Floods & climate change

Floods and man-made climate change.

Because the day to day weather is highly variable one cannot attribute any specific weather event (such as the current Asian, South American and Australian floods) to man-made global warming. However increased greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution leads successively to global warming, increased sea temperature, increased evaporation and thence to increased precipitation. Indeed the incidence of floods has greatly increased throughout the world over the last 60 years. Accordingly one cannot exclude the likelihood of a contribution of man-made global warming to extreme precipitation events.

The 2010-2011 Queensland, Australia, flood disaster has so far killed 16 (40 missing), forced thousands from their homes, adversely affected 70 towns and 200,000 people, flooded major parts of the capital city Brisbane, including the Central Business District, and cost circa $13 billion. [1].

This present Queensland and Eastern Australian disaster - coming shortly after the disastrous 2010 Russian heat wave (1/3 of the Russian wheat crop destroyed in fires) and the horrendous 2010 Pakistani floods (24 million homeless) and contemporaneous with the Brazil floods (500 dead, thousands homeless), Sri Lanka floods (23 dead, 1 million homeless) and Philippines floods (42 dead, 400,000 displaced) - has again raised concerns about the connection between man-made global warming from greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution and extreme weather events such as floods and drought.

For advice we must turn to expert climate scientists, meteorologists and other science-informed citizens. At the outset it must be clearly re-iterated that weather is variable and accordingly one cannot say that the severity of a specific event such as the La Niña-associated Queensland floods can be attributed to climate change. However increased precipitation derives from increased sea temperature and increased evaporation and accordingly man-made global warming to a global average of +0.8C above the 1900 value is contributing to extreme precipitation events (more heat means more evaporation and hence more precipitation).

Set out below in the public interest are 90 expert, informed, referenced opinions about the link between man-made global warming and increased precipitation events.

Please use this as a resource and tell everyone you can.

The bottom-line message: stop burning fossil fuels and otherwise generating greenhouse gases ASAP and we must return the atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration from the current dangerous and damaging 392 parts per million (ppm) to about 300 ppm for a safe planet for all peoples and all species (see 300.org: https://sites.google.com/site/300orgsite/300-org---return-atmosphere-co2-to-300-ppm ).

1. The US National Academy of Sciences (2010): “Extreme precipitation is likely to increase as the atmospheric moisture content increases in a warming climate. Typical magnitudes are 3-10per cent per degree C warming, with potentially larger values in the tropics, and in the most extreme events globally.” [2].

2. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007: “Observations are consistent with physical understanding regarding the expected linkage between water vapour and temperature, and with intensification of precipitation events in a warmer world. Column and upper-tropospheric water vapour have increased, providing important support for the hypothesis of simple physical models that specific humidity increases in a warming world and represents an important positive feedback to climate change. Consistent with rising amounts of water vapour in the atmosphere, there are widespread increases in the numbers of heavy precipitation events and increased likelihood of flooding events in many land regions, even those where there has been a reduction in total precipitation. Observations of changes in ocean salinity independently support the view that the Earth’s hydrologic cycle has changed, in a manner consistent with observations showing greater precipitation and river runoff outside the tropics and subtropics, and increased transfer of freshwater from the ocean to the atmosphere at lower latitudes.” [3].

3. Queensland Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) Report. In 2010 the Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) Report to the Queensland Government and the Local Government Association of Queensland advised that "a. an increase in rainfall intensity is likely; b. the available scientific literature indicates this increased rainfall intensity to be in the range of 3-10 per cent per degree of global warming; c. the SAG understands the preference for a single figure to support policy development. More detailed analysis is required to firmly establish such a figure and this work will be undertaken as part of the review of Australia’s Rainfall and Runoff [AR&R]. This document will become the authoritative source of information on the issue when released in 2014. However the SAG would consider a figure of 5% increase in rainfall intensity per degree of global warming reasonable for informing policy development in the interim... Extreme precipitation is likely to increase as the atmospheric moisture content increases in a warming climate…If this recommendation turns out to underestimate the changes (and the evidence produced to date would suggest it will) then further increases will be recommended through revision of the AR&R. Taking this first step now will make these increases more acceptable in the future.” [4].

4. Final Report of the Queensland Inland Flooding Study (2010): “ Executive summary. Flooding causes significant impacts on Queensland communities and the economy- and with our changing climate, flooding events are likely to become more frequent and more intense. Effective land use planning will ensure that our communities are ready for the impacts of climate change… Various scientific methodologies were examined to identify benchmark figures fro planning to take account of the projected impacts of climate change on flood risks. These methods were based on the theory that precipitable water in the atmosphere will increase as global temperature increases. Analysis was undertaken to determine the extent of evidence in the Queensland historical record for this physical relationship. This analysis included both land surface temperature and sea surface temperatures. The recent wok of Rafter and Abbes (2010) was also considered, which uses extreme value analyses to calculate the percentage increases of intense rainfall from a suite of Global Climate Models. The project also took into account the recently released report from the US National Academy of Sciences (2010) which concludes that: “Extreme precipitation is likely to increase as the atmospheric moisture content increases in a warming climate. Typical magnitudes are 3-10per cent per degree C warming, with potentially larger values in the tropics, and in the most extreme events globally.” [5].

