Feed aggregator
China criticises Donald Trump's plan to exit Paris climate deal
In a rare comment on a foreign election, veteran climate chief says a wise political leader should make policy in line with global trends
China on Tuesday rejected a plan by US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump to back out of a global climate change pact, saying a wise political leader should make policy in line with global trends, a rare comment on a foreign election.
The world is moving towards balancing environmental protection and economic growth, China’s top climate change negotiator told reporters, in response to a query on how China would work with a Trump administration on climate change.“If they resist this trend, I don’t think they’ll win the support of their people, and their country’s economic and social progress will also be affected,” Xie Zhenhua said.
Continue reading...Nature is not a vague abstraction; ask Robbie's friend
Claxton, Norfolk Supporters of development seem to see nature as an abstract idea, a theoretical resource, which can withstand any amount of imposition
I was amused recently by a neighbour who described her love-affair with a robin called “Robbie” – a decade-long passion that’s probably three times the average robin’s life. Since both robin sexes sing and cannot always tell each other apart, my neighbour may actually have loved many Robbies over the years. Yet no matter, her love is true.
It’s interesting to compare my neighbour’s engagement with nature to the public responses at Lough Beg in County Derry, Northern Ireland, which I visited recently. Lough Beg is part of “Seamus Heaney Country”, the landscape central to the Nobel laureate’s magnificent poetry. A proposed four-lane highway would violate Heaney’s heartland and wildlife areas protected by numerous international designations. Yet, in the absence of protest from more mainstream NGOs (such as the RSPB and Ulster Wildlife Trust), a friend is fighting a lone legal battle, supported by his own money and crowd sourcing.
Continue reading...Sustainable aquaculture is possible, with the right science
Aquaculture is in the spotlight again, with an ABC investigation raising concerns over the sustainability of the expansion of Tasmania’s salmon-farming industry.
Controversies over fish farming are newsworthy and emotive, particularly when company profits and communities are at stake. Unfortunately, independent scientific evidence is often used selectively or even ignored in these debates.
Science is an essential tool for managers and regulators when planning industry expansion, and Australia’s aquaculture industry does have a strong research base.
Fish farming can be sustainable, but only if it takes proper account of scientific research – and only if that research moves fast enough to give an up-to-date picture of the risks.
Demand for sustainable aquacultureThe ever-growing demand for seafood, combined with the limited opportunity to increase catch from wild fisheries, means we need more aquaculture. Farming already produces roughly 50% of the global seafood supply, and farmed fish production now exceeds that of farmed beef.
Intensive aquaculture is relatively new, with supply rising tenfold since the mid-1980s. It is thus unique among food production sectors in that its initial expansion has taken place in an era of unprecedented scrutiny from government, environmentalists and the community.
This scrutiny is warranted, given that many fish farms are in coastal waters considered as a multi-use, common resource. In Australia, the industry is subject to high environmental standards and constantly evolving management.
Intensive aquaculture has several inherent advantages over other forms of agriculture (besides the intrinsic health benefits of seafood). These include efficient food conversion (it takes just 1.3kg or less of feed to produce 1kg of salmon, compared with 1.8kg for chicken and 2.6kg for pork); relatively limited use of fresh water; and the absence of fertilisers.
However, there are also significant sustainability challenges, including limiting marine feed ingredients; waste management; the use of drugs, colourants and other chemicals; impacts on wild marine species; management of fish health and welfare; site selection; and societal attitudes.
The aquaculture research community is acutely aware of these challenges. At a World Aquaculture conference in Adelaide in 2014, the program was dominated by issues related to sustainable development.
Planning for the futureIn the forseeable future, world aquaculture production is projected to grow at least at its current and long term rate of 6.5% a year. Australia’s industry, while representing less than 0.1% of world production, is growing even faster: more than 7% a year over the past decade.
Given cost constraints, this future expansion will be mostly inland or in coastal marine environments. Scientific input will be crucial if this expansion is to be managed in a sustainable way.
For example, coastal aquaculture operations are exposed to conditions that create good years and bad years. Understanding the spatial and temporal variation in these conditions is critical. It is not in the industry’s interest to risk growing fish in marginal conditions.
Conditions are also becoming more challenging as a result of climate change – the oceans off Australia’s southeast are among the fastest warming on the planet.
Enlightened aquaculture businesses are trying to anticipate these conditions by working with scientists including CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology to understand future environmental risks on a range of timescales.
