Cattle Methane Emissions in Australia - Lower Than We Thought!!

Methane emissions from Australian cattle are 24% lower than previously estimated, according to data based on eight years of research into ways to reduce emissions in livestock. 

The new method has been published late in 2015 in the journal Animal Production Science and resulted in an update of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI).

CSIRO’s Ed Charmley said the work was conducted because of concerns about the large differential between NGGI and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) methane emission figures for Australian cattle, as well as doubt surrounding the accuracy of previous calculation methodologies used for cattle — particularly northern Australian cattle.  “Different methods used to calculate emissions from livestock in temperate and tropical regions were based on studies done in the 1960s and 1990s, mainly with dairy cattle,” Dr Charmley said.  “Both of these past methods were found to be likely overestimating the emissions from cattle.”

Dr Charmley said the revised method is based on improved ways of estimating ruminant methane emissions from forage-fed beef and dairy cattle, and has been tested against international defaults provided by the IPCC. The method has also brought the NGGI in line with the estimates of the IPCC, much to the delight of Meat & Livestock Australia (MLA).

“This revelation clearly shows livestock-based emissions are nowhere near what they were thought to be and will help improve the accuracy of Australia’s national greenhouse gas emissions estimates,” said MLA General Manager, On-farm Innovation Dr Matthew McDonagh.  “This is positive news for the Australian livestock sector as it seeks to continually improve its production efficiencies and demonstrate its environmental credentials.”

MLA Manager, Sustainable Feedbase,  Tom Davison added that the latest research findings from the National Livestock Methane Program (NLMP) show there are a number of simple management measures producers can implement to substantially reduce methane emissions while increasing productivity.  “Some of these are as simple as integrating leucaena into grazing systems, improving growth rates or herd reproductive performance, while other future techniques may include feeding red-algae to livestock and have been prioritised for further research,” Dr Davison said.  

We look forward to continuing to make further gains in this field for the mutual benefit of both our livestock industries and environmental sustainability.”

Read more: http://sustainabilitymatters.net.au/content/energy/news/cattle-methane-emissions-are-lower-than-we-thought-45757300#ixzz4KD4QqLEp

Cattle Emissions Much Lower in Australia - New Estimates

Methane emissions from Australian cattle are 24% lower than previously estimated - and that is very substantial, given the overall percentage of animal methane in the total greenhouse gases in Australia, according to data based on eight years of research into ways to reduce emissions in livestock. The new method has been published in the journal Animal Production Science and resulted in an update of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory (NGGI).

CSIRO’s Ed Charmley said the work was conducted because of concerns about the large differential between NGGI and Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) methane emission figures for Australian cattle, as well as doubt surrounding the accuracy of previous calculation methodologies used for cattle — particularly northern Australian cattle,  where it was assumed pasture quality was very poor, leading to high methane emissions.  “Different methods used to calculate emissions from livestock in temperate and tropical regions were based on studies done in the 1960s and 1990s, mainly with dairy cattle,” Dr Charmley said.  “Both of these past methods were found to be likely overestimating the emissions from cattle.”

The revised method is based on improved ways of estimating ruminant methane emissions from forage-fed beef and dairy cattle, and has been tested against international defaults provided by the IPCC. The method has also brought the NGGI in line with the estimates of the IPCC, much to the delight of Meat & Livestock Australia (MLA).

“This revelation clearly shows livestock-based emissions are nowhere near what they were thought to be and will help improve the accuracy of Australia’s national greenhouse gas emissions estimates,” said MLA General Manager, On-farm Innovation Dr Matthew McDonagh.  “This is positive news for the Australian livestock sector as it seeks to continually improve its production efficiencies and demonstrate its environmental credentials.”

MLA Manager, Sustainable Feedbase Tom Davison added that the latest research findings from the National Livestock Methane Program (NLMP) show there are a number of simple management measures producers can implement to substantially reduce methane emissions while increasing productivity.  “Some of these are as simple as integrating leucaena into grazing systems, improving growth rates or herd reproductive performance, while other future techniques may include feeding red-algae to livestock and have been prioritised for further research,” Dr Davison said.  “We look forward to continuing to make further gains in this field for the mutual benefit of both our livestock industries and environmental sustainability.”

Generally if higher quality leguminous feeds are a larger part of the diet, then methane emissions per beast falls.  Over the past 20 years or so, grass fed pasture diets have replaced the push to improve forage with legumes, more common in the 1970s - 1980s.  A swing back to a higher legume % based diets in the paddocks is emerging and methane emissions may continue to fall, as well as the higher quality feed also helping with animal productivity generally.

