Around The Web

The idea is to come up with better alternatives to this. Australian Customs and Border Protection Service, CC BY

Japan’s fleet has left port for another season of “scientific” research whaling in the Southern Ocean.

Like last year, there is little that anyone can do to legally rescind Japan’s self-issued lethal research permit – a fact that has led to calls for more pragmatism and less confrontation in efforts to conserve whales.

Such avenues include greater collaboration between the International Whaling Commission (IWC) and other organisations, and a renewed emphasis on marine ecosystem research in the Southern Ocean.

How whale poo can help

While Japan’s new whaling program dominated the IWC’s summit last month, a Chilean-sponsored resolution nicknamed the “whale poo” resolution was also quietly adopted at the meeting.

More formally known as the Draft Resolution on Cetaceans and Their Contribution to Ecosystem Functioning, the resolution notes the growing scientific evidence that whale faeces are a crucial source of micronutrients for plankton.

The resolution will lead to a review of the ecological, environmental, social and economic aspects of whale defecation “as a matter of importance”, while the IWC’s Scientific Committee will review the research and identify any relevant knowledge gaps.

Why is this important?

Much of the Southern Ocean is described as high-nutrient, low-chlorophyll (HNLC) waters. This means that the despite high concentrations of important nutrients such as nitrate and phosphate, the abundance of phytoplankton is very low.

Phytoplankton is the base of the marine food chain, and plays an important role in the global carbon cycle by removing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere through photosynthesis. However, the growth of phytoplankton in large HNLC regions of the Southern Ocean is limited by the availability of a key micronutrient: iron. In essence, the Southern Ocean is anaemic, and whale poo is the remedy.

It works like this. Antarctic krill graze on phytoplankton, taking up the iron. The krill are then consumed by whales, which store some iron for their own use as an oxygen carrier in their blood (as in ours), but also expel large amounts of iron in their faeces.

Adult blue whales, for example, consume about 2 tonnes of krill a day, and the amount of iron in their faeces is more than 10 million times higher than normal seawater.

Conveniently, whale poo is liquid, and is released at the surface where it can act as a fertiliser to promote phytoplankton growth in the ocean’s sunlit top layers. Therefore, whales are part of a positive feedback loop that helps sustain marine food chains.

The whale poo positive feedback loop. Indi Hodgson-Johnston/University of Tasmania

More whales obviously make more whale poo, so it makes sense that more research and protection should be afforded to whales to ensure a healthier marine ecosystem.

Scientists collect whale faeces from the surface of the water, making this a great way to do whale research without killing or harming them.

What about scientific whaling?

Some have suggested that the legal arguments against scientific whaling are well and truly exhausted, and that controlled commercial whaling could be the next step. Assuming that anti-whaling nations such as Australia would not follow such a pathway, and that hard law options are frustrated, other avenues to end lethal research are needed.

The whale poo resolution also aims to increase the IWC’s existing collaborations with various research organisations. This includes the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), of which Japan is a member. CCAMLR made headlines last month when it approved, by consensus, the world’s largest marine protected area in Antarctica’s Ross Sea.

While the CCAMLR Convention states that nothing in it shall derogate from the rights and obligations under the Whaling Convention, the role of whales are important to CCAMLR’s ecosystem approach to conserving marine life in the Southern Ocean.

Japan’s current whaling program has the stated scientific objective of investigating “the structure and dynamics of the Antarctic marine ecosystem through building ecosystem models”. This aligns with both the research needed for CCAMLR’s ecosystem approach and the Australian Antarctic Division’s own research priorities.

With an emphasis on research such as ecosystem modelling, collaborations that include and value Japan’s abundant non-lethal research in the area could help to most of the stated scientific objectives of Japan’s whaling program without harming whales.

Of course, many people contend that the main purpose of Japan’s whaling program is not scientific. But this doesn’t change the fact that the same old battles at sea and in the courts have done little to prevent the taking of whales. The Whaling Convention cannot be changed, and nor can Japan’s interpretation of it. A different tack is clearly needed in both law and diplomacy.

