Australia experiencing a late winter season heatwave breaking temperature recotds.
Australia is in the grip of a late winter season heatwave with temperature records falling across most states. Southern States are experiencing storm fronts with strong winds some times in excess of 100km/hr.
Australia: late Winter #heatwave temperature records broken for Queensland, New South Wales, Northern Territory and South Australia. In Qld, Birdsville’s running maximum temperature at 3:30pm AEST on Friday was 39.6°C. This is roughly 15°C above average for this time of year and Qld’s highest winter temperature on record. (Weatherzone)
Sydney Airport has broken its winter record of 31.1°C this Friday, reaching 31.6°C at 2:48pm. In August 2024 to date, Sydney's running average maximum has been 21°C, some 3.1 above the long-term average. (Weatherzone)
In Queensland, Rental advocates warn heat-related deaths will increase if Queensland regulations aren't tightened. The ABC News report summarises that:
Parts of Queensland are predicted to see a record-breaking 36-degree end to winter.
Advocates want efficiency regulations to protect renters and public housing tenants.
The state government says their reforms have made renting fairer and lifted housing standards.
The Pacific Islands Forum is underway in Tonga. The UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres made a speech to the opening of the forum.
He highlighted in his speech (see below) the need for a just transition for the phaseout of fossil fuels and called for all members of the G20 to step up and lead, by phasing out the production and consumption of fossil fuels and stopping their expansion immediately.
While Australia was not explicitly named, we are the only member state of the Forum involved in fossil fuel expansion and export.
"When governments sign new oil and gas licenses, they are signing away our future." said Guterres.
He also called for national climate plans – Nationally Determined Contributions – to be submitted by next year, aligning with the 1.5-degree upper limit of global heating.
Guterres also launched two new reports from Tonga highlighting the acceleration of sea level rise and the impacts already occurring on low lying Pacific Nations.
There is a new report on Cruise ship emissions. Cruise ships are getting larger and more numerous. This is a problem for the environment, according to Transport NGO Transport and Environment.
They argue that the cruise ship sector:
The world’s biggest cruise ships are now twice as big as they were in 2000
At the current rate of growth, the biggest cruise ships in 2050 could become almost eight times bigger than the Titanic and carry nearly 11,000 passengers
Twentyfold increase in the number of cruise ships from only 21 in 1970 to 515 today
Cruise ship CO2 emissions were already nearly 20% higher in 2022 than in 2019 before the pandemic
Cruise ships are currently exempt from fuel duties as well as most corporate and consumer taxes. A €50 tax on a typical cruise journey ticket would bring in €1.6 billion globally, €410 million of which would be raised in Europe.
The European Copernicus Agency early this week identified that Sunday, Monday and Tuesday set new global daily average temperature records. This Thursday UN Secretary General highlighted Extreme Heat with a call to action, including an end to new fossil fuel extraction. He highlighted a new International Labor Organisation report on extreme heat safety and health for workers.
22 July 2024 was confirmed as warmest day globally in recent history. July 23 and July 21 also broke the record set in July 2023.
Yet Australia is still approving new coal and gas projects, allowing offshore #Fossilfuel exploration exacerbating the #ClimateCrisis. We need a #ClimateTrigger in National Environment laws
Sunday Monday and Tuesday this week all exceeded Global Daily Average Temperature Record set in July 2023. Welcome to the Anthropocene.
The Coalition’s pledge to build seven nuclear reactors, if elected, would represent a huge shift in energy policy for Australia. It also poses serious questions about whether this nation can meet its international climate obligations.
If Australia is to honour the Paris Agreement to limit global average temperature rise to 1.5˚C by mid-century, it can emit about 3 billion tonnes, or gigatonnes, of carbon dioxide (CO₂) over the next 25 years. This remaining allowance is what’s known as our “carbon budget”.
My colleagues and I recently outlined the technological options for Australia to remain within its carbon budget. We did this using a tool we developed over many years, the “One Earth Climate Model”. It’s a detailed study of pathways for various countries to meet the 1.5˚C goal.
So what happens if we feed the Coalition’s nuclear strategy into the model? As I outline below, even if the reactors are built, the negative impact on Australia’s carbon emissions would be huge. Over the next decade, the renewables transition would stall and coal and gas emissions would rise – possibly leading to a 40% blowout in Australia’s carbon budget.
