Australian water torture
The understanding that climate change is an economic problem, not just an environmental one, has triggered the engagement of mainstream business over the last decade.
Business leaders understand risk and those who understand the climate science quickly conclude that 'early action' is a far more intelligent and rational response than paying the much higher price of climate change’s full impact.
All good in theory, the only problem is that the window for 'early action' closed about two decades ago. Any remaining doubt that this was the case was washed away with people’s lives, homes and businesses in Australia over the last few weeks.
While we can lament the lack of earlier action – and many like to apportion blame for it – there is little point. Instead we need to plan for our new climate reality and face the facts: Climate change is going to be very expensive and if we want our economies to survive the impacts we'd better start allowing for these costs in our economic planning, at both the national and corporate level.
I will not go into the science that explains why these weather extremes are looking like our new normal – or worse, perhaps just an opening salvo. If you want to explore that further you can find some references here or watch a US TV report here.
There are some who argue that the middle of a crisis is not the time to draw the connection to climate change and the threat it poses. The opposite is in fact the case - it is just the right time, while emotions are raw and the impacts are in our face. As governments focus on hunting down terrorists after a terrorist attack, we should focus on the cause of our problem right now as well. Unfortunately in our case, there is no single group of perpetrators but rather a whole system we need to transform.
Nevertheless, we should focus on it clearly and name the problem, with CO2-emitting energy sources like coal and oil the place to start. Of course while doing so will hopefully encourage action to eventually stop the problem getting worse, it won’t change our more immediate reality. We are facing a chaotic climate crisis and we need to start putting money in the bank and making adaptation action a major priority, or our economies will struggle to cope.
This would be a rational response to the threat already described in countless global studies. The reason for urgency is emphasised, however, by the growing recognition in the scientific community that we may have badly underestimated the speed and scale of change, particularly ice melting and sea level rise.
Some of the world’s leading scientists, like NASA’s James Hansen, argue that several meters of sea level rise this century is looking close to inevitable unless there is quite an extraordinary shift from our current path, of which there are no signs yet. Such a climate shift will make the Queensland floods look like a rained out picnic and will deliver human tragedy and economic calamity on a scale that will be hard to fathom.
My key point, though, is not that we should dwell on such doomsday scenarios, no matter how inevitable they may now seem. We instead need to get ready to survive them – because we can, if we get focused on it now. That means higher taxes, with the money being put aside for the ultimate rainy day. It means rapidly changing building and town planning rules to reduce the economic risk. It means our financial institutions, and their regulators, allowing for climate risk when they lend money and it means ensuring our economy, as a whole, has more resilience built into it.
No matter how desperate the forecasts now look, it is hard to imagine a crisis we can’t ultimately deal with, though not without cost. Human society has shown itself to be extraordinarily adaptable and capable of responding to new circumstances. Our resilience and capacity for innovation appears to be boundless once we put our minds to the task. WWII is perhaps the most dramatic example, and one from which we can learn many lessons and take great heart.
While many of us have days when we despair at the lack of action in response to the climate science, history shows this ongoing denial is a consistent pattern. Fortunately, also consistent is our capacity to then suddenly wake up and achieve extraordinary change, amazingly quickly.
The good news is that, in a technical and economic sense, eliminating CO2 emissions from the global economy is quite viable, and surprisingly so, as Jorgen Randers and I detailed in our One Degree War Plan. These conclusions have been replicated in a number of other studies. So all we need is the decision to act.
This will be little comfort for the families of the 30 dead in the Queensland floods since November, or those of the more than 800 now confirmed dead in Brazil’s worst ever natural disaster, with that country also gripped by floods and mudslides.
But like water torture, each new catastrophic climate event slowly breaks down our resistance. Every flood drips on our collective denial, wearing it down until it will be paper-thin. Then one day, the denial will be gone and we’ll get to work. The more we get ready for that day, the less torture we will have to endure.
Comments on this article
This would be a rational
This would be a rational response to the threat already described in countless global studies. The reason for urgency is emphasized, however, by the growing recognition in the scientific community that we may have badly underestimated the speed and scale of change, particularly ice melting and sea level rise.
disk space management
World Water Museum Installation
Looking for samples of Oz water to send to the World Water Museum Installation. Details at: World Water Art Exhibits Pollution
http://water.thinkaboutit.eu/think5/post/world_water_art_exhibits_pollution
Competition for economic resources and living space
What drives the need to build in flood zones?
