Monday, October 31, 2005
Blair calls for global response to climate change
Sunday, October 30, 2005
Australian Environment Minister latest to accept global warming is human-induced
Senior scientists fed up with Bush over global warming
Saturday, October 29, 2005
Think big because the planet is small
Increasingly it appears that the greatest challenge facing humankind is to sustainably manage the limited resources of the planet Earth, in the face of human overpopulation and increasing material demands of modern human societies. We still know too little about the detailed interactions of the biosphere and global climate to be certain of the long term consequences of human-induced global warming. However we do know that the huge and growing human population on the planet is leaving a large footprint on the global ecosystem. The long term consequences of human-driven global deforestation and wholesale transformation of land usage of the planet Earth are anything but predictable (see Box 1).
The human-driven removal of large swaths of primary forests in New Zealand and worldwide are playing a large role in the changing dynamics of the planet's carbon cycle. The long-term consequences of this transformation of the planet's surface for the global climate and biosphere are not yet clear. The original image was produced by NASA in May 2001.
As a global society, humans need to understand the finite nature of the planet's natural resources and reorganize our behaviours to reflect this finite supply.
A tiny yeast population in a test tube of nutrients initially grows exponentially, unimpeded by the ultimately limited nature of the available resources. However at some point the population of yeast cells become so large that they compete for the remaining resources. In short order the population growth stagnates, as individuals scavenge for the rapidly diminishing left overs of previously unfettered consumption, while also contending with the increasing concentration of waste products of that consumption. Finally the whole population of yeast crash as the resources are completely exhausted and expended. Humans are currently still on the growth part of the curve, but the transition to decline and ultimate extinction can be extremely rapid. Luckily for us, unlike the test tube, the Earth is provided with a continual input of new energy from the Sun. However humans rely heavily on the global climate and ecosystem to harness this energy and convert it into usable resources like tuna and rice. Without a productive and healthy biosphere, we will be hard-pressed to find much nourishment from solar panels alone. We need to learn how to rationalize our energy consumption and restrict our ever-expanding encroachment on all other life on the planet. If we don't do this the consequences could be difficult or impossible to live with. There is no reason why New Zealand should wait for other countries to lead in the battle for a sustainable future. Smart people should apply themselves to this problem immediately and challenge the status quo.
Think as big as the oceans are vast
The World Conservation Union (IUCN) has just co-hosted an inaugural conference urging international action to create a network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to combat the effects of global climate change and human exploitation of our seas and oceans. A press release for the conference, held in Geelong, Australia, says that "nations across the world need to step up and scale up their efforts in protecting the world’s vast and increasingly vulnerable marine environment from climate change, pollution, resource depletion and other threats".
Friday, October 28, 2005
Climate change will bring drought and fire to Europe
A recent study published in the prestigious Science magazine, and reported on by the BBC, used computer modeling to predict the impact of global climate change on Europe in the next century. The main negative impacts are expected to be water shortages and droughts, increased frequency and severities of forest fires and increased flooding. Arguably, all of these effects have already been observed in Europe in the last few years. Apparently, it is only going to get worse. However, one of overall results of the report was that most of Europe is going to be less affected by global climate change than other regions such as the Arctic and the Amazon. Apart from droughts, fires and floods, the European simulations predict rapid changes in the distribution of various species of plants and animals as well as changes in crop suitability in agricultural areas. A good friend of mine from Portugal was telling me that the widespread fires that Portugal experienced this year have only just been put out in mid October, and that they are thinking about extending the fire season in Portugal to accomodate this shift. These kinds of things could well become the norm across Europe in the next few decades.
A NZ Herald piece picked up on the water shortage part of the simulation analysis, especially for the Mediterranean, and reminds readers that "in 1995, about 193 million people out of an EU population of 383 million faced water shortages."
Thursday, October 27, 2005
Millions of fish die in massive drought in the Amazon
Global climate change is "the greatest challenge to face man"
Monday, October 24, 2005
Greens patience wearing thin
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Greens co-leader says being centrist is blah
"Well, being centrist is being blah from our point of view. I mean, I'm not interested in being a nothing. We want to stand tall on what we believe in. Sometimes those policies are popular; sometimes they're not. And over time, our positions become mainstream. Thirty years ago, if you'd talked wind turbines, people would have laughed at you. What's happening now? Most of the new energy projects are wind energy projects. It's the same with energy efficiency and solar water heating and rail. All those types of initiatives. Concerns about the environment generally are much more in vogue than they were when I started out in Values 31 years ago. I'm not about to sell my principles just to get the baubles of power." - Rod Donald.