Image credit: Margaretta Fahey.

partially sourced from CSIRO press releases and Sustainability Matters online

What is Warming the World?

This set of recent data from NASA has been picked up by Bloomberg and spread rather more widely in the business community.

I believe it does provide a lot of easily seen information to rebut the climate change deniers.  Will they accept any data?

It seems the strongest cohort of climate change deniers are located in the US political system along with the lobbyists who gild their cages and support their political campaigns.

While there is leadership around, it needs to do more.

http://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2015-whats-warming-the-world/?utm_content=bufferd5d70&utm_medium=social&utm_source=linkedin.com&utm_campaign=buffer

The link is to a graphic infographic.  

Well worth watching, clearly showing the overriding effects of greenhouse gases, predominantly, carbon dioxide on global temperatures.

Interestingly............some very hot weather in Europe right now, with Paris recording the hottest day ever yesterday - over 40C,  and London also having very hot, near record breaking high temperatures.

Pope Francis Pushes for Environment and Climate Change Sensibility - Encyclical 2015

Yes, the Pope has spoken out on the environment.  A link will take you the document in English but it is also available in a number of other world languages including Arabic too.

 http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html


Available publicly the day after the Australian document on developing north Australia is ironic. That document continues to foster debate in Australia today, with extensive media coverage and more expected in coming weeks and months.

The Pope does not pull any punches in his encyclical and quite clearly in layman's terms comes out to support the premise that a major cause of climate change has been and is now, atmosphere changes from increased levels of greenhouse gases from burning fossil fuels also leading to other effects.

He uses clear, easy to read language and does document material, relying on scientific evidence.

There are a few excerpts around with this one which appeared on the ABC web site in Australia a reasonable overview  - http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-06-19/pope-francis-warns-humanity-about-pace-of-consumption/6557822

" Pope Francis has issued a major encyclical on the environment, called Laudato Si (Praise Be), On the Care of Our Common Home. Here are some key excerpts from the official English version:

On climate change and its causes

In recent decades this warming has been accompanied by a constant rise in the sea level and, it would appear, by an increase of extreme weather events, even if a scientifically determinable cause cannot be assigned to each particular phenomenon. Humanity is called to recognise the need for changes of lifestyle, production and consumption, in order to combat this warming or at least the human causes which produce or aggravate it. It is true that there are other factors (such as volcanic activity, variations in the Earth's orbit and axis, the solar cycle), yet a number of scientific studies indicate that most global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrogen oxides and others) released mainly as a result of human activity. Concentrated in the atmosphere, these gases do not allow the warmth of the sun's rays reflected by the Earth to be dispersed in space. The problem is aggravated by a model of development based on the intensive use of fossil fuels, which is at the heart of the worldwide energy system.

On dangers to the planet

If present trends continue, this century may well witness extraordinary climate change and an unprecedented destruction of ecosystems, with serious consequences for all of us. A rise in the sea level, for example, can create extremely serious situations, if we consider that a quarter of the world's population lives on the coast or nearby, and that the majority of our megacities are situated in coastal areas. Climate change is a global problem with grave implications: environmental, social, economic, political and for the distribution of goods. It represents one of the principal challenges facing humanity in our day. Its worst impact will probably be felt by developing countries in coming decades.

Doomsday predictions can no longer be met with irony or disdain. We may well be leaving to coming generations debris, desolation and filth. The pace of consumption, waste and environmental change has so stretched the planet's capacity that our contemporary lifestyle, unsustainable as it is, can only precipitate catastrophes, such as those which even now periodically occur in different areas of the world. The effects of the present imbalance can only be reduced by our decisive action, here and now. We need to reflect on our accountability before those who will have to endure the dire consequences.

On consumption, sustainable development and wealth disparity

We all know that it is not possible to sustain the present level of consumption in developed countries and wealthier sectors of society where the habit of wasting and discarding has reached unprecedented levels. The exploitation of the planet has already exceeded acceptable limits and we still have not solved the problem of poverty.

We fail to see that some are mired in desperate and degrading poverty, with no way out, while others have not the faintest idea of what to do with their possessions, vainly showing off their supposed superiority and leaving behind them so much waste, which, if it were the case everywhere, would destroy the planet. In practice, we continue to tolerate that some consider themselves more human than others, as if they had been born with greater rights.