5. The Queensland Government itself understands the connection between global warming and increased precipitation events while remaining notoriously committed to fossil fuel burning and methanogenic livestock production. The Final Report of the Inland Flooding Study, 2010, was released by Queensland Climate Change and Sustainability Minister Kate Jones at the Local Government Association of Queensland's (LGAQ) annual environment conference on the Gold Coast. "What we're asking is that councils use this science to build into their flood risks an increase in flooding as a consequence of climate change. What we'll see is rainfall intensity increasing by five per cent, which will mean they'll need to build that into their flood planning… [ planning for a once-in-a-century flood isn't enough to protect inland areas in the future]…Instead we're recommending local governments adopt a climate-change factor for increased rainfall intensity of five per cent per degree of global warming, and incorporate this into local flood studies and planning schemes. This will increase the amount of land considered flood prone over time and enable councils to make informed decisions and provide better advice to residents. This is the first time definitive advice on how to plan for more intense flooding under climate change has been provided in Queensland."[6].

6. Australian Bureau of Meteorology (2010): " Data collected by the Bureau of Meteorology show that the Australian mean rainfall total for 2010 was 690 mm, well above the long-term average of 465 mm. As a result, 2010 was Australia’s wettest year since 2000 and the third-wettest year on record (records commence in 1900). The only month to record a national monthly total below the long term average during 2010 was June. This means that 11 months of the year experienced above average rainfall, an occurrence observed only once previously, in 1973... Based on preliminary data (to November 30), sea surface temperatures in the Australian region during 2010 were +0.54 °C above the 1961 to 1990 average. This is the warmest value on record for the Australian region. Individual high monthly sea surface temperature records were also set during 2010 in March, April, June, September, October and November. Along with favourable hemispheric circulation associated with the 2010 La Niña, very warm sea surface temperatures contributed to the record rainfall and very high humidity across eastern Australia during winter and spring." [7].

7. Professor David Karoly (Professor of Meteorology and an ARC Federation Fellow, University of Melbourne School of Earth Sciences and a lead author of the Nobel Prize-winning IPCC) commenting on the 2011 La Niña-connected Queensland floods and climate change: ''Australia has been known for more than a hundred years as a land of droughts and flooding rains, but what climate change means is Australia becomes a land of more droughts and worse flooding rains… On some measures, it's the strongest La Niña in recorded history … [but] we also have record-high ocean temperatures in northern Australia, which means more moisture evaporating into the air. And that means lots of heavy rain.'' [8].

8. Professor David Karoly (Professor of Meteorology and an ARC Federation Fellow in the School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, and a lead author of the Nobel Prize-winning IPCC) on Queensland floods, climate change and extreme precipitation: “What gives very heavy rainfall is high Indian Ocean temperatures and La Niña in the Pacific. This year we have both of those, and both are at record highs… (presented data from the Australian Bureau of Meteorology shows a marked increase in Australian region December sea temperature: http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/climate/change/timeseries.cgi?graph=sst&area=aus&season=12&ave_yr=11 ) …This (pronounced long-term warming trend in the waters near Australia) isn’t just climate variability. This is man-made climate change… we can’t say this individual event [in Queensland] is due to long term climate change, but we can say the overall global sea surface temperature increases are due to anthropogenic [man-made] forcings.” [9].

9. Professor David Karoly (Professor of Meteorology and an ARC Federation Fellow in the School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne, and a lead author of the Nobel Prize-winning IPCC) on Queensland floods, climate change and extreme precipitation: “"What we are seeing over the last 50 years and over the last 100 years is a change in this pattern of extremes with more hot and more wet extremes in northern Australia and more hot and more dry extremes in southern Australia and that pattern is exactly what we would expect from climate change due to increasing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere.” [10].

10. Professor Ian Lowe on the Queensland floods, extreme weather events and man-made global warming: “The Queensland floods are another reminder of what climate science has been telling us for 25 years. As well as a general warming and increasing sea levels, it predicted more frequent extreme events: floods, droughts, heatwaves and severe bushfires. The decline in rainfall in south-western WA and the increasing rainfall in the tropics are exactly what the science has been telling us to expect. It is still too early to say with certainty that climate change is responsible for the strong El Nino event which brought devastating drought to eastern Australia and the equally strong La Niña event which has produced the terrible floods. But they are exactly what climate science has been warning us about. If we don’t want to see more events like the 2009 Victorian bushfires and the floods now happening, we need a concerted program of action to reduce greenhouse pollution.” [11].

11. Professor Ian Lowe (president of the Australian Conservation Foundation; Professor of Science, Technology and Society and former Head of the School of Science at Griffith University, as well as an adjunct professor at Sunshine Coast University and Flinders University) on the Queensland floods: “The Queensland floods are another reminder of what climate science has been telling us for 25 years, like the recent long-running drought, the 2009 heatwaves and the dreadful Victorian bushfires. As well as a general warming, increasing sea levels and altered rainfall patterns, climate modellers confidently predicted more frequent extreme events: floods, droughts, heatwaves and severe bushfires. The decline in rainfall in Western Australia's south-west and the increasing rainfall in the tropics are exactly what the science has been telling us to expect. It is still too early to say with certainty that climate change is responsible for the strong El Niño event that brought devastating drought to eastern Australia and the equally strong La Niña event that has produced the terrible floods. But they are exactly what climate science has been warning us about since the 1980s.’ [12].

12. Professor Neville Nicholls (an Australian Research Council Professorial Fellow, Monash University, Melbourne): "Is the [current] La Nina that strong because of global warming, or is global warming exacerbating the effect of La Niña? Honestly, we don't know. But just because we don't now doesn't mean it's not happening. You'd have to be a brave person to say it [climate change] is not having some sort of effect. I can guarantee you in the next couple of years people will start looking back at this event and asking was it so unusually strong because of global warming." [13].

13. Professor Will Steffen (executive director of the ANU Climate Change Institute; Australian Government Climate Change Committee member): "As the climate warms, there is more water vapour in the atmosphere. This means that there is a probability that there will more intense rainfall events around the world. There is some evidence that we can see them now. I think the place where the best data is the US." [13].