I find it hard to disagree with Rod on most of this. Selling your principles for the 'baubles of power" does not sound cool to me either. I guess its just a question of what exactly are the Green party principles, focus and priorities? One of my associates from Oxford recently had this to say about his opinion on a reasonable set of principles for the Green party:
The Greens should "develop a tight focus on scientifically strong and politically relevant policies, and ... by reducing waste, eliminating perverse subsidies and creating opportunities for new eco-industries".
This sounds like a good starting point to me. I think that most would probably agree that the Green Party have at least tried to do something on the specific policies of reducing waste, eliminating perverse subsidies and creating opportunities for new eco-industries. But what about the overall approach as a party? Is the current Green party scientifically strong and focused on politically relevant issues? Or do they tend to tackle too many small and disparate issues. Are they always backing their positions with science, where science is relevant?
Scientifically strong!
I am a scientist. Some of us scientists still have principles, even in the morally bankrupt times we live in. One of the biggest things lacking in political discourse as far as I can see is scientifically sound, reasoned argument and a basic understanding of statistics. Too many issues are pursued with emotional fervour (nothing wrong with emotion!) but without any sound reasoning. For instance, acknowledging that marijuana use (on the current balance of evidence!) contributes to mental illness in teenagers. The scientific evidence for this is steadily growing. Of course, how you use this information to inform policies is another thing altogether. But it is not only important to understand, as a policymaker, the science, but also to communicate those principles of evidence and reason to the general population.
Politically relevant
As a small party, should the Greens be spending their time focusing on things like child smacking laws? Arguably, it is a worthwhile cause, but the planet is getting smacked much harder than our children are. Priorities are important. If the Green party maintains a focus on sensible environmental policy, the public will follow them. I am not suggesting that the Green party changes its principles, I am suggesting that the Green party re-assesses its priorities and the means by which it communicates those priorities to the public. As Rod correctly points out, environmentalism and clean energy are now mainsteam. Why isn't the Green party? Since the Green party is the only party that can make a clarion call for global environmental sustainability - shouldn't that be their number one priority?! In the same interview, Rod Donald himself says:
"There is some pretty radical change that needs to take place if we're actually going to save this place. That might sound over the top, but you've just got to look around you to see what we're doing to this earth, and it can't cope with much more abuse."
I couldn't agree more.
Saturday, October 22, 2005
25% more carbon released by Amazon deforestation than first thought
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Environmental concerns bring Jane Campion back to the director's chair
"One day I heard them talking about the world they would inherit and how our generation had used up so much of the resources that they will inherit a depleted and plundered Earth where they might not live very long."
I am glad that Jane Campion is thinking about tomorrow. More kiwis should.
Wednesday, October 19, 2005
Worst Hurricane Season Ever?
The link between the severity/frequency of hurricanes and global warming is still a hotly debated topic. My guess is that it will not be debated in 5-10 years time...
Sunday, October 16, 2005
Policy Webs and the Coalition Game
ACT | Greens | Labour | Maori Party | National | NZ First | Progressive | United | |
ACT | - | 12% | 47% | 26% | 64% | 60% | 28% | 56% |
Greens | 12% | - | 63% | 84% | 45% | 52% | 83% | 47% |
Labour | 47% | 63% | - | 65% | 65% | 69% | 69% | 67% |
Maori Party | 26% | 84% | 65% | - | 53% | 62% | 78% | 54% |
National | 64% | 45% | 65% | 53% | - | 70% | 56% | 61% |
NZ First | 60% | 52% | 69% | 62% | 70% | - | 61% | 67% |
Progressive | 28% | 83% | 69% | 78% | 56% | 61% | - | 54% |
United | 56% | 47% | 67% | 54% | 61% | 67% | 54% | - |
By itself, this table makes for interesting reading. For example, it shows that, on environmental policy, the two most similar parties are the Greens and the Maori party, being 84% similar. Whereas the two most different parties are (unsurprisingly) the Greens and ACT, having only 12% common policy ground. As you would expect Labour and National are both fairly central. The Labour party shares more than 60% policy similarity with all other parties apart from ACT, while National shares greater than 50% similarity with all other parties except for the Greens. NZ First is the only party that somehow manages to maintain 50% similarity with all of the other parties, making them the most versatile party when it comes to coalition talks.