On fossil fuels

There is an urgent need to develop policies so that, in the next few years, the emission of carbon dioxide and other highly polluting gases can be drastically reduced - for example, substituting for fossil fuels and developing sources of renewable energy. Worldwide there is minimal access to clean and renewable energy. There is still a need to develop adequate storage technologies.

We know that technology based on the use of highly-polluting fossil fuels - especially coal, but also oil and, to a lesser degree, gas - needs to be progressively replaced without delay. Until greater progress is made in developing widely accessible sources of renewable energy, it is legitimate to choose the lesser of two evils or to find short-term solutions. But the international community has still not reached adequate agreements about the responsibility for paying the costs of this energy transition.

On political myopia and bureaucratic inertia

Recent world summits on the environment have not lived up to expectations because, due to lack of political will, they were unable to reach truly meaningful and effective global agreements on the environment.

A politics concerned with immediate results, supported by consumerist sectors of the population, is driven to produce short-term growth. In response to electoral interests, governments are reluctant to upset the public with measures, which could affect the level of consumption or create risks for foreign investment. The myopia of power politics delays the inclusion of a far-sighted environmental agenda within the overall agenda of governments.

On market forces and carbon credits

Once more, we need to reject a magical conception of the market, which would suggest that problems can be solved simply by an increase in the profits of companies or individuals. Is it realistic to hope that those who are obsessed with maximising profits will stop to reflect on the environmental damage which they will leave behind for future generations? Where profits alone count, there can be no thinking about the rhythms of nature, its phases of decay and regeneration, or the complexity of ecosystems which may be gravely upset by human intervention.

The strategy of buying and selling "carbon credits" can lead to a new form of speculation, which would not help reduce the emission of polluting gases worldwide. This system seems to provide a quick and easy solution under the guise of a certain commitment to the environment, but in no way does it allow for the radical change which present circumstances require. Rather, it may simply become a ploy which permits maintaining the excessive consumption of some countries and sectors.

On relationship between banks, environment and production

Saving banks at any cost, making the public pay the price, foregoing a firm commitment to reviewing and reforming the entire system, only reaffirms the absolute power of a financial system. A power which has no future and will only give rise to new crises after a slow, costly and only apparent recovery. The financial crisis of 2007-08 provided an opportunity to develop a new economy, more attentive to ethical principles, and new ways of regulating speculative financial practices and virtual wealth. But the response to the crisis did not include rethinking the outdated criteria which continue to rule the world.

Production is not always rational, and is usually tied to economic variables which assign to products a value that does not necessarily correspond to their real worth. This frequently leads to an overproduction of some commodities, with unnecessary impact on the environment and with negative results on regional economies.

The financial bubble also tends to be a productive bubble. The problem of the real economy is not confronted with vigour, yet it is the real economy which makes diversification and improvement in production possible, helps companies to function well, and enables small and medium businesses to develop and create employment.

On effect of mining on the environment and local people

Underground water sources in many places are threatened by the pollution produced in certain mining, farming and industrial activities, especially in countries lacking adequate regulation or controls. It is not only a question of industrial waste. Detergents and chemical products, commonly used in many places of the world, continue to pour into our rivers, lakes and seas.

The export of raw materials to satisfy markets in the industrialised north has caused harm locally, as for example in mercury pollution in gold mining or sulphur dioxide pollution in copper mining. There is a pressing need to calculate the use of environmental space throughout the world for depositing gas residues which have been accumulating for two centuries and have created a situation which currently affects all the countries of the world.

In this sense, it is essential to show special care for indigenous communities and their cultural traditions. They are not merely one minority among others, but should be the principal dialogue partners, especially when large projects affecting their land are proposed. For them, land is not a commodity but rather a gift from God and from their ancestors who rest there - a sacred space with which they need to interact if they are to maintain their identity and values. When they remain on their land, they themselves care for it best. Nevertheless, in various parts of the world, pressure is being put on them to abandon their homelands to make room for agricultural or mining projects which are undertaken without regard for the degradation of nature and culture.

On public pressure on companies and boycotts

A change in lifestyle could bring healthy pressure to bear on those who wield political, economic and social power. This is what consumer movements accomplish by boycotting certain products. They prove successful in changing the way businesses operate, forcing them to consider their environmental footprint and their patterns of production. When social pressure affects their earnings, businesses clearly have to find ways to produce differently. This shows us the great need for a sense of social responsibility on the part of consumers.  "

------

The full document is about 82 pages and if interested in the environment is essential reading, covering ethical issues about the environment and how it has influenced social and moral issues.