As the new marine protected area shows, Antarctica is a proven platform of peace. Increasing joint scientific research, and riding on the wave of the recent success in the Ross Sea, may provide fresh dialogue with which to resolve the stalemate. What we need is a newly respectful, non-combative discourse with Japan which, whaling aside, is a brilliant contributor to Antarctic science.

Joint Australian and Japanese research in other areas of Southern Ocean and Antarctic science has a long and friendly history. It is upon these longstanding and positive relationships that research addressing relevant objectives should be focused and funded.

Constructive intervention

While some, including the Australian Greens, have called for an Australian government vessel to intervene, Japan is whaling in waters that are recognised by most countries as the high seas.

Since the landmark 2014 International Court of Justice ruling, Japan no longer consents to that court’s jurisdiction on matters of living marine resources. And with little recognition of Australian jurisdiction in the area, and the risk of any intervention being illegal under laws of the sea, there is little hope for successful international legal action. Sending an Australian ship to intervene or collect evidence would therefore be largely futile.

On the other hand, researching marine ecosystems in the Southern Ocean is difficult and expensive. Instead of sending a customs vessel, Australia should divert its funds and attention to research that will boost our understanding of the Southern Ocean ecosystem and its role in the global carbon cycle.

By increasing knowledge and recognition of whales’ role in the Southern Ocean ecosystem, the resolution offers yet another avenue for developing norms of non-lethal whale research that are recognised as legitimate by all International Whaling Commission members.

Perhaps in one of Australia’s most vexed diplomatic issues with their close ally, whale poo could pave the way to more intensive and thoughtful scientific collaborations, and help deliver a peaceful end to Japanese whaling in the Southern Ocean.

The author would like to thank Lavy Ratnarajah, a biogeochemist at the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems CRC, for her kind assistance with the scientific aspects of this article. The views expressed are solely those of the author.

Indi Hodgson-Johnston receives funding from the University of Tasmania.

Victorian Liberal opposition reportedly threatening to block legislation to adjust the state's solar feed in tariff.

Critically endangered bird – down to just 14 in the wild – not helped by being ‘morons’ with poor survival instincts

Scientists are scaling trees in Tasmania in an attempt to save the critically endangered orange-bellied parrot after the wild population dropped to the “stupidly low numbers” of just 14 individuals.

Three of those wild-born birds are females that have begun the process of selecting nest boxes in Melaleuca, a blustery outpost in the wilderness world heritage area near the southwest tip of Tasmania.

Continue reading...

Sweden has announced a government subsidy that will cover 60% of the cost of installing a residential energy storage system.

Tesla's 14kWh Powerwall 2 batteries open for order in Australia, with installations set to begin in Feb 2017 – just as 100s of thousands of solar households lose their premium FiT.

The huge success of a community-based program encouraging solar and battery storage uptake in Australian homes and businesses suggests the battery storage sector may be in the early stages of mass-market uptake. And that's not all it tells us.

Community solar funding program gathers pace, meeting latest $140,000 target in just two days to install solar on three local businesses.

Vietnam parliament votes to scrap plans to build 4GW of nuclear power, citing declining electricity demand and a doubling in the cost of the two plants to $US18 billion.

On its fortieth anniversary, Storm Boy's critique of consumerism and vision for Australian race relations are more than relevant ever before.

A study of more than 250 plants and animals suggests many will be unable to adapt quickly enough to survive predicted changes in rainfall and temperature.

‘We need more gas,’ Australia’s environment and energy minister says, urging state governments to follow US lead

Australia’s environment and energy minister, Josh Frydenberg, has welcomed Donald Trump’s commitment to lift Obama administration’s restrictions on fossil fuel exploration within his first 100 days in the White House, saying the move will be a boon for consumers.

Frydenberg was asked about Trump’s declaration about various executive actions he would take in the opening phase of his presidency during an interview with Sky News on Wednesday.

Continue reading...

The climate isn’t waiting to see what a President Trump does, and neither should the world.

Donald Trump  is now using his new leverage with leaders near and far to benefit his business empire.

A group of 48 countries - including 7 close neighbours of Australia - have pledged to fast-track 100% renewables between 2030 and 2050, and ratchet up emissions reductions by 2020.