Blistering speech by United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres on World Evironment Day urging leaders take the right decisions taking urgent climate action, particularly over the next eighteen months, with concerning temperature trends and increasing climate damage impacts
Antonio Guterres highlighted that
The European Commission’s Copernicus Climate Change Service officially reported May 2024 as the hottest May in recorded history.
This marks twelve straight months of the hottest months ever.
The World Meteorological Organisation reports today that there is an eighty per cent chance the global annual average temperature will exceed the 1.5 degree limit in at least one of the next five years.
In 2015, the chance of such a breach was near zero.
There’s a fifty-fifty chance that the average temperature for the entire next five-year period will be 1.5 degrees higher than pre-industrial times.
Urged financial institutions to stop bankrolling fossil fuel destruction and start investing in a global renewables revolution; To present public, credible and detailed plans to transition [funding] from fossil fuels to clean energy with clear targets for 2025 and 2030;
Called for advertising and PR companies to "stop acting as enablers to planetary destruction. Stop taking on new fossil fuel clients, from today, and set out plans to drop your existing ones. Fossil fuels are not only poisoning our planet – they’re toxic for your brand."
Highlighted that "the Godfathers of climate chaos – the fossil fuel industry – rake in record profits and feast off trillions in taxpayer-funded subsidies.
Called for an effective price on carbon and tax the windfall profits of fossil fuel companies.
He proposed: "We do have a choice: Creating tipping points for climate progress – or careening to tipping points for climate disaster."
He advised that "We are playing Russian roulette with our planet. We need an exit ramp off the highway to climate hell. And the truth is… we have control of the wheel. The 1.5 degree limit is still just about possible."
An Australian scientist proposes freight and container ships optimise their routes based upon satellite data and a AI algorithm based upon the mapping of ocean currents and ocean eddies.
This could save a freight route between Sydney and Wellington in New Zealand about 17 percent fuel use, with minimal deviation and change in delivery time. It could achieve these savings by tracking the flow of a large anticlockwise eddy in the Tasman Sea.
Projecting this globally: global shipping industry could potentially cut its total fuel usage by 10 per cent with his route optimisation algorithm, Estimated savings are projected to be nearly US$50 billion and 237 million tonnes of CO2 emissions every year.
Shane Keating is an oceanographer and associate professor of applied mathematics at UNSW Sydney. He has developed an application and is offering it through his just-launched UNSW spin-off company named Ocean Intelligence.
“It’s essentially Google Maps for the sea, which offers the most efficient route in real time based on the behaviour of ocean eddies,” Keating said in this article in the Saturday Paper.
The following email to one of my superannuation funds, Telstra Super, was partly generated from the latest Market Forces Climate Wreckers Report. It is easy to generate a letter with specific information to your Super Fund. I added substantially more contextual information to my email. But a short personal note with reasons on the necessity for divesting for our future can also have an impact.
Every Super member has an opportunity to change how their superannuation is invested, divesting away from fossil fuels to clean energy solutions.
To TelstraSuper,
Time to End all investments in the world’s worst fossil fuel expanders
I’m contacting you to demand that you end the fossil fuel expansion plans of companies you invest my retirement savings in, and publicly divest from them if this fails.
I have particular concerns that your engagement with Woodside and Santos to adopt a change in business, has failed. These companies are almost entirely dedicated to Fossil fuel production and expansion. Your continued investment of member superannuation money in these companies under the rubric that you can engage and get them to adopt net zero emissions by 2050 is fatally flawed and is not in keeping with your fiduciary duty to act for members long term behalf.
In announcing Australia’s support for fossil gas all the way to 2050 and beyond, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has pushed his government’s commitment to net zero even further out of reach.
When we published our analysis in December on Climate Action Tracker, a global assessment of government climate action, we warned Australia was unlikely to achieve its net zero target, and rated its efforts as “poor.”
That’s because Australia’s long-term emissions reduction plan – released under the Morrison Coalition government and not yet revised by the Albanese Labor government – resorts to unrealistic technological fixes and emissions offsets.
Photo Credit: Ottawa march for a Plastics Treaty coutesy FoEI via X
The United Nations Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee for a Global Plastics Treaty is holding its fourth meeting in Ottawa, Canada from 23–29 April 2024 to prepare a treaty by the end of 2024. Global Plastics pollution is an escalating Crisis that interlinks with the Biodiversity Crisis and Climate Crisis. The Health and environmental impacts of plastics, microplastics and nanoplastics are of increasing concern as more research is done. (See Background Science).