I am sure it will not be forgotten as ordinary citizens, scientists and politicians pore over the document in the coming weeks and months.

The Pope carries a bit of clout, and the document and various extracts will be widely read .......worldwide.

Will it influence the world's politicians?  Early days, but the US President has reacted positively to the material.

Lets hope that a decent outcome can be achieved later in 2015 at the climate summit in Paris.  The Pope seems to believe that significant change is needed..........for the world and us.

Deep Carbon Cuts - Pathway to US Lower Greenhouse Emissions

Recently the Yale Environment 360 blog recently reported that the United States can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 80 percent by 2050, using existing or near-commercial technologies, according to researchers with the Deep Decarbonization Pathways Project.

The study analyzed scenarios with four types of decarbonised electricity: renewable energy, nuclear energy, fossil fuel with carbon capture and storage, and a mixed case. The scenarios achieved reductions of 83 percent below 2005 levels and 80 percent below 1990 levels, according to the study, which was released ahead of next month’s climate talks in Lima, Peru, and negotiations in Paris in December 2015.

The energy efficiency of buildings, transportation, and industry would need to increase through the use of smart materials and energy-efficient designs, and vehicles will need to be fueled with electricity generated from wind, solar, or nuclear, as opposed to coal, the researchers said. They project the net costs would be on the order of 1 percent of gross domestic product per year.

The 80-percent reduction by 2050 is a long-standing goal of the Obama administration, in line with the global commitment to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees Celsius. “One important conclusion is that investment opportunities in clean technologies will arise during the natural rollover and replacement of infrastructure,” said lead author Jim Williams. “The plan calls for non-disruptive, sustained infrastructure transitions that can deeply decarbonise the U.S. by 2050, and enhance its competitive position in the process.”

This is a significant move and one that seems a highly logical pathway to successful outcomes.  

There is more emphasis on energy efficiency, especially retro fitting to buildings, an area that has not greatly been explored in Australia.

While the study outcomes have not yet been included in US government policy, it does seem to point to a solid and logical route for progressing the gains required.

What is the program for Australia?  We seem to be stuck on 5% reduction by 2020, yet more is possible.  It also seems that individuals are also doing more outside of government policies - notably with the development of household PV systems around Australia. The transport fuel issue is a big problem in Australia with vast distances and a small population, but gas would seem to be part of the mix in this case.

I do not yet see a lot of confidence among people with the current direct action program of the federal government, that it could achieve the scale of reductions needed to get to 80% below 2005 levels, especially while most electricity seems to be generated by coal.  However, if these plants were replaced [ even if through old age] by gas or new thorium nuclear plants then much greater reductions might be achievable.  With both India and China developing thorium reactors - that could be an option within 15 years or so.

Temperatures ARE Rising - Data Shows Extent

The proportion of days in the United States that are warmer than the long-term average increased from 42 percent in 1964 to 67 percent today, according to an analysis of 3.2 million temperature anomalies over the last 50 years.

Enigma.io, a New York City-based company that specializes in searches of information from public databases, examined data from 2,716 U.S. weather stations to track the temperature anomalies. The company found that since 1964, temperature anomalies characterized as warm or “strong warm” have increased by an average of .5 percent a year.

Enigma’s data show, for example, that in 2012, 84 percent of temperature anomalies in the U.S. skewed on the warm side. The company forecast that by the 2030s more than 70 percent of anomalous temperatures in the U.S. are likely to be higher than the historical average, rather than colder.

Would similar data be apparent for Australia?

My guess is that similar data could be derived fro Australia.

So much for the climate change deniers, especially in both the US and Australia.

Australia is about to change ideas about how to combat climate change by removing a carbon tax and to replace that with so called direct action efforts to control greenhouse gas emissions.

Most scientists do not think the scheme would work.  Australia will be doing less to mitigate climate change.

With recent international reports arguing that temperatures and greenhouse gas emissions that are driving that issue are increasing more rapidly, it is time to also accelerate efforts at reducing impacts, or we are all up the creek without a paddle!!!   Sorry............our kids are. 

Does Biodiesel Deserve a Better Deal??

Biodiesel and ethanol both fall under the category of “biofuels,” which describes any fuel synthesized from plant or animal matter. But that’s pretty much where the similarities end.