Intense warmth in both the air and oceans is driving the mini-meltdown at a time when Arctic sea ice should be rapidly growing.

Water produced when coal seam gas (CSG) is extracted from below ground can be safely re-injected hundreds of metres underground, according to new CSIRO research.

Water is pumped out of coal seams to access the gas held within them. CSG in the Surat Basin, Australia, produces on average 70 gigalitres of water each year - a seventh of the water held in Sydney Harbour. What to do with this water is one of a number of concerns voiced by communities around CSG.

Our research shows that injecting large volumes of treated CSG-produced water at suitable locations within the Surat Basin is unlikely to cause any harm to groundwater quality.

However, to achieve this the water has to be treated adequately to eliminate the risk of polluting groundwater with arsenic – a generally immobile toxic element that occurs naturally in some of the rock formations being considered for re-injection.

Why re-inject CSG water anyway?

In Queensland, the state government’s policy on managing “produced water”, also commonly known as “CSG water”, is to “encourage the beneficial use of CSG water in a way that protects the environment and maximises its productive use as a valuable resource”.

In many cases the most suitable and socially-accepted option is to treat the water, using reverse osmosis technology, and inject it into deep aquifers. The re-injected water can be used to top-up already stressed aquifers.

However, looking at similar projects around the world, especially from Florida, has shown that injecting clean water underground can sometimes mobilise naturally occurring contaminants such as arsenic.

When rainwater seeps underground and becomes groundwater it changes its composition. During the subsurface passage that can often take thousands of years the groundwater composition changes slowly to successively take on the characteristics of the rocks.

When water with a non-compatible composition is directly injected into deep aquifers, the injected water will also react with the rocks and therefore change its characteristics to one that is compatible with the new host rock. This occurs through the release of elements from the rocks, a process called mineral dissolution.

In addition, arsenic mobilisation can also occur by a process called desorption, in which case loosely-attached ions are released from mineral surfaces. Both processes may proceed until a new balance or “geochemical equilibrium” is established and both have the potential to mobilise toxic elements such as arsenic.

Testing the waters

In our new research, we analysed results from injection experiments at Reedy Creek and at Condabri, both located in the Surat Basin in Queensland, through computer models that can simulate groundwater flow and groundwater quality.

This analysis showed that if and how much arsenic is mobilised depends on the composition of the injected water. From the research we conclude that minimising arsenic release most importantly depends on oxygen being stripped from the water prior to injection of the CSG water.

During the research elevated arsenic levels have been found during a field experiment at one of the sites (Reedy Creek), for which both experiments and computer modelling suggest that arsenic release was triggered by the injected water.

However, computer modelling also demonstrated that this type of arsenic mobilisation could have been completely prevented by adjusting the pH of the injected water to the pH of the naturally-residing groundwater.

The experiments performed at the second research site at Condabri under different experimental conditions showed that arsenic concentrations in the groundwater increased substantially if the injected water was not stripped of oxygen.

When oxygen was not removed from the injected water this caused the dissolution of the naturally-abundant mineral pyrite, or “fool’s gold”. Arsenic is often embedded in trace amounts in this mineral.

What can we do?

The findings from this research were used to guide the design requirements for the large-scale implementation of CSG water injection into the Precipice aquifer. During the treatment process all water is now deoxygenated prior to injection and the pH of the injected water is similar to the natural groundwater.

The Reedy Creek re-injection scheme is now successfully operating and injecting treated CSG water. Since starting the injection in 2015, over 10 gigalitres (GL) has been injected into the Precipice aquifer and the scheme is currently Australia’s largest treated water re-injection scheme.

As a result groundwater levels in parts of the Precipice aquifer have started to rise for the first time in the last few decades.

This research received funding from National GISERA (National Gas Industry Social and Environmental Research Alliance). This is a collaborative vehicle established to undertake publicly-reported independent research addressing the social, economic and environmental impacts of Australia's onshorel gas industry. The governance structure for National GISERA is designed to provide for and protect research independence, integrity and transparency of funded research. Visit www.gisera.org.au for more information.

We all remember March 11, 2011, when the magnitude-9.0 Great East Japan earthquake triggered a 14-metre tsunami that flooded the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant. Four of the six reactors on site were badly damaged, three suffering core meltdowns.