Although this table makes for interesting reading, sometimes a picture is even better. Its possible to turn these numbers into graph that visually illustrates the policy affinities of all the parties in a single picture. To do this we need to borrow some analysis tools used in evolutionary biology. Using standard software when can generate a graph that summarizes all these relationships by using a table of pairwise differences. It is trivial to convert Table 2 into just such a set of differences. For example the 12% similarity between Greens and ACT will convert to an 88% difference. With these differences (known in evolutionary biology as distances, and usually calculated based on the differences between pairs of DNA sequences) we can now use standard computer software to calculate a graph called a Neighbour Net, which provides a compact summary of pairwise similarities. The resulting graph (which I will dub a Policy Web) is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1 - Environmental Policy Web for 8 New Zealand political parties. The scale bar provides an idea of the approximate percentage difference that the edges in the graph represent.
One observation from the Policy Web is that the Greens, the Maori party and the Progressive Party form a policy clique advocating a strong focus on environmental issues. The second observation is that ACT is out on a fairly long policy limb compared to the other parties. The distance along the shortest path in the graph between two parties in the Policy Web is representative of the amount of difference between their respective policy packages. The Policy Web provides an at-a-glance summary of the relationships between different party’s policies. If it were used across the board, it should provide a quick insight into what coalition combinations actually make sense for a given policy area. Based on environmental policies, the Maori Party should be in coalition with the Greens, and could not possibly sit comfortably with parties such as ACT, National and United Future.
Friday, October 14, 2005
Abrupt climate change
"A change in global climate has been described as the greatest current threat to humanity. The fierce debate over how we should meet that threat is constantly stoked by researchers' efforts to understand more about how our climate works, and how exactly we are altering it. Here news@nature.com looks at the changing political and scientific climate in this emotive arena."
Recent research articles in Nature point to a growing consensus among climatologists, using many different data sources including satellite data, weather balloons and climate models. Not only is there agreement that global climate change is real, but independent estimates of the rate of global warming based on these different data sources and methods are starting to agree as well, with rates from 0.09-0.2 degrees Celcius per decade.
More alarming is the possibility of abrupt climate change. This can occur when initial global warming creates the opportunity for positive feedback loops, where more warming triggers new events that create more warming or more greenhouse gases. Three examples of such feedback loops that are occuring are:
- The shrinking polar ice in the arctic is exposing more dark open ocean, which absorbs much more sunlight then the reflective ice it is replacing. This increase absorption causes further rises in ocean temperatures and thus further decline of the polar ice caps. This process is likely to increase the rate at which the polar ice caps are melting, causing still greater rises in temperature and sea levels worldwide.
- Increasingly hot and dry summers have in recent years caused widespread forest fires in the USA, Australia and this year in Portugal and Spain. These forest fires release a lot of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, thus accelerating global warming, and causing still hotter and drier summers in the future.
- Increasingly hot and dry summers, even without fires, have also caused many agricultural crops in Europe to wilt, dry out and sometimes die completely. During this process a huge amount of carbon is released as CO2 into the atmosphere. It has been calculated that in this year alone, as much carbon was released by dry crops in Europe, as was stored by crops in the last 4 years.
These kinds of positive feedback loops could lead to a runaway process whereby even if we cease all human-caused production of greenhouse gases we would still experience the end-game of global climate change -- whatever that may be. Certainly it is likely to involved the complete disappearance of the arctic polar ice and a large increase in worldwide ocean levels. As well we should expect more powerful hurricanes, more forest fires and huge changes in the fauna and flora planet-wide, including the range and distributions of many species.
If the runaway process scenario is correct, than these changes could all occur very abruptly. Even if is not the case, we should expect this century to be the last nice one for humankind for a long time. Taking this scenario together with the fact of diminishing global oil supplies, and you have a recipe for economic paralysis and disaster if the status quo continues. The only good thing is that we know about all of this in advance. Thanks to solid scientific research that is growing more certain and dependable by the day. We are in a position now that we have enough information to act. So lets face this challenge while we are still in good nick! Lets start acting now!