Biodiesel offers a significantly improved environmental impact compared to both ethanol and standard petroleum-derived diesel. It can be used in standard diesel engines with little or no negative impact on engine health. Just add it to the tank of your Toyota, Nissan, Volkswagen or Mercedes diesel vehicle – or pretty well any other diesel including light trucks.  In tropical warm weather it even starts well in the morning.

Meanwhile, ethanol deserves scrutiny for its relatively high emissions, and the way it can damage engines that aren’t specifically designed to burn the fuel.

In recent years, ethanol has been the target of a backlash from environmentalists and critics of government waste, who argue that the limited benefits of the fuel don’t justify the federal support it received over the last few decades. In the USA, the Renewable Fuels Standard, which sets a production mandate for both ethanol and biodiesel, has recently been a target of reformers, who would like to see the standard cut to reflect the low demand and perceived declining promise of ethanol. If that happens, biodiesel production could get caught up in the reforms, with the EPA opting not to raise production targets for biodiesel in 2014.

Biodiesel can be produced from vegetable oils, animal fats or recycled food by-products like restaurant grease, or from algae, which can be grown using waste materials like sewage. It can be sold in a variety of blends with petroleum diesel or as a pure 100-percent blend known in some areas as B100.

Locally in the NT there is one small scale production facility near Berrimah, using waste vegetable oils and greases………plus one large mothballed facility at East Arm where current production is zero, but capacity is 130 million litres per year.

The mothballed biodiesel facility near Darwin

The cost of the fuel to consumers varies depending upon blend and location, but may be more expensive than mineral based diesel.  That extra cost brings the benefit of about a 50-percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, according to a 2010 study by Argonne National Laboratory in the USA.

Should there now be more emphasis on biodiesel production, with this very high reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, especially as Australian mineral derived diesel seems to be remaining persistently high in price?  

Big Reductions in US CO2 Emissions are Continuing - Good Stuff!

A report released earlier in 2013 attributed much of the emissions decline to new energy-saving technologies and a doubling in the take-up of renewable energy.

 A revolution is transforming how Americans produce, consume, and even think about energy. Traditional sources are in decline, while natural gas, renewables and energy efficiency are on the rise.

These changes, which seem to show no sign of abating so far, have major implications for US economic / national security interests and are increasing the diversity of the country's energy mix, improving energy security, and rapidly shrinking the US 'carbon footprint' - a major positive development for addressing climate change.

A copy of the article with further links in it is available here - http://www.environmental-expert.com/news/us-co2-emissions-fall-to-lowest-level-since-1994-366452?utm_source=News_Air_11042013&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter&utm_content=feattextlink

There are also geo-economic and geopolitical implications for energy policy, relating to the Middle East energy supplies, and has intensified debate in Australia a major gas exporter, about gas reservation policies for local industry……with US domestic industry a major beneficiary of cheap gas especially, because of US policy on that issue.

Biochar May Also Sequester Carbon Dioxide

'Biochar' is the name for charcoal when it is used as a soil amendment. People add charcoal to land in order to increase soil fertility and agricultural productivity.  Water holding capacity in soils is also usually increased.

In addition to these benefits, researchers are now saying that biochar has potential to mitigate climate change as it can help sequester carbon and thus cut our greenhouse gas emissions.

Sean Case, a PhD student at the US NERC's Centre for Ecology and Hydrology (CEH) and lead author of the study says: "We've shown that adding biochar suppresses CO2 emissions very significantly over several years... Previous studies have found this effect in the lab and over short periods, but this is the first time anyone has looked at bioenergy crops in the field, and at the effects of biochar over a long period."

Results of the study show that by applying biochar before planting energy crops, soil greenhouse-gas emissions can be cut by around a third.

Researchers studied a plantation of miscanthus, a perennial grass which is harvested for fuel. They monitored how much CO2, nitrous oxide and methane came from the plot's soil over two years. They also monitored soil emissions under controlled conditions in the lab.

The plots that had been treated with charcoal emitted 37% less greenhouse gases than neighbouring plots that hadn't, while in the lab the impact was 55%. Most of this came from cutting CO2 emissions, with methane playing no significant role and only a small nitrous oxide component.

"There's a lot of interest at the moment in the potential of bioenergy crops to sequester carbon in the soil, because unlike arable land these crops aren't ploughed every year so the carbon is not being regularly disturbed," says co-author Dr Jeanette Whitaker of CEH. "Biochar contains a lot of carbon in its own right, so adding it to the soil is already having an immediate sequestration effect, but our research suggests that it also reduces the CO2 emitted by soil respiration, which makes the case for using it even stronger. It's about maximising the sustainability benefits of bioenergy crops."