14, Professor Will Steffen (executive director of the Australian National University's (ANU) Climate Change Institute) on Queensland floods and global warming: "What we can say about the Queensland floods is there is a strong La Niña, which tends to give this heavy rainfall, but in addition to that there are very high sea surface temperatures… "(In a US study of rainfall in a heavily saturated area over the past 100 years) there's been a significant increase (in rain in the area) since 1980 consistent with a strong warming. There's definitely a risk and a growing risk that events of this type will become more frequent as the climate warms. One-in-100-year events would become a one-in-20 or one-in-30-year event as the climate shifts ... we say with some confidence they are becoming more frequent and they will become more frequent in future." [14].

15, Professor Matthew England (joint director of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW) on record high temperatures and Queensland floods: “Climate change has seen a warming of waters globally, and the waters north of Australia are an important part of the climate system for Australia's monsoon rains. They are at their warmest ever measured and we cannot exclude climate change from contributing to this warmth, (and) if it is very warm there this enhances evaporation into the atmosphere, creating moist air… Climate change projections are pointing to more frequent extreme events, that's to say more flooding events, more droughts and fires, but whether Australia as a nation sees many more flooding events or not is still a little bit more complex to pin down." [14].

16. Professor Barry Brook (Foundation Sir Hubert Wilkins Chair of Climate Change and Director of Climate Science at The Environment Institute, University of Adelaide) on the Queensland disaster and global warming: “The period 2010-2011 has seen record rainfall and rural flooding events in Australia. This has culminated this week with the 3rd largest city, Brisbane, being struck by severely damaging and costly urban floods, inundating the central business district and overwhelming many thousands of homes and businesses…:The point of this post is not to try to attribute these extreme weather events directly to climate change, although I think there is a real influence at work here. A major factor is one of the strongest La Niñas on record… Climate change, left unabated, will increase the frequency and severity of natural disasters. More and more energy is being trapped within the Earth system (see figure to the right), and it has to be expressed somewhere, sometime. The laws of physical science dictate nothing less. And it will, in turn, hit the Australian and World economy hard. Those economic rationalists among us should heed the reminder that these latest natural events have delivered. Avoided global heating is avoided cost (with the worst-case scenarios being incalculable). For the general populace’s opinion on climate change, what will the latest events do? I can’t be sure of course, but I suspect that it will, in many, awaken within them a deep-seated horror — “...this could happen to me”. This personal demon, fed by the graphic reporting we now get on such events, might well do more than anything else to catalyse a community consensus for real, effective and urgent action to eliminate fossil fuels.” [15, 16].

17. Ellen Sandell (national director of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition and joint Banksia young environmentalist of the year in 2009) re the Queensland flood disaster: “We know that any one single extreme weather event cannot be attributed just to climate change. But we can look at the climate models and predictions, which all say that in a climate-changed world extreme weather events will become more frequent and intense. The La Niña phenomenon, the major cause of the increased rain in south-east Queensland, gets stronger as sea surface temperatures increase. Warmer air also holds more water than colder air, and this water eventually has to come down somewhere. Hence increased rain and floods…I don't want to live in the kind of world we are previewing right now. We need fundamental change, and it starts with a price on pollution that rids our economy of polluting energy and creates clean energy instead. It starts with increased funding for healthy, renewable energy. It starts with a serious commitment from all political parties to do what is right and significantly reduce Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.I hope some good can come out of this tragedy, and that we use it to have the conversation about what we are going to do this year to make these solutions a reality.” [17].

18. Parliament of Australia, Parliamentary Library (that provides carefully researched infomation to members of the Australian Federal Parliament) : “Are extreme weather events—severe storms, flooding, droughts, heat waves or extremely violent cyclones—becoming more common? The answer appears to be 'yes'. Trends towards more powerful storms and hotter, longer dry periods have been observed, according to the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report, and this trend is projected to continue.” [18].

19. Professor John Holdren (Professor of Environmental Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University; Director of the Woods Hole Research Center; recent Chairman of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and President Obama’s chief scientific adviser) on climatic disruption (2008): “”Incidence of floods is up almost everywhere…(figure: Major floods per decade 1950-2000; number of events per decade on a 0 to 350 scale plotted by decade) …There’s a consistent 50-year upward trend in every region except Oceania” [note: data source Milennium Ecosystem Assessment; histograms show that 2000s/1950s ratio about 10 (Americas), 4 (Europe), 10 (Africa), 6.5 (Asia); not shown, Fiji suffered its worst floods in decades in January 2009 with 11 dead and 9,000 evacuated]. [19].

20. GRID-Arendal (a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme ,UNEP): “Number of flood events by continent and decade since 1950. Roughly 17% of all the urban land in the United States is located in the 100-year flood zone. Likewise, in Japan about 50% of the population lives on floodplains, which cover only 10% of the land area. In Bangladesh, the percentage of floodprone areas is much higher and inundation of more than half of the country is not uncommon.” [note: data source Milennium Ecosystem Assessment; histograms show that 2000s/1950s ratio about 10 (Americas), 4 (Europe), 10 (Africa), 6.5 (Asia)]. [20].

21. GRID-Arendal (a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme ,UNEP): “ Number of Disasters per Year. Trends in number of reported disasters. Much of the increase in the number of hazardous events reported is probably due to significant improvements in information access and also to population growth, but the number of floods and cyclones reported is still rising compared to earthquakes. Is global warming affecting the frequency of natural hazards? (Sources CRED Annual Disaster Statistical Review 2006, 2007) [note: Figure shows that floods increased 6 fold from 1980 to 2007 whereas earthquakes scarcely increased at all). [21].