The process for a Global Plastics Treaty was started in March 2022 at the resumed fifth session of the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-5.2). See my reports of INC1, INC2, INC3.
A Zero Draft of the treaty has been prepared with elements of both common rules for all parties, and a nationally driven policy framework, and many procedural issues still to sort out. Australia is a member of the High Ambition Coalitionto End Plastics Pollution, which put out this joint Ministerial statement before INC4.
INC4 wrapped up with some progess made, decision on intercessional work covering several issues but excluding polymer production and reducing production, and kicking the big decisions on plastics regulation down the road. The failure of the High Ambition Coalition to speak up and push more strongly for more ambition by including more in intercessional work at the last plenary is a lost opportunity that may knobble ambition in the treaty that results.
The next negotiation meeting - INC5 - is due in November in Busan, South Korea.
Comments on the final day and hours of negotiations:
Negotiations wrapped up at 3.17 am local time in Ottawa with the call from the dais: “Plastics may last forever, but this INC should not!”.
Miko Aliño (@mikoalino) commented on X: "The bridge getting to an ambitious #PlasticsTreaty became much more challenging after #INC4 delegates chose to exclude production reduction measures from intersessional work – a compromise that ignores the full plastics life cycle, contrary to the UNEA Resolution 5/14 mandate."
Earth Negotiations Bulletin (@IISD_ENB) commented on X: "Despite a growth of brackets and new text when #INC4 was meant to streamline, there were some signs of #PlasticTreaty progress, such as agreeing to set a legal drafting group to ensure the text of the new instrument on #plasticpollution is legally sound."
Greenpeace Canada summarised the outcome in a statement highlighting the failure in the High Ambition Coalition (that includes Canada, Australia) to push more strongly for "inclusion of any reference to plastic production or polymers in intersessional work, despite strong support by various countries, scientists and civil society groups. While Canada supported in principle a proposal from Rwanda to add a reduction of production in the intersessional work, the country and various other high ambition coalition governments did not push for it in the final plenary, resulting in a compromised outcome."
Graham Forbes, Greenpeace Head of Delegation to the Global Plastics Treaty negotiations and Global Plastics Campaign Lead at Greenpeace USA, said:
“The world is burning and member states are wasting time and opportunity. We saw some progress, aided by the continued efforts of states such as Rwanda, Peru, and the signatories of the Bridge to Busan declaration in pushing to reduce plastic production. However, compromises were made on the outcome which disregarded plastic production cuts further distancing us from reaching a treaty that science requires and justice demands. People are being harmed by plastic production every day, but states are listening more closely to petrochemical lobbyists than health scientists. Any child can see that we cannot solve the plastic crisis unless we stop making so much plastic. The entire world is watching, and if countries, particularly in the so-called ‘High Ambition Coalition’, don’t act between now and INC5 in Busan, the treaty they are likely to get is one that could have been written by ExxonMobil and their acolytes.
“We are heading towards disaster and with time running out – we need a Global Plastics Treaty that cuts plastic production and ends single-use plastic. There is no time to waste on approaches that will not solve the problem.”
Break Free from Plastics in a statement - INC-4 negotiating countries fail to respond to the magnitude of the plastics crisis - also highlighted the non-inclusion of plastics production in intercessional work as a lost opportunity making the achievement of an ambitious treaty more difficult:
"Today’s decision to exclude upstream measures from the intersessional work means it will be more daunting to include extraction or production reduction measures under the ambit of the draft plastics treaty. This compromise diminishes the ambition of this process as it ignores the central role of plastics production in fueling the climate, biodiversity and pollution crises. This is not only an utter disappointment, but also a missed opportunity to tackle the root causes comprehensively."
Indian based NGO Centre for Financial Accountability (@cfa_ind) did a thread summary of outcomes on X:
"The fourth meeting of the INC for a global agreement to end plastic pollution concluded on April 29 after a plenary full of huddles and the regrettable decision to not include discussions on primary plastic polymers in the intersessional work. "
"Countries decided to move forward with intersessional work on the financial mechanism, as well as on plastic products, chemicals of concern in plastic products, product design, reusability, and recyclability."
"Member States agreed to include observers’ participation during this work. They also decided to create a legal drafting group that will conduct a legal review of the text and provide recommendations to the plenary. "
"The exclusion of upstream measures from intersessional work, however, weakens the plastics treaty's scope. Ignoring plastics production's impact on climate, biodiversity, and pollution crises undermines comprehensive solutions."