What drives the need to chop down the trees in the river catchments? When the rain comes, there is nothing to slow down the wash off and erosion.
Its the last twenty years of economic boom in the Sunshine State. More people, reduced regulations for business. Environmental limits unheeded. Land cleared. Jobs, jobs, jobs. Making money, spreading suburban and water front paradise. The real estate companies, miners and developers have been rolling in the dough.
Now comes the time for the Australian tax-payer to foot the bill. And theres still talk of increasing migration to Australia for economic growth, and no signs yet the major parties pay more than lip service to the need of reducing carbon emissions.
from The Washington Post
Never before in modern history.. extracts from The Washington Post
Arctic ocean warming up, icebergs growing scarcer and in some places seals are finding water too hot, according to report to.. Commerce Department from Bergen , Norway. ..all point to radical change in climate conditions and unheard-of temperatures. Within a few years it is predicted that due to ice melt the sea will rise and make most coastal cities uninhabitable
Washington Post November 2, 1922 reported by WP and AP
http://sites.google.com/site/carbonnuclear/home
floods
Our forbears built houses to suit the climate Queenslanders had houses up on stilts with large verandas very sensible in a hot wet climate.in other Australian towns some pieces of land were never built on because they were swampy and tended to flood ,sometimes used as the sale yards or as sports ground.It seems to me that in later years we have decided that we know better than the people that came before us because we have degree,s from University(its a shame they don't teach common sense there)This problem is made worse by money hungry councles that want as many houses in the ward as possible so they can charge more rates and increase their budgets so they allow flood land to be built on but that is alright because they are better educated than our forbears
Floods in Queensland
http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/ncc/cdio/weatherData/av?p_nccObsCode=136&p_dis...
Referring to "Australian Water Torture" written by Paul Gilding.
The above reference is to the BOM site.
You will note that ,of the highest monthly rainfall events that have occurred since records started in Ipswich, there are only three that have occurred since 1980.
May 9th1980 July 20 1985 and Dec 12 1991.All the others are prior to 1980 - six of them before 1910.
How do you reach the conclusion that this year (2011) is so unusual and so related to recent issues?
Continuing Global Warming is a great benefit !
The burning of "fossil fuels" (coal, oil & gas) has released a lot of carbon ( mostly as CO2 ) which was otherwise irretrievably locked away underground. It has been an immense benefit. Volcanic activity , burning coal-seams , etc produce sporadic & unpredictable amounts of CO2 along with lots of "nasties" such as SO2 ( acid rain ,solar reflectance & global cooling) fluorides , ash & other deadly byproducts. The steady input of atmospheric CO2 from fuel usage has allowed increased food production with many benefits. The utilisation of oil and coal in plastics,pharmaceuticals,etc has produced a wondrous & enviable lifestyle . However, the easily obtained oil has been tapped & the less easily accessed oil is much more risky & expensive to obtain.It is being called "peak oil" and predictions are that supplies will diminish from now on. That means the Governments all over the world will have a dwindling tax-take from fuel sales. To counteract this they(bureaucrats)need new taxes.Spurred on by the"Greens" lobby they intend to tax CO2 (the world's best and cheapest fertiliser) by declaring it a pollutant ! THIS MUST NOT BE ALLOWED .PLEASE OPPOSE IT !
Global Warming is a great benefit !
Global warming took us out of an ice age & allowed the development of all the civilisations of the recent past , including our own.This is fortuitous because mankind did not (& can not) control the climate change that brought this benevolent period into existence. We are a carbon-based life-form entirely dependent upon photosynthetic plants to produce both our food & our oxygen.The plants reqire carbon dioxide (CO2) ,water & sunlight.To have water you need to have warmth or else the water is locked up as ice ( e.g. permafrost).A warm climate with abundant CO2 ,water & sunlight allows lush plant growth,crops to harvest & fodder for animals which in turn feed us. The mild temperature & CO2 increases have IMMENSELY benefitted food production .Below 200 ppm of CO2 photosynthesis ceases ! Currently the CO2 level is around 400ppm.Those advocating a reduction back to the 280ppm of the pre-industrial era are comdemning us to a period of poor crop production ,massive diclocation to the food supply & probably world conflict over access to vital foodstuff. We should be embracing the GLOBAL WARMING benefits we are enjoying.How about a bit of GRATITUDE!