Whitaker explains that in the long term, it is unlikely people will use wood as biochar. Instead, biochar can be made out of anything from municipal waste to chicken manure.

Different regions will have different availability of feedstock products, with crop residuals common.

 

 

 

Gas to Diesel Fuel - Is There a Case for a Plant in Australia?

There is a lot of gas in Australia, and less it seems of liquid fuels suitable for diesel or petrol.  Could there be a case for gas to diesel conversion? Economics seem to be positive, particularly for remote areas.  Surprise suprise - that is where the gas is, as well as there being major needs for diesel for transport fuel for trucks and power generation, all of which is trucked in from refineries located a long way from where the fuel is used.

A recent article explores this in some detail -
 http://www.miningnewspremium.net/storyview.asp?storyid=9590380&sectionsource=s0 .

The major Australian engineering group GHD has been examining this idea in some more detail, and presented some results of a study focused on the WA Canning Basin recently.

“The miners are very reliant on diesel. Some use it for their trucks, some use it for power generation and it’s costing them a lot of money,” GHD studies manager Jonathon Beales said at the Australian Gas Technology conference in Perth  recently.

“Talking to a number of our clients, we’ve estimated the cost of transporting diesel from Port Hedland or Kwinana adds 25 per cent to the cost they have to pay for it.”

Add to the fact that 40-50% of diesel is currently imported and there’s currently a shortage of diesel – also in the order of 40-50% – and there’s a compelling case for miners to subtly encourage gas producers to consider Gas-To - Liquids [GTL] projects for their commercialisation plans.

GHD estimated a 55 tonne iron ore project could use up to 1 million litres of diesel per day.

As an industry, Beales reckoned, the iron ore sector used 11.1 billion litres of diesel in 2010.

Beales said synthetic diesel delivered from a GTL plant could cost miners a whopping 85% less than having to import their fuel, given the right circumstances.

But what’s in it for gas producers?

“In a number of discussions with companies we’ve had in that region, we’ve found that they are sitting on a great resource but are struggling to find a way to get it to market,” Beales said.

It seems to be a win-win for both industries and would increase Australia’s liquid fuels security to boot.

While the cost of developing a plant is high - possibly $1 billion - it would add to Australian local fuel supplies while offering some real cost savings along the west coast of Australia for mining and other resource projects including agricultural and pastoral developments.

Developing the GTL plant close to the gas seems sensible, but will it happen?  Do not hold your breath, yet! 

Climate Change Reprise

Unfortunately the Australian Financial Review newspaper usually has a pay firewall. But they seem to have relented over this article now available here -
http://afr.com/p/lifestyle/review/rethinking_climate_scepticism_2oSrxbSmLf4FhjNRyzAQpN

By Mark Lawson, and in the AFR on Friday November 25 2011 it is an excellent overview of the current state of climate debate and climate science as well as climate change issues, and worth reading.

There has been a lot of editorial comment about the article, mostly positive, over the past few days.

Take the chance and read it......... free.

Australia and Now California - Have a Carbon Reduction Plan

It has received almost no media attention in Australia, yet California, which is said to be the world's 8th largest economy, has late last week, passed the final draft of a "cap and trade" program to provide financial incentives for polluters to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Some parts of the plan will commence in 2012, major parts including compliance for some of the worst polluters, including power plants, commence in 2013, and others to commence in 2015. The plan will cover 85% of the emissions in California.

The broad thrust of the Californian scheme is generally similar to that proposed for Australia, with the start of the market mechanism, after a few years of the mandated carbon price, planned for mid 2012.

With California's economy being considerably larger than Australia's, this is a big step for them, and some hope the rest of the USA might follow in time.

I am amazed that this move in California continues to receive such little attention from the media and pro carbon adherents in Australia to add weight to their arguments.

More media information from the US here - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/21/business/energy-environment/california-adopts-cap-and-trade-system-to-limit-emissions.html

and here -
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/20/california-cap-and-trade_n_1022314.html

There are quite a few sceptics, believing it will not work, but many think it might.

Using Carbon Dioxide for Algal Biofuels

It seems that Australia is about to move forward several steps in developing commercial use of waste carbon dioxide.

Origin Energy has announced a new medium scale [a prelude to larger scale use if successful] waste CO2 from its power plant to produce fresh water algae, which it then plans to harvest for potential biofuel production.