"This compromise diminishes ambition and highlights the need for holistic solutions. It's not just disappointing; it's a severe setback in our efforts to combat the plastic pollution crisis."
WWF said in a statement while progress had been made, most of the big decisions that determine how ambitious the treaty will be are still to be made:
“Countries have made important progress in Canada with constructive discussions on what the treaty will actually do, but the big decisions still remain: will we get the strong treaty with common global rules that most of the world is calling for, or will we end up with a voluntary watered-down agreement led by least common denominator values?
"Negotiators need to recognise that plastic pollution is an accelerating global crisis that cannot be solved with fragmented national approaches. Governments must now employ all possible means to step up progress between the meetings on measures that will have the biggest impact on addressing plastic pollution across plastic’s full lifecycle, in particular, global bans on high-risk products and chemicals, global product design requirements and a robust financial package to secure a just transition,” said Eirik Lindebjerg, Global Plastics Policy Lead, WWF International.
During the closing plenary, INC Chair Luis Vayas Valdivieso (Ecuador) proposed, and delegates agreed to establish a legal drafting group to ensure legal clarity in the text of the future agreement. The Committee also established two intersessional expert groups to:
develop an analysis of potential sources and means that could be mobilized, for implementation of the objectives of the instrument, including options for the establishment of a financial mechanism, alignment of financial flows, and catalyzing finance; and
identify and analyze criteria and non-criteria based approaches with regards to plastic pollution and chemicals of concern in plastic products and product design, focusing on recyclability and reusability of plastic products and their uses and applications.
During the course of the day, delegates had considered and modified the streamlined parts of the Revised Draft Text (PDF), on issues related to just transition, the preamble, objective, scope, and the principles that will govern the new agreement, as well as the technical issues to be addressed in the future instrument.
Global Alliance Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) Global South media conference (Starts 11 mins in):
Europe proposes to adjourn INC4 and hold an INC4.2 to further work
Delphine Levi Alvares (@delphinelevialv) comments on X At 2.16 am, "EU proposes to adjourn rather than close #INC4 and hold an INC4.2 to continue the work. GCC countries are obviously saying no. The group of 'like-minded countries' is brought up again and still has not disclosed who is part of it... Are they ashamed of working together?"
Earth Negotiations Bulletin (@IISD_ENB) on X: "Delegates at #INC4 discuss a European Union, proposal calling for additional time for negotiations before INC-5, calling to adjourn INC-4 and resume the work to identify common areas and landing spots before November 2024. "
Rwanda and Peru propose 40% by 2040 plastics production reduction target
Rwanda and Peru submitted a conference room paper calling for a compilation report of scientific and technical information on sustainable levels of consumption and production of primary plastic polymers, and an open-ended working group to consider options for primary plastic polymers including the implication of no option.
"The science tells us that current and projected levels of plastic consumption and production are unsustainable and far exceed our waste management and recycling capacities. Moreover, these levels of production are also inconsistent with the goal of ending plastic pollution and limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees." said a Rwanda statement on intercessional work.
A motion submitted by Rwanda and Peru sets out a global reduction target, ambitiously termed a “north star”, to cut the production of primary plastic polymers across the world by 40% by 2040, from a 2025 baseline.
It says: “The effectiveness of both supply and demand-side measures will be assessed, in whole or in part, on their success in reducing the production of primary plastic polymers to sustainable levels.” (Guardian)
The motion was supported by 29 countries including Australia, Denmark, Nigeria, Portugal, the Netherlands and Nigeria, who signed a declaration, “the Bridge to Busan”, calling on all delegates to ensure plastic production was addressed.
Delegates arriving for the penultimate day of official negotiating time for INC-4 hunkered down, with some Subgroups spending considerable time validating streamlined texts, while others proceeded with line-by-line negotiations. Discussions had become heated in one group late Saturday evening, with some delegations noting that their considerations did not appear in the streamlined text. “Any discussions on polymers goes beyond the mandate of the INC,” charged one delegation, noting that they had made strong calls to delete that part of the text, and were concerned that it was still reflected in the Co-Facilitators’ streamlined text. In response, another delegate stated that “we must be able to discuss polymers in order to consider the full lifecycle of plastic.”