Past Disasters
A sample of some past disasters for you as listed on Andrew Bolts blog. Perhaps CO2 caused these "In Retrospect"
The deadliest natural disaster in US history was the hurricane that ripper into the rich, port city of Galverston, Texas, on September 18, 1900. The category 4 storm devastated the island city, killing 1 in 6 residents and destroying most of the buildings in its path.
In 1900, drought in India blamed for 250,000 to 3 million deaths.
The Yellow River had flooded again in 1898, and in 1900 northern China suffered a severe drought. Some religious Chinese blamed the natural catastrophes on the foreign religion in their country.
In Buenos Aires, Argentina, a heat wave [in 1900] continued into its second day. The New York Times reported that "There were 219 cases of sunstroke here Sunday, of which 124 cases were fatal. The thermometer on Saturday registered 120 degrees in the shade with 93 of 120 cases fatal"
I could go on. Please stop this speculative nonsense.
No one event is evidence for
No one event is evidence for climate change, and this applies to the Queensland floods, as well as the Victorian. But climate change deniers can jump up and down all they like and deny until they are blue in the face. The facts are the facts, no matter how displeasing they may seem, or how inconvenient they are, anthropogenic climate change is real and with us now.
History and Stupidity will be repeated!
The news media and the cowboys riding the opinion polls (politicians) are falling over each other in blaming the insurance companies for “lack of heart” towards the disaster victims. Some people may forget that our Governments actually allowed insurance companies to use vague legal terms in defining “floods”. It seems that our Governments are keen to move attention away from their own inability to undertake proper planning. I am sure all the highly paid engineering experts will find ways to hide behind outdated formulas and “standards”. Whilst many of the have been found to be incorrect because of historic and scientific evidence, these formulas helped developers to use land in flood prone areas and to use building methods totally unsuitable for such locations.
This Article would have been more appropriate in the year 1900
Search for Queensland or Brisbane Floods on the BOM website and you'll find the facts. Looking back from 1900 shows that the previous 60 years produced 8 major floods. A major flood at the the Brisbane City Gauge is taken to be when the gauge exceeds 3.6m. There were also six moderate floods recorded during this time (where the gauge exceeded 2.7m). One flood reached 7m on the gauge and two exceeded 8m. So commonsense in 1900 should have meant Brisbane city needed to be planned to survive a 9m flood. From 1900 to 2010 Brisbane experienced only one major flood in 1974, when the gauge read 5.4m. Still more than 3m less than two of the 1800's floods. There was one borderline moderate to major flood in 1907 and only one other moderate flood in 1931. So in the 110 years from 1900 to 2010 only three moderate or major floods occurred, compared to the previous 60 years when 14 such floods occurred. Reference to future planning is commendable and necessary based on the history, but the lack of factual research, and relevance of Climate Change to flood severity and frequency is poor journalism not founded in fact.
Water torture drivel.
As soon as we can find an island for all these AGW believers the better off all us skeptics will be. May I suggest Tasmania or New Zealand for starters. By the way NZ has a carbon tax. May I also suggest an AGW church be built on each hill top for morning, lunch and dinner services so all believers can attend at least one service daily as relief from building levy banks to hold back the rising sea levels.
Head in the Sand, Ralph?
Ralph, you talk about Climate change sceptics. I am an anthropogenic climate sceptic. As I have posted here twice today, the AGW hypothesis has been falsified. Game Over. But to call us Climate change sceptics is untrue. We know that climate changes. Climate has changed since the beginning of time. When MBH98 produced the fraudulent hockeystick graph, they were trying to deny that climate had not changed for 1000 years. The graph tried to eliminate both the Medieval Warm Period (~850-1300AD) and the Little Ice Age (~1350-1850AD) We also agree that there has been global warming. We don't agree that it is dangerous.
Stop trying to equate us with Flat Earthers etc. The real current flat earthers are the believers in the falsified AGW hypothesis. Look at the Vostok Ice Core Samples. ALL scientists have accepted that the Ice Cores showed warming PRECEDES the rise in atmospheric CO2 by 800+/- 200 years.