22. Professor Vicky Pope (head of climate change advice at the Met Office, UK) explains how a warmer world is a wetter world (2011): "As the average global temperature increases one would expect the moisture content of the atmosphere to rise, due to more evaporation from the sea surface. For every 1C sea surface temperature rise, atmospheric moisture over the oceans increases by 6-8%. Also in general, as more energy and moisture is put into the atmosphere [by warming], the likelihood of storms, hurricanes and tornadoes increases." [22].

23. Australian CSIRO-Bureau of Meteorology report “The State of the Climate” (2010). The present Australian floods have been caused by the current La Niña phenomenon but have occurred in the context of an increase in sea surface temperature due to man-made global warming. Thus the Australian CSIRO-Bureau of Meteorology report “The State of the Climate” (2010) states that “Sea surface temperatures around Australia have increased by about 0.4^oC in the past 50 years… Australian average temperatures are projected t rise buy 0.6^oC to 1.5^oC by 2030. If global greenhouse emissions continue to grow at rates consistent with past trends, warming is projected to be in the range of 2.2^oC to 5.0^oC by 2070… there is a greater than 90% certainty that increase in greenhouse gas emissions have caused most of the global warming since the mid-20th century. International research shows that it is extremely unlikely that the observed warming could be explained by natural causes alone. Evidence of human influence has been detected in ocean warming, sea level rise, continental-average temperatures, temperature extremes and wind patterns. CSIRO research has found that higher greenhouse gas levels are likely to have caused about half of the winter rainfall reduction in south-west Western Australia.” [23].

24. Phillip Sutton (convenor of the Climate Emergency Network (CEN) and author with David Spratt of “Climate Code Red. The case for emergency action”: http://www.scribepublications.com.au/book/climatecodered ) has commented thus on the Queensland flood disaster and man-made global warming on behalf of CEN: ““The Climate Emergency Network is calling on the Australian Federal and State governments to heed the message of the current disastrous Queensland floods and commit to urgent and effective action to end the plunge into catastrophic climate change and to restore a safe climate. Failure to do so will lead to a future of even more extreme floods, droughts and bushfires, occurring more often. Australia’s weather has always been highly variable but climate change is exaggerating the extremes. Hot weather is becoming hotter and dry weather is becoming drier. More water is taken from the land and sea into the atmosphere, so that when it does rain, it rains harder. It’s time for Australian politicians, and the public, to stop ignoring the undeniable evidence and to join the dots. Climate change is not the sole cause of these events but it is certainly increasing their devastating effects. For several decades extreme weather events have become more common and more intense – exactly as climate scientists predicted. And now across the world communities are suffering not just extreme but catastrophic weather-driven disasters. And what is really scary is that this is all happening with a global temperature increase of less than 1°C. World leaders have agreed to limit climate change to an increase of 2 degrees but have failed to take action that can achieve even that. It is generally acknowledged that the world is currently on track to an increase of at least 4 degrees, unless strong action is taken. We are facing a climate emergency now with a warming of less than 1°C and emergency action needs to be taken without further delay to cool the earth. To cool the earth we need to stop adding greenhouse gases to the air and we need to take the excess carbon dioxide out of the air. Such action will have to be taken urgently, on a national and global scale.” [24].

25. Professor Matthew England (Climate Change Research Center, University of New South Wales, Sydney): "I think people will end up concluding that at least some of the intensity of the monsoon in Queensland can be attributed to climate change. The waters off Australia are the warmest ever measured and those waters provide moisture to the atmosphere for the Queensland and northern Australia monsoon.” [25]. (cf. #15).

26. Dr David Jones (head of climate monitoring and prediction, Australia Bureau of Meteorology, Melbourne): "We've always had El Ninos and we've had natural variability but the background which is now operating is different,. The first thing we can say with La Nina and El Nino is it is now happening in a hotter world…So the El Nino droughts would be expected to be exacerbated and also La Nina floods because rainfall would be exacerbated [more evaporation, more atmospheric moisture]." [25].

27. Dr Kevin Trenberth (head, Climate Analysis Section at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA.): “The rapid onset of La Nina meant the Asian monsoon was enhanced and the over 1 degree Celsius anomalies in sea surface temperatures led to the flooding in India and China in July and Pakistan in August…[ about 0.5C of 1.5C above pre-1970 levels attributed to global warming]… The extra water vapor fuels the monsoon and thus alters the winds and the monsoon itself and so this likely increases the rainfall further. So it is easy to argue that 1 degree Celsius sea surface temperature anomalies gives 10 to 15 percent increase in rainfall." [25].

28. Professor Neville Nicholls (Monash University, Melbourne, president of the Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society): "It's a natural phenomena. We have no strong reason at the moment for saying this La Nina is any stronger than it would be even without humans. It [atmospheric warming of about 0.75C over the past half century] has to be affecting the climate, regionally and globally. It has to be affecting things like La Nina. But can you find a credible argument which says it's made it worse? I can't at the moment." [25]. (cf # 12).

29. Dr. Kevin Trenberth (head, Climate Analysis Section, National Center for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA): I find it systematically tends to get underplayed and it often gets underplayed by my fellow scientists. Because one of the opening statements, which I’m sure you’ve probably heard is “Well you can’t attribute a single event to climate change.” But there is a systematic influence on all of these weather events now-a-days because of the fact that there is this extra water vapor lurking around in the atmosphere than there used to be say 30 years ago. It’s about a 4% extra amount, it invigorates the storms, it provides plenty of moisture for these storms and it’s unfortunate that the public is not associating these with the fact that this is one manifestation of climate change. And the prospects are that these kinds of things will only get bigger and worse in the future." [26].