Also affected by the tsunami, but to a much lesser extent, were the four reactors at the Fukushima Daini nuclear power plant, roughly 11km further south. That site was partially flooded, but sufficient safety systems were still available to shut down and cool the reactors safely.

At 5.59 am local time on Tuesday the tsunami alarms sounded again, as a magnitude-6.9 earthquake 10km off the coast shook the area. Just over half an hour later the resulting tsunami hit the Fukushima coast – but this one was barely a metre high, and well below the height of the 5.7m seawall, meaning that Fukushima’s nuclear plants were spared another flood.

However, the earthquake caused a circulation pump in the used fuel cooling pond of Fukushima Daini reactor 3 to shut down. After checking the system, the pump was restarted after 99 minutes, and operator TEPCO said the plant had suffered no lasting damage.

The situation might have been more serious were it not for the fact that Fukushima Daini, like most of Japan’s nuclear power stations, has been out of action ever since the disaster at its neighbouring station prompted Japan to shut down all of its nuclear reactors for safety checking and upgrades.

Although all of Daini’s systems have since been restored, its reactors have not been restarted. All the fuel has been removed from the reactors and is stored in cooling ponds – which is where the circulation pump failed that normally pushes water through a heat exchanger for cooling.

Because of the low residual heat in the used fuel, the reported temperature rise was less than 1℃ during the 99-minute outage. Without cooling, the temperature of the cooling pool would be expected to rise by 0.2℃ per hour. It would therefore take more than a week without cooling before the normal operating range of 65℃ would be exceeded, and this would still be far below the fuel melting point of around 2,800℃.

There has been no reported damage from the latest earthquake at the Fukushima Daiichi plant where decommissioning work continues (although it was briefly stopped in response to the earthquake). As of 11am on Tuesday, plant parameters show reactor cooling systems operating normally with reactor temperatures of 20-25℃, again far below any dangerous levels. Again, the low amount of residual heat in the fuel means that any changes on loss of cooling are slow. This is in stark contrast to the situation in 2011 where loss of cooling to the operating reactors led to fuel melting in less than four hours.

Is Japan’s nuclear power coming back?

Before the 2011 meltdowns, there were 54 nuclear power reactors operating in Japan. Since then, only three reactors have completed all of the required modifications and safety inspections and returned to operation, and one of these is currently shut down for routine refuelling. Currently 42 reactors will potentially be restarted, 24 of which are slowly going through the restart approval process.

The extent of modifications to avoid possible damage from tsunamis is illustrated by the work that Chubu Electric Power Company is carrying out at its Hamaoka nuclear power plant in Japan’s southeast Shizuoka prefecture. This year Chubu has completed construction of a huge seawall, 22m high and 1.6km long, which together with other safety upgrades will cost about 400 billion yen (A$4.9 billion).

After TEPCO faced accusations that it failed to take full account of the tsunami risk at Fukushima, Japan is clearly taking no chances next time around.

Tony Irwin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.

It seems nobody's quite satisfied with the latest water plan for the Murray Darling.

A privatization spree in Canada could cost regular people billions, erode democracy and undermine the fight against climate change

While prime minister Justin Trudeau flogged our public assets last week, he had a soothing message: rest assured, we’ll be well-served by the private sector. Bankers and billionaires lined up to sound a note of confidence. “I think it’s unprecedented,” exclaimed Canada’s top business lobbyist John Manley. “A once-in-a-generation opportunity,” enthused Trudeau’s economic advisory council.

These corporate figures are rubbing their hands because Trudeau is about to put one of our great crises in their hands: the need for historic investment in the country’s infrastructure, for so long the domain of the state.

Continue reading...

In response to concerns from the former cycling commissioner, the deputy mayor for transport insists plans are on track

Sadiq Khan is committed to being the most cycling-friendly mayor that the capital has ever had – and is already delivering real results. However, there have recently been a number of inaccurate reports about his plans and I’d like to take this opportunity to set the record straight.

Making cycling safer and easier will be a significantly higher priority for Sadiq than it was for the previous administration.

Continue reading...