(see http://tinyurl.com/mv33ou )
And anthony w - I am a real person - I use my real name - I do not hide behind a pseudonym or an initial and I do not distort the evidence - unlike the CRU crew (Hide the decline)
Head in the Sand
Based upon the arguements from climate change sceptics as there have always been floods then any flood is part of the natural cycle. I wonder if they would ever envisage a circumstance where Global warming had caused climate change? As the last drop of flowing wather evaporates thay would still argue that this is what it was like 3 billion years ago and its a natural cycle. When they are standing on tip toes breathing through a snorkle..perhaps. If you look hard enough you can find people that will promote AIDS is not caused by HIV, universe is expanding, the Earth is Flat the sun orbits the earth, evolution is rubbish as intelligent design is the only obvious exlanation for the complexity of life. If they are right then what is the objective of the conspiracy theory behind climate change, some left wing communist plot? I can see more liklihood in a possible conspiracy on the sceptics side of the debate in supporting the status quo and big carbon business.
In any case I would prefer to be cautious and insure my house thanks.
More like this please
I fully agree that the time could hardly be better to face the facts and act. Although some action is slowly getting off the ground, like planning decisions at local councils, much more needs to be done. We might be able to finance this summer's events by a flood levy, but what about all the costs associated with spate of major floods in the past decade, and those yet to come, let alone the slow erosion of productivity caused by the long term droughts.
We need more articles like this one please.
I'd like to see the IP
I'd like to see the IP numbers of posters, either some are pseudonyms of the same person, or a pseudo-science climate deniers convention haunts these threads. The more they protest, distort the evidence for climate change, and resort to referring to "nutty fringe group websites", the easier it is to see through their freaky, bizarre, oddball and peculiar arguments.
Perplexed Seb
Seb,
The hypothesis is that the tiny proportion of the atmosphere made up of man-made CO2 emission is causing dangerous global warming. As I put in my previous post it has been falsified. A hypothesis only stands until it is falsified. Professor Robert M Carter has falsified it, not once but SIX times. http://tiny.cc/kkzc9
Also See the peer-reviewed papers by ex NASA Physicist Ferenc Miskolczi on the saturated effect of CO2.
The trouble is education. People are falsely taught that CO2 is a pollutant when in fact it is vital to all life on Earth.
Perplexed
Let's ignore the fact that Australia has flooded before and will flood again. Let's also ignore the fact that Brisbane was built on a flood plain and the fact that you can't buy insurance for flood in many areas suggests the professional risk assessors will not bet against a future catastrophe. And while we're at it, let's ignore the fact that an increase in extreme weather events and particularly an increase in the severity of ENSO (El Nino and Southern Oscillation) which produces the La Nina phenomenon responsible for the rainfall this summer, is predicted by climate models based on fundamental laws of physics - And now let me ask this: If we accept that CO2 is a greenhouse gas which traps long-wave radiation re-radiated from the planet; and we accept that CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere have increased dramatically since the industrial revolution; then does it not make intuitive sense that our business as usual activities will result in a warmer planet ? And that this brings with it the risk of devastating economic disruption and severe social challenges. Milton, Stan, John, Geoff, Steve, Ray? What do you think? There is a nobel prize for any of you who can disprove the radiative properties of CO2 btw.
Climate Change
I found reading this article very depressing.
Currently, planetary average temperatures [AMSU Channel 5 satellite data] are about 1.1 Deg F COLDER than this time last year and falling fast, and sea surface temperatures are about 0.5 degF COLDER than this time last year.
There is some indication that sea levels rises are flattening off.
Bitterly cold winters in North America, Europe and Asia might also give some indication of what is happening.
It is time to recognise that the AGW hypothesis is dead, and perhaps pay attention to the [much more dangerous] alternative of impending cold.
philip wood
No - what he is saying is that the droughts and floods will be more frequent and more severe. He is absolutely right that the effects of ice melts have been underestimated so when you combine more severe droughts and floods with rising SEA TEMPERATURES and RISING SEA LEVELS then we get the issues. SIMPLE or not? Then on top of this, in todays modern world unlike the past (before human rights in which you have the priveledge to live under here in Australia) we can no longer overlook these potential effects - BECAUSE the majority of the worlds popluation live on the coast in large cities and if we leave it to late will you accept a few dozen million environmental refugees in your area Mr Philip Wood?