30. Dr Debbie Abbs (climate scientist, CSIRO Atmospheric Research, Melbourne): "Global climate models simulate rainfall over areas as wide as 200 kilometres. Extreme rainfall over small areas is much more than that found over large areas where results are averaged out. This means there is a need to provide extreme rainfall scenarios at regional scales so projected climate change can be factored into major infrastructure projects that are being designed to last for decades to come… [high-resolution model to focus the results from CSIRO's Global climate model down to 7.5 kilometre-wide areas over southern Queensland and northern New South Wales]… "The most extreme rainfall events we currently experience become more frequent in 2040, with the 1-in-40 year event of today corresponding with a 1-in-15 year event in future. The areas of greatest increase in intensity occur over mountainous terrain, inland from Coffs Harbour, Coolangatta and north of Brisbane… [26% increase in flooding leads to a 60% increase in damage costs]…. With projected increases in the intensity and frequency of extreme precipitation events, the community's exposure to extreme rainfall events is growing rapidly." [27].

31. Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) (2011): “"Recent scientific advice to the Queensland Government warned that the state would be threatened by higher flood levels from intense torrential downpours brought on by climate change. In 2010 the Scientific Advisory Group to the Queensland Government’s Inland Flooding Study advised that “an increase in rainfall intensity is likely” and “the available scientific literature indicates this increased rainfall intensity to be in the range of 3–10 per cent per degree of global warming”. [28].

32. Professor David Karoly (Melbourne School of Earth Sciences, University of Melbourne) (2011): ''Australia has been known for more than 100 years as a land of droughts and flooding rains, but what climate change means is Australia becomes a land of more droughts and worse flooding rains…[ individual events could not be attributed to climate change]…on some measures it's the strongest La Nina in recorded history … [but] we also have record-high ocean temperatures in northern Australia which means more moisture evaporating into the air. that means lots of heavy rain…in Victoria we had heavy rainfall but the run-off hasn't been as high because after 10 years of drought the ground wasn't as saturated.” [29].

33. Dr David Jones (climate analyst, Bureau of Meteorology (2011) on current floods (Australia; Brazil 500 dead, 2,700 lost houses; Philippines, 42 dead, 400,000 displaced; Sri Lanka, 23 dead, 325,000 displaced) : "There is definitely a link between our weather and eastern Brazil's. La Niña sets the atmosphere up for floods. It doesn't mean you get them, but certainly it makes the floods more likely, both in eastern Australia and in the north-east of Brazil where we do see usually above average rainfall during La Niña events…[US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration: 2010 was the wettest ever recorded on the planet]… That tells you the hydrological cycle is very, very active at the moment. We've seen a lot of evaporation, we've seen a lot of rainfall around the planet and as best as we can tell, the highest rainfall on record. It was also the hottest year on record, 2010. At a whole range of different levels there's certainly drivers which would support this view that the world is seeing a lot of extreme weather at the moment." [30].

34. Professor Ed Blakely (disaster expert, professor of urban policy, US Studies Centre, Sydney University) re Queensland floods: “''We shouldn't regard this [flood] as freakish…should assume they [such disasters] are going to occur because of climate change. They are becoming increasingly frequent and far more devastating… [examine need of Queenslanders to] retreat from the coast… It will take 60-75 years, so we have got to start now. It's very important for us to see not just this incident but the long-term trend and learn from it and plan for it. I warned people in Brisbane before hurricane Katrina that this could happen. I had all the CSIRO data that showed a flood that looked very much like the flood that happened. They scoffed.'' [31].

35. Dr Andrew Glikson (former Principal Research Scientist, Australian Geological Survey Organization, Earth and paleoclimate scientist. School of Archaeology and Anthropology, Research School of Earth Science, Planetary Science Institute, Australian National University) on Queensland floods [noting according to the report, that climate scientists were careful never to point to a single event as evidence of climate change but to examine medium and long-term trends] : “'Cyclones have increased twofold over the past 20 years. Floods have increased threefold. It's happening now, and it's happening faster than some of the climate-change scientists have dared to predict” [31].

36. William Cosgrove (vice president, World Water Council), 3rd World Water Forum, 2003: "Extreme weather records are [already] being broken every year and the resulting hydro-meteorological disasters claim thousands of lives and disrupt national economies," said of the Marseille-based think tank made up of users and suppliers of water for social and economic development. The big problem is that most countries aren't ready to deal adequately with the severe natural disasters that we get now, a situation that will become much worse as storms and droughts become more pervasive. Ignoring the problem is no longer an option… The increasing incidence of extreme events provides a convincing argument to continue looking into building partnerships between science, water managers and the disaster preparedness communities, including the development and dissemination of capacity development packages and methodologies. It is telling that disaster reduction has been recognized since 2000 an issue central to poverty reduction. ” [32, 33].