More here - http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20065708-54.html?tag=nl.e797

[ interestingly - reported in US not Australian media]

At about the same time, a leading US saltwater algal producer has announced a scaling up of existing work in the Pilbara region of WA, which uses CO2 from LNG processing as the accelerator of algal growth.

More here -http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/business/a/-/wa/9328127/algae-fuel-to-diversify-pilbara/

Both are in regions of Australia with plenty of sunshine, especially in the Pilbara.

Coincidentally, the aviation industry announced this week that they saw biofuel as a suitable fuel, with lowered CO2 emissions overall, as a substitute for existing fossil oil fuels.

Australia does have open spaces and sunshine, but so far a timid set of national and state governments, that seem reluctant to embrace non fossil fuels, although industry does seem more active to use them.

There is a major program in the private sector with wide support across industry and academia to develop base load solar thermal power stations, but so far without major support from government. More details are here -
http://beyondzeroemissions.org/blog/zero-carbon-australia-stationary-energy-plan-nsw-elements-110307

And there is a very comprehensive range of documents that do seem to provide evidence and analysis that would support the plan.

Could Australia prosper on waste carbon............after all, we are the highest per head producer of carbon???

Compost Awareness Week - May - 2011

It is International Compost Awareness Week this week...........with functions around the globe. The USA, Canada, UK and Australia are examples.

The message below is focussed on the East Coast of Australia, but relevant all over Australia.

Composting, the ‘intelligent’ alternative
Tuesday, 3 May 2011

That’s the message from the Centre for Organic & Resource Enterprises (CORE) at the launch of the sixth International Composting Awareness Week (ICAW). Organised in conjunction with Compost Australia (a division of the Waste Management Association of Australia), the week of events from May 1-7 will promote the benefits afforded to us all when our business communities and households get involved in composting.

“Composting is the responsible and sustainable thing to do for our planet,” according to CORE.

The major objectives of ICAW are to increase the diversion of organics from the main waste collection program through increasing awareness and participation in centralised composting, kerbside collections, home composting and community composting.“Each year over half the household garbage we produce is made up of food and garden organics. Most of this organic waste can be recycled by composting it”, said Eric Love, chairman of CORE.“If all this organic material was diverted from landfills and properly composted, it could be used to reverse the affects of climate change.

By applying this compost to gardens, farms and other land uses, millions of tonnes of carbon will be stored in the soil. This acts to lower the atmospheric temperatures that lead to changes in our climate.”

ICAW also aims to increase awareness and knowledge about the correct use of "soil-improving composts"; help reduce and recover food waste; and highlight the environmental and social benefits of composting including the opportunities to reduce our carbon emissions.

“Composting is not new. Compost has been used in crop production for over 4,000 years. Artificial fertilisers only became widely available a century ago. Australia is an old and eroded continent that is suffering from land degradation,” said Love.

Emissions from landfills are part of the Australian Federal Government’s carbon abatement initiative. If everyone composted, the total waste going to landfill could decrease by up to one third and emissions and disposal costs will drop, according to CORE.

Peter Wadewitz, chairman of Compost Australia said, “Compost produced by the recycled organics industry is already providing Australian landscape, horticulture and agricultural industries with affordable solutions to improve productivity and environmental outcomes.“Recycled carbon based products are also being effectively used to treat contaminated stormwater runoff and enabling the water to be reused, or more safely released into our waterways.”

Kimbriki Resource Recovery Centre is getting into the action of ICAW by offering talks, demonstrations and tours at its Ingleside/Terrey Hills site on May 3, 4 & 5 (at 10am and 2pm).

It will also give away 500 bags of Kimbriki Compost each day. Peter Rutherford, Kimbriki’s senior ecologist, will demonstrate simple ways to make great compost at home, and explain how this relates to healthy plants and healthy people. Australian Native Landscapes’ soil expert, Rob Niccol, will discuss composting and soil health; explain about the value of compost in larger projects and how it is being used to supplement Australia’s dwindling soil resources. He will also demonstrate the latest in mulch blowing technology and conduct a guided tour of the large-scale compost making operation at Kimbriki.

For more information visit: www.compostweek.com.au

Less Greenhouse Gas - Modest Steps and Tangible Actions Work

A lot of the debate around alternate energy, energy efficiency and even a carbon price or tax has focussed on climate change. That nebulous, end of century effect that no one is really sure about whether real or imagined, and which sceptics of climate change then have great delight in demolishing any argument to do anything about issues now. I am not a sceptic of man driven climate change, but for many it is just a difficult concept.

