21 October 2016, Renew Economy, A renewable fiction: Myths mainstream media refuses to let go. For reasons that are not entirely clear, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar appear to have gotten the better of mainstream media. For years now, many in mainstream media have been propagating myths about renewable energy in general, and wind and solar in particular. It’s unclear why this is so – whether it is simply about ideology, politics, the protection of vested interests or simply the fear of new technologies and new ideas. Since the big price spike in South Australia and then the blackout, however, the myth making has reached plague proportions and has spread to some surprising corners. From the arch conservative Andrew Bolt of News Limited to Chris Uhlmann at the ABC, and via so much of the Murdoch media, the Fairfax Press, commercial TV and radio and rather too many in ABC radio and TV, the myths have been perpetuated, egged along by conservative politicians. The instances are so many that it is impossible to count, let alone list, and for this article we will ignore the cheap sloganeering such as “renewables are a fraud”, “wind energy doesn’t work,” and “wind energy is a boondoggle.” The problem we identify in the following examples is that there still seems an inherent bias against wind energy, and it appears to be based either on a lack of understanding of how energy systems work, or how they are changing. They seem convinced that renewables are the primary cause of high electricity prices, that fossil fuel plants don’t need back up, that transmission lines were only built to link remote and unreliable wind farms. They fail to understand – and appear to have no interest in asking – that new technologies can make the grid cheaper and more stable, and that we should be accelerating the transition rather than slowing it down and turning to old and expensive alternatives. Read More here
Yearly Archives: 2016
20 October 2016, Climate Home, Antarctic ice shelf collapse pits fishing against science. The UK is calling for a ten-year fishing moratorium in seas vacated by Antarctica’s collapsing ice shelves. The proposal, which was shared with Climate Home, passed the scientific committee of the UN Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) on Thursday. Russia has the power to veto the move when it goes to a full commission debate in Tasmania next week, however, and has consistently opposed territorial limits to fishing vessels in the far south. The collapse of an ice shelf provides a one-of-a-kind scientific laboratory, said Phil Trathan, a scientist at the British Antarctic Survey and one of the authors of the proposal. The newly open waters provide a window into the hidden processes of ocean ecosystems. “All of these areas are covered by ice and when that goes then there’ll be a whole new community develop under there. And given that a lot of communities develop quite slowly in the Antarctic then we can look at how they develop through time,” said Trathan speaking from Hobart, where the CCAMLR meeting is taking place. “If fisheries are going to exploit those areas before we have a chance to look at them scientifically then it’s a lost opportunity.” Antartica’s great ice shelves project out over the ocean from the fringes of the land. They are in a state of rapid decline, losing a total of 310 cubic km of ice every year. Once a shelf becomes too thin to support its own weight, it collapses in dramatic style, as was witnessed by satellites when the 3,250 sq km Larsen B ice shelf disintegrated within a few months at the beginning of 2002. Read more here
20 October 2016, Climate Home, Netherlands accounting fudge reduces 2020 carbon cuts. The Dutch government could avoid setting tough new climate policies thanks to carbon accounting changes. Ordered by a court to cut greenhouse gas emissions 25% from 1990 levels by 2020, the authorities were under pressure to close new coal power plants. In a convenient twist for reluctant ministers, the latest national energy outlook shows that target is much closer than previously thought. The official emissions forecast for 2020 is now a 23% cut, up from 17% a year ago. Economics minister Henk Kamp claimed in a statement this showed the success of a 2013 energy agreement, which predates the landmark court ruling. An official response to the Urgenda case is due out in late November. Green groups maintain that stronger action is needed to meet the spirit of the court judgment – and ambition of the UN climate deal struck in Paris. The new numbers owe more to methodological tweaks than carbon-cutting initiatives, lead analyst Michael Hekkenberg explained on the Energy Research Centre of the Netherlands website. Under the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change guidelines on methane’s global warming potential, the 1990 baseline emissions have been revised up. “This revision is obviously not good news for the climate,” Hekkenberg stressed. Meanwhile, the forecast 2020 emissions have been revised down, but largely due to shifting assumptions about renewable power imports and declining energy demand. Read more here
20 October 2016, Climate Home, UN approves plans for new IPCC global warming report. Governments have approved plans for a new UN report to explore the impacts of warming of 1.5C above pre-industrial levels at a meeting in Bangkok, Thailand. The head of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Hoesung Lee said the study will be delivered by 2018 ahead of a global review into efforts to tackle climate change. An outline of the study released on Thursday revealed the IPCC will explore development pathways compatible with limiting warming to 1.5C and their economic implications. Scientists will also examine the global and regional changes that can be expected under warming up to and above 1.5C. So far, the world has heated to around 1C above 1850 levels…. In contrast with previous IPCC publications this will be “succinct and objective to provide policymakers with guidance to act,” she added. Still, some commentators noted that a draft plan for the report approved by scientists had been watered down after the Bangkok meeting, specifically areas focused on strengthening global efforts to tackle climate change. “The material that was removed relates to increasing ambition, policy, institutions,” said Glen Peters, a senior researcher at Oslo-based CICERO. “These are all the areas that are critical to understand if we want to get to 1.5C, but also the areas the governments seemingly want to keep off limits.” Read More here