37. World Water Council press release from the 3rd World Water Forum re climate change, droughts and floods (February 2003): “Economic loses from weather and flood catastrophes have increased ten-fold over the past 50 years, partially the result of rapid climate changes, the World Water Council (WWC) says. These rapid climate changes are seen in more intense rainy seasons, longer dry seasons, stronger storms, shifts in rainfall and rising sea levels,. More disastrous floods and droughts have been the most visible manifestations of these changes. From 1971 to 1995, floods affected more than 1.5 billion people worldwide, or 100 million people per year, according to experts. This total includes 318,000 killed, and more than 81 million left homeless. Major floods that left at least 1,000 people dead and caused $1 billion in damages per episode have been the most destructive… According to climate experts, the expected climatic change during the 21st century will further intensify the hydrological cycle – with rainy seasons becoming shorter and more intense in some regions, while droughts in other areas will grow longer in duration, which could endanger species and crops and lead to drops in food production globally. Evidence for the link between climate change and increasing climate variability is mounting rapidly. For example, scientific research has linked the recent droughts in the USA and Afghanistan to the effects of global warming… These climate disasters stemming from climate variability include: Floods [and Droughts] - Based on data for ther period 1950 to 1998, the number of major flood disasters has grown considerably world-wide from decade to decade – six cases in the 1950s, seven in the 1960s, eight in the 1970s, 18 in the 1980s, and 26 in the 1990s. The number of significant flood disasters in the 1990s was higher than in the three previous decades combined. Overall, global precipitation is estimated to have increased by about two percent since 1900, though not on a uniform basis. This disparity in new rainfall caused some places to become wetter and others to get drier, such as North Africa south of the Sahara. In the most calamitous storm surge, the flood in Bangladesh in April 1991 killed 141,000 people. Two floods in China, one in 1996 and the second in 1998, caused the highest material losses of the decade, of the order of $30 billion and $26.5 billion, respectively. Floods also destroy the hard-won economic advances that many in the the deveklo0jg world have accomplished, such as the Mozambique floods of 2000, which left nearly 1 million homeless, and Hurricane Mitch in Central America [1998]. Comparing the economic impacts of the 2000 flood in Mozambique with the 2002 flood in Central Europe clearly illustrates the disparity in how national economies are impacted by extreme events. The cost of damages reflects the income levels of the countries. According to officials at the World Bank, the Mozambique flood resulted in a 45 percent drop in GDP in 2000, whereas in Germany, the 2002 flood is estimated to have caused less than a one percent drop in GDP…Hurricane Mitch [1998] killed 11,000 people, with thousands of others missing. More than 3 million people were either homeless or severely affected. In this extremely poor regions, estimates of the total damage from the storm surpassed $5 billion. The President of Honduras, Carlos Flores Facusse, claimed the storm destroyed 50 years of progress. As far as the geographic distribution odf the worst floods, the majority occurred in Asian countries … In addition, the impact of floods has had increasingly detrimental and disruptive effects on human health. In flooded areas, some diseases such as diarrhea, which kills 2.2 million children under th4 age of five per year, or leptospirosis (a systemic infection that can lead to meningitis and hemorrhagic jaundice) spread more rapidly… Many countries in Africa have been suffering from unprecedented droughts that may signal widespread climate change … Sea level rise is a concern in coastal and low-lying areas, including small islands. In addition to coastal flooding, saltwater intrusion into freshwater aquifers present a threat to water supplies. The average global sea level rise from 1900 to the year 2100 is expected to be 0.48 meters (19 inches), between twice and four times the rate of rise over the 20th century. The main effect on humans will be to confront extreme events such as storm surges. Areas of greatest danger include Small islands in the Pacific, mainly the Atolls; Coastal low-lying countries like Bangladesh and the Netherlands; Coastal mega-cities like Tokyo, Lagos, Beuenos Aires and New York.” [32, 33].

38. Hideaki Oda (director of the secretariat of the 3rd World Water Forum) (2003): “Devastating floods seem to be getting worse. In 2002, many floods ravaged part so ft he world, especially in Asia and Europe. More than 4,200 people in the world died as a result of flooding, and more than 16 million people have been affected by floods in that year .” [32, 33].

39. Greens leader and Senator Dr Bob Brown in demanding that the Federal Government should impose the original version of the Resources Super Profits Tax, and use the funds to pay for the floods clean-up: “It's the single biggest cause - burning coal - for climate change and it must take its major share of responsibility for the weather events we are seeing unfolding now. We know that the oceans around Australia are at record high temperatures, and that's causing the moisture in the air which is leading to these catastrophic floods. It is costing billions of dollars, besides the pain, the anguish, the loss of life, the destruction and it should not be left to ordinary taxpayers to bear the full brunt of that." [34].

40. The Age, Melbourne (arguably the most progressive of Australia’s mainstream media), in an Editorial on man-made climate change and the Queensland and Eastern Australia flood disaster (2011): “Calls have begun for the Queensland government to conduct a royal commission into the floods, similar in scope to Victoria's Bushfires Royal Commission. The Victorian inquiry examined the circumstances of the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires, including the impact of climate change. Climate scientists were disappointed its report did not sufficiently emphasise the unique weather contributing to the disaster. Victoria had never had three consecutive days above 42 degrees until January 2009, when there were three above 43 degrees. The heatwave is believed to be responsible for 500 deaths in Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania, but was largely forgotten after the tragic fires… Australian weather is believed to be particularly sensitive to climate change. Like Victoria's fires, floods are part of a natural cycle. La Nina, the periodic oceanic cooling phenomenon, is far more directly to blame for the weather Australia is now experiencing. But it would be shortsighted not to take into account the role of global warming in these catastrophes. Professor David Karoly, from Melbourne University's School of Earth Sciences, says while individual events cannot be attributed to climate change, the extreme weather patterns are in line with scientific predictions that a warmer world will mean more severe droughts, more fires and flooding rains… So far, our political leaders have postponed making difficult decisions about the need to tackle climate change - such as setting a carbon price - because of fears they will be punished by a sceptical electorate. A great effort is required, with no immediate return guaranteed. More investment and better planning are necessary (in public transport, in alternative forms of energy and to compensate low-income earners when energy prices rise) to take into account the effects of drought, floods and rising sea levels. The band of environmentally aware voters is growing; the major parties can make gains by tackling their legitimate concerns.” [35].

41. Professor Will Steffen (a member of the climate change and carbon pricing committee set up by the Gillard government in September 2010 and who is working on a report about the floods) stated: “"We are getting more intense rainfall events as the earth warms, but it's difficult to pin down any individual event. Rainfall events like the type we've seen in Queensland are becoming more likely as the earth warms. There is a long-term warming trend with or without La Nina…We've now got a problem on our hands [re increasing burning of fossil fuels]." [36]

42. Chris Cocklin (environmental scientist, James Cook University, Townsville, Queensland) re La Nina. Climate change and the Queensland floods (2011): “You've got to be very careful about saying that ... the intensity of La Nina ... is a product of climate change. But more intense weather patterns is certainly one of the strong predictions of climate science. If you look at one of the significant predictions throughout many parts of Australia - it's that rainfall will become more intensified. So all of that will add up to patterns that we have got to get used to." [37].