The ex Governator - or maybe the ex Terminator - has had quite a bit to say over the past few days, while delivering a very well received address at a conference in the US. And it offers some common sense about effecting change.

His premise is that climate change is just too abstract for most people to conceive [ apparently especially Americans] and that those wishing to effect change at grass roots level and in society need to be focussing more on real effects now, tangible things. These include:

• job creation from green jobs related to mandated renewable energy use,
• reductions in oil use and hence dependence on other countries for energy,
• energy efficiency that offers real benefits in reduced costs due to efficency improvements in homes and businesses,
• health benefits from reduced use of oil,
• vehicle efficiency improvements to reduce fuel use,

among a range of issues.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-11128_3-20037752-54.html?tag=nl.e703

offers a reporters view of the address.

This seems a very pragmatic approach, well wrapped in some humour too, and does offer a way forward at even local levels. Getting back to the old cliche - "act locally, think globally' a catch cry slogan of the environment movement. And implies a degree of personal responsibility, in California's case also in some areas offering state support.

There have been a number of reports available of business case studies that created quite substantial real $$ savings by embracing energy efficiency, for example and many jurisdictions do have programs to assist in taking this approach and actions.

Also read an earlier post - http://abovecapricorn.blogspot.com/2011/02/how-to-effect-climate-change-now.html

How to Effect Climate Change - NOW

While we all wring our hands and think that government and our institutions are doing little about climate change - too hard, too many parties to get to work together and so on, there may be some options that can provide effect in both the near term as well as mid term.

And they use existing technology.........and can be implemented now.

Methane is a clear problem gas in the atmosphere, with much greater greenhouse gas potential than carbon dioxide. While methane from ruminants is often seen as giant problem, it is also a problem from termites. And either issue might not be fixed any time soon, although higher quality feed for ruminants does help in their case to reduce methane emissions.

The following link to a recent report published / presented on 23 February does seem to offer some sensible suggestions.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=cutting-black-carbon-methane-immediate-climate-change&WT.mc_id=SA_CAT_TECH_20110222

The issue of methane from landfill is a significant one and in Australia, many of the larger municipal sites do collect and utilise methane, with data available during the now aborted ETS scheme showing about an average of around 65% of produced methane being collected.

Australia is in the small league as regards landfills however, with much more potential in north America.

There is also a developing industry of anaerobic digestion of organic materials to generate methane, prior to aerobic composting. A sensible development, in both rural areas [ dairy herds, feedlots for example] as well as larger urban areas generating food wastes.

We need to start now though, if we are to have a reasonable chance of restricting temperature rise to the two degrees desirable.

Australian University Bans Bottled Water

The University of Canberra (UC) is introducing a total ban on the sale of bottled water on its campus.

It is believed to be the largest ban of its kind in Australia and the first across a university.

Read more here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/20/3117523.htm

While at least one Australian town, Bundanoon, has also banned bottled water, this is a very significant acceleration of the trend into a young demographic group.

Yes, some other places are doing similar things, but this one is with the support of the retailers on campus.

Afterall, what is wrong with being self reliant and bringing water from home?

Clearing for Clearing

Amendments to the Interim Development Control Order 17 which had prohibited land clearing in the Daly Basin area of the Northern Territory were gazetted today. Approval will be given for modest clearing in the Daly Basin of the Northern Territory, with 2000 ha in total likely to be approved in 2009.


Work has been taking place behind the scenes in developing the now extensive requirements to meet the new criteria established for this modest clearing.


It is something many property owners have been hoping would occur and a lot of effort has been expended to develop sound criteria that satisfy the interests of the multitude of interested parties across the environmental, pastoral, fishing, rural and government areas.


The hard part now will be getting it all together to actually have clearing occur before soil conditions become too dry for effective clearing - around May / June.


There are still quite a few hurdles to negotiate for land owners, before the bulldozers start.

Humour Time over Greenhouse Emissions

The time has come to lighten up on the discussion about Greenhouse Gases. And nothing more appropriate than on 15 December, the day Australia will announce the form of the Australian Greenhouse Gas Reduction Scheme or Emmission Trading Scheme [ETS].


What's the betting that it pleases few. Seems that is the way it goes these days.


So................................

At least there is a laugh in it, at last.

cartoon copyright - Parker and Hart