Seven-day ocean forecasts and medium-term outlooks covering several months will help the industry make decisions about cage locations, stocking density, diet, disease management, and when to harvest.
Monthly forecast of ocean temperatures for the east coast of Tasmania for the coming months Author providedMeanwhile, longer-term planning, on time scales of years and decades, will be informed by climate models. For example, the industry can aim to breed fish to cope with changing conditions such as warmer water.
Of course, forecasts are never 100% accurate, meaning that aquaculture businesses still need to account for risk and uncertainty.
Planning for nowScience is clearly crucial for effective future planning. But it is also important to ensure that current management is the best it can be, and that current risks are managed.
In the case of finfish aquaculture, the potential for localised impacts on the seabed around sea cages is well known, and monitoring and management strategies well established.
The potential for adverse effects on the water in and around cages is also important, and water column monitoring is increasingly a management requirement.
Broader ecosystem interactions – such as changes in fauna and flora on reefs around cages – are progressively being recognised as an issue for many aquaculture regulators and managers.
As scientists’ understanding of these risks increases, regulators and managers can implement strategies to protect a broader suite of environmental assets and values.
However, there is no “one size fits all” management approach for this rapidly growing industry, and strategies need to be considered in the local context (ecological, social and economic). Science can provide a better understanding of a particular scenario, but it is up to managers to use this information wisely – and to exercise caution where risks are not well understood.
Fast responsesManagement may aspire to be “best practice”, but it is important to recognise that this does not mean that it will be static or finite. Management should respond to changes in the environment (both natural and social) and should adjust as the science and understanding develops.
It is important to acknowledge the different but complementary roles that science and management play in aquaculture planning. Scientists seek to understand the situation (such as the current or future environmental conditions) and share that understanding impartially and objectively. Regulators and managers need to make decisions with a much broader mandate, and as such need to consider factors beyond the science alone. Good planning needs to recognise the value of both.
Aquaculture development and policy needs to be able to trust the science, which in turn, must be delivered in a timely manner, to ensure long-term sustainability of this industry.
Graham Mair receives funding from FRDC, the commonwealth government and industry for research related to aquaculture. He is a director of Australian Seafood Industries (ASI) Ltd. which is a company that manages a selective breeding program for Pacific Oysters. Graham Mair is a member and Past-President of the World Aquaculture Society which is a professional society that has no advocacy role.
Alistair Hobday is involved in research developing short-term, seasonal and climate scale forecasts which are used by marine industries, including salmon aquaculture. This work has been funded by FRDC, CSIRO, BOM, and co-investment from industry associations.
Catriona Macleod is an environmental scientist with a focus on environmental impact assessment and sediment remediation in the coastal zone and as such has been involved with research related to salmon aquaculture. She has received funding from a number of different government and philanthropic sources, including the FRDC and the Tasmanian state government.
Oz Minerals looks to solar to help power $1 billion copper project
Kiwis beating us on climate risk too
Waterloo Wind Farm extension complete, boosting capacity to 131MW
CEFC-backed renewables fund launched by Palisade
BHP Billiton backs “world first” forests bond
South Australia hedges bets and dirties pool in energy tender
Great Barrier Reef: why are government and business perpetuating the big lie?
Despite the government’s protests, it’s not possible to save the Great Barrier Reef without tackling global warming first
At the core of the Australian government’s failure to protect our Great Barrier Reef is the big lie.
Through its actions and inaction, rhetoric, funding priorities and policy decisions, the Australian government has implicitly pursued the line that it is possible to turn things around for the reef without tackling global warming.
Continue reading...Carnegie Wave Energy to change name to ‘Carnegie Clean Energy’ (CCE)
Germany’s brown coal economies turn to battery storage in industrial shift
Historic win for frontline communities: Plans for coal power project in Turkey shelved
Wetland archaeological sites at risk
How China came in from the cold to help set up Antarctica's vast new marine park
Conservationists have been celebrating the creation of the world’s largest marine park, covering 1.55 million square kilometres of the Ross Sea off Antarctica.
The agreement, brokered at last week’s annual meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in Hobart, will enter into force on December 1, 2017 – thanks in large part to China ending its resistance to the proposal.
For the next 35 years, fishing will be totally banned in a “no-take zone” covering 1.12 million square kilometres (72%) of the marine park, with exceptions for krill and toothfish in specially designated research zones.