43. Clem Davis ( former weather bureau meteorologist, visiting fellow at Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University) re la Nina, Queensland floods and climate change (2011): “It's the strongest La Nina episode since 1974, when Brisbane flooded the last time. It is probably within the top five events over ... 130 years of records. You've got natural variability and you've got what global warming may be impacting… The records aren't long enough [in Australia back to 1876] , so it's hard to see which is impacting on the other. [That's why] researchers are looking at paleoclimate records to see what the cycles may have been in the past." [37].

44. Long Cao, Govindasamy Bala, Ken Caldeira, Ramakrishna Nemani, and George Ban-Weiss on the importance of carbon dioxide physiological forcing to future climate change (at doubled CO2 a total 15% increase in precipitation run-off due to increased precipitation due to increased CO2 plus reduced transpiration from decreased plant leaf stomatal aperture) (2010): “An increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentration influences climate both directly through its radiative effect (i.e., trapping longwave radiation) and indirectly through its physiological effect (i.e., reducing transpiration of land plants). Here we compare the climate response to radiative and physiological effects of increased CO₂ using the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) coupled Community Land and Community Atmosphere Model. In response to a doubling of CO₂, the radiative effect of CO₂ causes mean surface air temperature over land to increase by 2.86 ± 0.02 K (± 1 standard error), whereas the physiological effects of CO₂ on land plants alone causes air temperature over land to increase by 0.42 ± 0.02 K. Combined, these two effects cause a land surface warming of 3.33 ± 0.03 K. The radiative effect of doubling CO₂ increases global runoff by 5.2 ± 0.6%, primarily by increasing precipitation over the continents. The physiological effect increases runoff by 8.4 ± 0.6%, primarily by diminishing evapotranspiration from the continents. Combined, these two effects cause a 14.9 ± 0.7% increase in runoff. Relative humidity remains roughly constant in response to CO₂-radiative forcing, whereas relative humidity over land decreases in response to CO₂-physiological forcing as a result of reduced plant transpiration. Our study points to an emerging consensus that the physiological effects of increasing atmospheric CO₂ on land plants will increase global warming beyond that caused by the radiative effects of CO₂.” [38].

45. Dr Richard Betts (the Met Office, UK; he and his colleagues have modelled the effect of plants opening leaf stomata less widely when CO2 is high, losing less water and hence causing increased run-off): "It's a double-edged sword; it means that increases in drought due to climate change could be less severe as plants lose less water. On the other hand, if the land is saturated more often, you might expect that intense rainfall events are more likely to cause flooding." [39].

46. Richard A. Betts, Olivier Boucher, Matthew Collins, Peter M. Cox, Peter D. Falloon, Nicola Gedney, Deborah L. Hemming, Chris Huntingford, Chris D. Jones, David M. H. Sexton & Mark J. Webb (Met Office Hadley Centre and other institutions) on projected increase in continental runoff due to plant responses to increasing carbon dioxide (2007): “In addition to influencing climatic conditions directly through radiative forcing, increasing carbon dioxide concentration influences the climate system through its effects on plant physiology¹. Plant stomata generally open less widely under increased carbon dioxide concentration², which reduces transpiration and thus leaves more water at the land surface⁷. This driver of change in the climate system, which we term 'physiological forcing', has been detected in observational records of increasing average continental runoff over the twentieth century⁸. Here we use an ensemble of experiments with a global climate model that includes a vegetation component to assess the contribution of physiological forcing to future changes in continental runoff, in the context of uncertainties in future precipitation. We find that the physiological effect of doubled carbon dioxide concentrations on plant transpiration increases simulated global mean runoff by 6 per cent relative to pre-industrial levels; an increase that is comparable to that simulated in response to radiatively forced climate change (11 6 per cent). Assessments of the effect of increasing carbon dioxide concentrations on the hydrological cycle that only consider radiative forcing will therefore tend to underestimate future increases in runoff and overestimate decreases. This suggests that freshwater resources may be less limited than previously assumed under scenarios of future global warming, although there is still an increased risk of drought. Moreover, our results highlight that the practice of assessing the climate-forcing potential of all greenhouse gases in terms of their radiative forcing potential relative to carbon dioxide does not accurately reflect the relative effects of different greenhouse gases on freshwater resources.” [40].

47. IPCC (2001): “The most widespread direct risk to human settlements from climate change is flooding and landslides, driven by projected increases in rainfall intensity and, in coastal areas, sea-level rise. Riverine and coastal settlements are particularly at risk (high confidence⁶), but urban flooding could be a problem anywhere that storm drains, water supply, and waste management systems have inadequate capacity. In such areas, squatter and other informal urban settlements with high population density, poor shelter, little or no access to resources such as safe water and public health services, and low adaptive capacity are highly vulnerable. Human settlements currently experience other significant environmental problems which could be exacerbated under higher temperature/increased precipitation regimes, including water and energy resources and infrastructure, waste treatment, and transportation.” [41].