As delegates worked through the text, it was sometimes difficult to see the shape the future instrument will eventually take. “There are so many no-text options, the final document may just be one page,” joked one delegate. Others were encouraged by the proposals for intersessional work, although how to fit all the potential issues to consider into the six months before INC-5 will be challenging.
The heavy sighs among participants were palpable in the hallways and contact group rooms as many realized the sheer amount of work they will need to get through before the end of 2024. What will the output of INC-4 be? How useful will it be for their deliberations at INC-5? Will a foundation of convergence on key concerns among delegations be possible to advance an agenda leading to a robust ILBI on plastic pollution? While the somber mood spoke volumes, the path towards candid textual negotiations offered a glimmer of hope.
As the energy waned in the halls of the Shaw Center in Ottawa, delegates slogged through the Revised Zero Draft to make headway on narrowing down the options, thereby streamlining the text.
Spending a considerable amount of time during the day addressing issues of finance, the testy discussion about breaking the traditional approach to financing, that developed countries should pay, has reared its head over the past few days. If all countries are responsible for plastic pollution in the environment, all countries pay to clean it up, correct? And what about historical responsibility? Should we compel the plastics industry to pay for plastic waste generated further down the plastics value chain? Delegations grappled with these questions, as one delegate reminded others that to effectively implement the new treaty, every cent, from every source, will count.
In the corridors, and behind closed doors, many participants were involved in fevered conversations about the status of the Draft and the nature and magnitude of intersessional work ahead. “They’ve spent so much time streamlining the text that we really may not get to the heart of the textual negotiations at this meeting,” lamented one worried observer. One participant said that “at this stage, we don’t know if we are taking one step forward and two steps back, or two steps forward and one step back.” On intersessional work, one delegate was overheard saying, “this cannot be a repeat of Nairobi… the earlier we hear what is planned, the sooner we can agree.” One seasoned delegate, commenting on the sheer volume of work remaining, wondered if INC-4 would benefit from “one additional day of negotiations.” A plenary scheduled for Sunday may give additional guidance.
On a Friday that felt like a Wednesday, delegates continued streamlining the Revised Draft Text. Many were excited to discuss the issue related to fishing gear in a joint Subgroup, with some being reminded that the issue of marine litter was what kickstarted the global discussions on marine plastic which grew into these negotiations towards a plastic pollution treaty. A seasoned delegate expressed optimism that “consensus was likely achievable,” hoping that an “easy win” could infuse the rest of the process with much needed energy. But what initially appeared to be a low-hanging fruit proved to be rather more complex, with developing countries wondering who would pay for the artisanal fishing industries to obtain alternative, biodegradable fishing gear.
In the morning, some were surprised to see the daily program showing three contact groups meeting in parallel. The schedule remained fluid, with some delegates arriving in the right rooms at the wrong time, and others missing out on short sessions altogether. “My delegation cannot be in three different places at the same time, didn’t we agree we wouldn’t do that?” complained one delegate.
Meanwhile, rumors were circulating about the possibility of a resumed INC-4 (INC-4.2) that could be convened prior to INC-5. In hushed conversations, some delegations shared that convening a “jamboree” would not be as effective as holding structured intersessional talks, targeted at the most contentious issues that remain on the agenda. Unfortunately, the late-night plenary did not shed more light on the status of intersessional work.
What is abundantly clear is that delegates will have their hands full for the rest of the meeting, with three meetings running in parallel to get through another reading of the text.
26 April - Plenary Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlQDSTkbwwo Debate on whether to proceed with 3 sub-groups running in parallel to speed work in the limited time at INC4. Australia spoke in favour of this. Many small countries have small delegations and would be unable to attend 3 groups in parallel. Chair decides to proceed with two meetings in parallel.with a third stream when exceptional circumstances dictate.
26 April 2024 - Canada's First Nation declares emergency due to excessive chemicals emission (Yahoo News)
26 April 2024, Greenpeace ramps up pressure on UN delegates to cut plastic production, by delivering a “Global Plastics Factory” outside the Shaw Centre (Greenpeace)
26 April 2024, Plastics Offsetting project by Danone in Bali called into question
A plastic offsetting project backed by the food and drink giant Danone has been suspended, following allegations that a recycling facility was built illegally close to a Balinese community and without proper consultation, an Unearthed investigation has found. Danone’s project was set up as an attempt by the French multinational to offset its enormous plastic footprint in Indonesia, and part of its promise to recover more plastic than it uses in the country by 2025. (Greenpeace Unearthed)
fHand.jpg)