The marine park’s creation follows years of often frustrating negotiations. The United States and New Zealand brought the idea to the 2012 CCAMLR meeting, but were met with concerns, particularly from Russia and China.
At the 2014 meeting, China set out the reasons for its opposition. Its delegates argued that the term “conservation” should balance protection and rational use of marine living resources; that marine parks should not be set up in the Southern Ocean without convincing data showing they will work; and that the CCAMLR has already adopted a wide range of successful conservation measures in the seas around Antarctica.
A year later, China once again looked set to block the issue, posing a series of questions about the proposed marine park. How could marine parks allow rational use of marine living resources? How could they facilitate scientific research? How would they be monitored and regulated, and how long would the protections last?
Nevertheless, China surprisingly supported the Ross Sea proposal at the end of the 2015 CCAMLR meeting, paving the way for this month’s decision.
Why the turnaround from China’s previous opposition? And what does this mean for its growing and changing influence on Antarctic diplomacy?
Global influenceThere are three key reasons that explain China’s shifting position. First, China is a latecomer to the current global ocean governance regime. When the Antarctic Treaty was signed in 1959, China was still relatively isolated from the international community. It was not until 1978 that it opened its doors to the world and engaged with the current international legal system, and as such it had little influence on the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea.
It has taken time for China to develop the necessary diplomatic and scientific expertise to become comfortable in this space. As a historic rule-taker rather than rule-maker, its government may need to overcome a natural mistrust of many existing regimes.
This issue is not unique to marine parks. Such hesitation was also evident when China joined the World Trade Organization in 2001 and when it started engaging with UN climate change negotiations in 1994. But China now uses the WTO dispute settlement body as frequently as other members, and ratified the Paris climate agreement at September’s G20 summit which it hosted for the first time – another sign of its increasing diplomatic engagement.
Second, China became a party of the CCAMLR in 2007. As the world’s second-largest economy and largest fishing nation, China has global fishing interests, including off Antarctica. Chinese Krill fishing in Antarctica has grown significantly since 2009, reaching 54,300 tonnes in 2014. This partly explains China’s concerns over proposed no-take zones.
There is, however, a deeper philosophical concern, which might be described as “anxiousness for commons”. While China’s Antarctic fishing interests account for only a very small share of its global catch, they are highly symbolic because Antarctic fishing showcases China’s quest for freedom in the “global commons”.
Third, the international community is currently developing a new global ocean governance regime. By coincidence, negotiations on the regulation of fishing in the Central Arctic Ocean and other international areas of the high seas have been going on at the same time as the discussions about the Ross Sea. In the Northeast Atlantic, the OSPAR has already established a network of high sea marine parks.
As a rising power, China would not be happy to face constraints or bans on its activities at a time when its rising status gives it access to places like the high seas, the ocean floor, the poles, and outer space. It would be a shame if China were to remain silent on those issues, and it probably won’t – China’s 13th Five Year Plan (2016-20) clearly says the nation would like to take a more active role in global ocean governance.
In the foreseeable future, we could possibly see China become more comfortable and active within the CCAMLR as well as the Antarctic Treaty System. Although generally being supportive, China would not keep silent. Rather, it would speak up more openly for its Antarctic interests, and have more intensive engagement with the Antarctic Treaty System.
One challenge for China would be how to enhance its capacity and expertise so as to provide high-quality proposals, which could not only pursue its own interests, but as an important global player, also help to make a concrete contribution to achieving sustainability in the Southern Ocean.
Nengye Liu receives funding from the EU Centre for Global Affairs, University of Adelaide, Australia and is working on a Project "The European Union and Conservation of Marine Living Resources in Antarctica".
'Bionic' plants can detect explosives
Ladybird invasion
World's children breathing dangerous air - in pictures
Three hundred million children live in areas with extreme air pollution, Unicef research shows. A new photo collection shows the scale of the problem in highly polluted countries in Africa and Asia
Continue reading...Ministers reject calls for charge on UK's disposable coffee cups
Therese Coffey claims 5p charge is not warranted as industry and chains are already doing enough voluntarily to reduce waste
Ministers have rejected calls for a charge on the 2.5bn disposable coffee cups thrown away each year because they believe coffee shop chains are already taking enough action to cut down waste.
Therese Coffey told the Liberal Democrats, who have urged the government to impose a 5p charge similar to that levied on plastic bags, that industry and chains were already doing enough voluntarily.
Continue reading...