Greenhouse gas, skepticism and the common good?

Earlier this week I watched an interesting and completely surprising debate in one of my new subjects. In a typical introductory workshop, we were given the PLEA 2009 Quebec Manifesto and a number of questions were posed to generate discussion.

One of those questions, paraphased, was is there a relationship between climate change and carbon emissions?
The group assigned to comment on that question simply stated "no". The lecturer teased out their reasoning which included the fact that they believed that the effect of man-made carbon emissions were insignificant compared to the natural climate cycles and contributions of natural disasters such as volcanoes and bush fires. The reasoning also included that while there appeared to be facts about carbon dioxide generation, they were not convinced they were linked to climate change. For them, the scientific link was not compelling enough.

Given that the next 12 weeks would be based on methods used to measure and reduce the production of greenhouse gas production in commercial buildings, it made sense that the lecturer then turned to the room and simply asked, "how many people here believe there is a link between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change?" I was surprised as I counted less than 50% of the room in agreement.

This was a room of future decision makers, still in their early twenties, who are tertiary educated and who do not believe the science is compelling enough. There is no doubt in my mind why the Australian Government is struggling to sell their carbon price and eventual emissions-trading scheme. Have we taught our society to be so skeptical that we do not even consider the precautionary principle?

The science of the debate has become extremely political and divisive in Australia and I wonder whether the discussion our group had is symptomatic of that and the growing weariness of a federal government which as a minority government has opened our eyes to how difficult it is to govern when every decision is the culmination of much compromise.

In many ways I felt like an outside in my class earlier this week - nearly a generation older, with a firm conviction that even if the science is not rock-solid we are still compelled to act and despairing at the vehemence with which the majority of my fellow countrymen and women rail against change for the sake of the common good. It was with interest I read Richard Lambert's piece Unravelling a few of Australia's Climate Myths written from the view of an outside looking into this country's current debate.

It would be interesting to know what other people think of us in the global community.

In celebration of biodiversity..

Semester two kicked off on Monday so last weekend I studiously ignored my pending project management assignment and headed south to celebrate the end of the mid-semester break.

What better way to prepare for the coming semester than spend some time marvelling at the amazing biodiversity at our back door.  In this part of the world, it is whale watching season from May to September and we were not disappointed, sighting a very happy whale frollicking off the coast at Victor Harbour. For those with a keen interest in whale watching, I would recommend checking out the South Australian Whale Centre website which includes a log of recent sightings. We think the whale recorded as ID#1154 on the 23 July was the same one we saw about that time (but didn't log with the centre).

However it wasn't just about whales. My delighted Englishman had a close and harmless encounter with a lone echidna which was dawdling along the cliff top path and sighted both a dolphin in the bay as well as a seal playing off the rocks.

With the batteries recharged and the warm glow of biodiversity in my veins, I am ready to take on second semester.

Hmm.. what on earth just happened?

This evening I took my ego into my own hands and attempted to network.....

To say that at various times I felt I was in a parallel universe does not do the experience the justice it deserves. The theme of the evening was sustainability and therefore to behold not one, but two people, being escorted from the venue was a little surreal.

I did learn about a very cool whole system design concept for growing tomatoes but didn't really know what to think when one of the participants was interested in the product but ideologically opposed to the retailer.

Taking inspiration from the two marketing PhDs I befriended, I really need to work out where I am going to position myself in this unusual job market.

What I have learnt in my holidays

Well, the results are in and I have very successfully navigated my first semester, exams and all, which is both a source of relief and pride.

Despite perhaps rather foolishly enrolling in a winter school subject to simultaneously learn about the dark arts of project management and fast forward this learning adventure, I have continued in my spare time to marvel at the strong reactions change evokes. Having spent part of my holidays donating a small fortune to my dentist to repair teeth grinding damage, self-inflicted unconsciously worrying about small stuff, I know I'm not immune to adverse reactions to change.

The Australian Government has announced that from 1 July 2012, there will be a price levied against the 500 largest producers of carbon dioxide equivalents released to the atmosphere. I genuinely think they would have got a more positive reaction by announcing they were going to wipe Australia off the map with a series of nuclear tests, such has been the vehement outpouring of angst by a large number of Australians.

It probably pays to put the political climate here in Oz in context. As alluded to in Vote 1 - Thermal Comfort, after the last federal election, neither of the two major parties received enough of the primary vote to form government in their own right, resulting in a "hung parliament". It was an ugly campaign and an inconclusive outcome. The reality for Australians is that the major party which was prepared to negotiate with the minor Greens party and a number of independent members formed a government. Like all negotiations, there are concessions so we have had some unusual outcomes including very specific poker machine reform and the speeding up of an emissions trading scheme which (ironically) both major parties had previously threatened but been unable to deliver. There are numerous other political issues clouding the debate but I'll encourage you to research those yourself and come to your own conclusions.

Thanks to the good folk at the Australian Bureau of Statistics I can highlight the following information;
"In 2007, 18.75 tonnes of CO₂ were emitted for every Australian, compared with an OECD country average of 10.97 tonnes per person. Many large economies, including Japan (9.68 tonnes/person) and the United Kingdom (8.6 tonnes/person), had significantly lower per capita CO₂ emissions than Australia in 2007. Of the OECD countries, only Luxembourg (22.35 tonnes/person) and the United States (19.1 tonnes/person) had higher per capita CO₂ emissions than Australia".


There is a compelling case that as good Global citizens we need to make some fundamental changes to the way we operate our country and invest in alternative technologies and industry over the long term for lasting global benefit.


What has been so disappointing has been the lack of public discussion about the multitude of options and positive changes that can be made. You would think from the current national debate we are the smartest and most efficient users of energy on the planet so there will only be additional costs and penalties and nothing to gain from new technology and ways of thinking. There appears to be more focus on price increases than using less by being smarter, more efficient or seeking alternatives. That after all folks, is the entire point...


The fear of change appears to be the biggest threat to planet!

Perspectivity - is that a word?

Wandering around the murky, albeit "G" rated, depths of cyberspace, in the name getting educated, I came across a blog discussing the game called Perspectivity. It makes for interesting reading and highlights, amongst other things, that sometimes non-partisan, lashings of common good can be beneficial all round.

Have a look and think...could we make the current debate just a little more civil?

Rio de Janerio - a mecca for Peter Allen fans and sustainable optimists alike..

Despite bunking off early in swot vac to check out some of the more obscure World Heritage sites lurking in the wilds of South Australia, I survived the exam which tested my knowledge of The Australian Environmental Bucket list (also see Don't forget to admire the beautiful things).

In the process of memorising large chunks of specific information, with the view to documenting it word perfectly under exam conditions, my review took me back to those heady days when folk were genuinely convinced that Sustainable Development was actually a solution to the world's dilemmas. Enter Rio Declaration 1992, diplomatically hammered out as the outcome from what was known as "The Earth Summit".

Nineteen years on, several summits later, and the planning is well underway for Rio+20 - Earth Summit 2012 by the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development. There are two main themes - Sustainable Development Governance and the Green Economy. If you've been listening to Australian media of late, you may have interpreted that to mean "the Nanny state will be empowered to drag us back into the caves". For the curious, here's a fine example of the current state of the debate.

How much do you really know about your country's commitments to the United Nations Framework on Climate Change (which incorporates the Kyotol Protocol)? How much of your own opinion is influenced by fear of the unknown?

The World Resources Institute, in preparation for Rio+20 has released a Information Note which is well worth considering. After all, one of the key aspects of Sustainable Development is Broad Community Consultation which includes the provision of information. Ask yourself, do you have enough information about the issues that affect you environmentally, socially and economically to make informed decisions?