Fact or Fiction
Really Me Gilding - you really are trying to 'gild the lily' with this lot of hyperbole. The best I can recommend for it - and possibly you also is as an additive to the fungi heap! Please, a little more thought and less hot air - we don't wish to add to our non existent 'man made' hypothesis do we?
":A land of droughts and flooding rains"
It is sad but telling that Mr Gilding feels under no obligation whatsoever to demonstrate the causal connection between the recent Australian floods and AGW. This is just as his fellow travellers felt equally little need to draw the same connection between AGW and the extensive Australian drought earlier in the decade. In 1908 Dorothea Mackellar wrote of our "sunburnt country" as a "land of droughts and flooding rains": What was natural then is apparently caused by humans nowadays: what hubris!
Worldwide
If only the whole world subscribed to Climate Spectator we could feel assured that people at least have had a chance to think about these issues. This is a good simple article and Paul Gilding and the rest at CS should be praised for devoting their time to such an important debate! It really does sadden me to see some readers remarks posted below - and the only answer I have to this is that it's equally important for us and those behind CS to help bring light to the changes needed in our education system. The majority of skeptics below, I would assume, are from our older generations hence I can understand their ignorance which is due to their level of education and therefore trust in the science. But let me say this - if they think we of the new and emerging generations will accept this for much longer then they are wrong (and I will bet my house on it - does anyone want to put their money where their mouth is???).
Keep religion seperated from State (as per our consitution) - keep religion seperated from our education system - and wake up!!!
forecasts
Nostrodamus made a forecast on this surely?
Move on, nothing to be seen here!
The author of this drivel has quoted discredited figures and a TV show as his sources and claimed that CO2, at 4/1000% of our atmosphere, of which a miniscule amount is man caused, caused the Queensland Floods.
These "1 in 100 year" floods have occurred each 30-50 years over the last 2 centuries and are a natural cycle, as are floods are on other major river systems.
To suggest we burn fossil fuels that heat up the ocean is likening the planet to a kettle! The reality is that we have ocean currents, the operation, flow paths and mechanics we do not understand, that circulate water of varying temperatures around the globe and defy measurment of AVERAGE global ocean temperature! We know little about the ocean except it is 7 miles deep in places, covers 70 % of the planet and is our greatest carbon sink!
I suggest to the author that this dead horse be allowed to decompose in peace and be part of the carbon cycle that has enabled life on this planet to flourish and cycle for billions of years. By doing so, keep your grubby hands out of tax payers pockets trying to scam more money for a fraudulent hypothesis on a problem that only exists in your own mind!
Climate science ignorance or something more sinister?
Thanks Paul for a fantastically well written and intelligent article; quite the antidote to some astonishing drivel on this subject (by an expert in entertainment and football) that I read yesterday.
I notice climate change doubters are out in force, presumably reading the Spectator in order to blog misinformation, sow doubt and push agendas. My advice to them is to do some serious reading and come back with practical suggestions. Or stay away.
Disaster Capitalism
Sounds like Paul has been reading too much of Milton Friedman's work.
Is this a Class War?
Bit old fashioned.
Could much of the opposition to accepting responsibility for polluting the planet is part of the ongoing class war which has been gripping the USA for some time?
Consquences include the increase in inequality across the community - ie tax cuts in the face of national deficient and ongoing needless wars, which support the weapon makers. The bailing out of Wall Street, targeting of education for cut backs, persistance in the mainatance of a sub standard health system which costs 2.5 times that of the rest of the 1st world, yet does not privide cover for the less well off, etc.
The race to the bottom re wages and security of employment or exporting the jobs else where, in the name of economic efficiency? For whom?
This seems to be a desire to return to the world before the French or American Revolution by the gilded few.
That > 98% of the people working in the area of climate suggest that we have a problem, seems to be a mere distraction to be destroyed.
In whose interest is the opposition to any changes to our pollution emitting systems serving?
Are you sure?
I guess the Brisbane floods of 1841, 1890, 1893, 1931, and 1974 were all caused by climate change too? The floods aren't getting worse, we are just building more stuff on the floodplains.
It is the same with droughts, in the drought of the early 1900's we had less rain, this recent one was only worse because we used the water less wisely (flood irrigating rice??)
The climate isn't getting worse, we are just getting dumber! But I still believe we should look after the place better and reduce our emissions, polluting the place you live is never smart!