48. Global Greenhouse Warming.com on climate and floods: "Meteorologic floods are by far the most common of the types of floods in the human experience, affecting parts of the globe every year. Such floods can bring good, such as the fertile soils formerly brought to the Nile Delta by annual flooding. However, large floods are mostly known for their catastrophic loss of life and property, such as in China and Bangladesh which repeatedly devastated by floods - Bangladesh lost 300,000 people in November 1970 and more than 130,000 in April 1991, from cyclone-induced flooding, and the massive flooding of the Yangtze River in China in 1931 caused more than 3 million deaths with a further 2 million in 1959 from flooding and starvation. …By 2025, half the world's population will be living in areas that are at risk from storms and other weather extremes," the World Water Council said, citing evidence gathered by U.N. and other experts. The economic cost of changes in climate and floods will be huge, especially for poor countries that are likely to bear the brunt of these events. The phrase Climate and Floods is something we will hear more of in the years ahead.”[42].

49. Dr James Hansen (top US climate scientist; Director, NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies; member of the prestigious US National Academy of Sciences; 2007 Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility of the prestigious American Association for the Advancement of Science; adjunct professor, 75-Nobel-Laureate Columbia University) on climate change and extreme floods in “Storms of My Grandchildren” (2009): “A warming atmosphere causes greater desiccation, but at other times and places it can deliver heavier rain and cause larger floods… Increased warming’s greatest impact on storms will occur through its influence on atmospheric water vapor. The amount of water vapor that the air can hold is a strong function of temperature. The fact that atmospheric water vapor increases rapidly with only a small temperature rise is the basis for the runaway greenhouse effect. But the storms of our grandchildren will begin long before the planet approaches the runaway greenhouse effect… Latent heat is the energy that water vapor acquires when it evaporates from the liquid state or sublimates from ice. To evaporate water requires a lot of energy – more than 500 calories per gram of water at normal atmospheric pressure – which is needed to break the strong forces of attraction [hydrogen bonds] between water molecules When the water vapor condenses, that latent energy is released as heat that is potentially available to fuel a storm … Because a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapor and thus has greater latent heat, the strength of the strongest storms will increase as global warming increases. The greater moisture content of the air also increases the amount of rainfall and the magnitude of floods. Already, as we’ve seen, many places around the world have experienced an unnatural increase of “hundred-year” floods, which are occurring more often than their names would imply. In some places the effect of increased rainfall amounts is exacerbated by deforestation or other human activities that reduce the ability of the surface to retain water.” [43].

50. Julian C. R. Hunt Department of Earth Sciences, UCL, UK) , Mark Maslin (Environment Institute, UCL, UK), Peter Backlund (National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA), Tim Killeen (National Centre for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, Colorado, USA) and H. John Schellnhuber (Potsdam Institute for Klimatology, Potsdam, Germany) on urban threat from and contribution to extreme weather events (2007): “In 2005, 50% of the world’s population lived in cities consuming over 75% of the world’s energy use; as human development (as measured by the UN index) energy use will increase faster than the increase in population. By 2030, it is predicted that over 60% of the world’s population will live in cities with this percentage continuing to rise to the end of the century. Urban areas are particularly vulnerable to the effects of global; warming, particularly extreme weather events such as floods, storm surges, drought and heat waves (Stern et al. 2006; IPCC 2007), For example, it is estimated that the 2003 heat wave in Europe killed as many as 35,000 people. With modern urban lifestyles citi4s are consuming ever more power, which is still largely generated by fossil fuel combustion; the main uses are heating or air conditioning homes and buildings and powering vehicles, with industry in cities now taking a relatively small proportion. In fact cities discharge an amount of heat comparable to that received from solar radiation. Inevitably they contribute to greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel combustion and also from waste disposal management practices. As rapidly growing cities are clearing forests and vegetated areas, they are reducing the surface absorption of greenhouse gases and thereby further increasing their concentration in the atmosphere. Therefore, cities have special responsibilities both to their own citizens and to everyone else to mitigate future climate change, at the same time helping their communities to adapt to the growing seriousness of the consequences for people’s heath and welfare. Since the planning of such policies is complex as well as politically difficult, decision makers responsible for the future of cities require the best expert knowledge available. Hence the importance and timeliness of the papers in this special issue, which are a selection from those presented at a conference held at University College London [UCL] in April 2006.” [44].

51. Professor David de Kretser (Governor of Victoria, Australia, and eminent IVF scientist) interviewed about the devastating Victorian floods coming 2 years after the January 2009 heat wave that killed 374 Victorians and the 7 February 2009 Black Saturday bushfires that killed 173 Victorians): "I'm sorry, I'm one of these believers in climate change I'm afraid and if its doesn't get that message out I don't think its going to go away. There's too many of these events, not only in Australia but throughout the whole world that are happening now, which everyone says this week (is a) one in 100, one in 200 years (event) but they are happening pretty much more frequently now.'' [45, 46].

52. Elizabeth Farrelly (Sydney Morning Herald columnist, author and architect) re responses to the Queensland floods (2011): "To blame Bob Brown [for blaming man-made global warming for extreme floods] is to shoot the messenger. As we ache for Queensland's losses and rightly look to recovery, we must also heed the cataclysm's larger lesson... Global energy demand is about 13 terawatts (a terawatt is a trillion watts; a watt is a joule per second). Eighty per cent of this is fossil-derived. For civilisation to survive, a California Institute of Technology chemist, Nathan Lewis, calculates, 90 per cent must be carbon-free by 2050. To do it with nuclear power would mean building a reactor every two days for the next four decades. Yet if we don't do it, melting ice caps will be the least of our worries. Melting the permafrost, with its vast reserves of carbon dioxide and methane, will turn global warming, and its weather extremes, exponential...The sun pours 120,000 terawatts of energy onto Earth; 10,000 times what we need. With solar technology only 10 per cent efficient, calculates Lewis (and efficiencies now are often 15 per cent or higher), the entire energy needs of the US could be generated from a 400-kilometre square of Earth's crust...Melbourne University's Zero Carbon Australia plan insists that, using only wind, solar, biomass and hydro, we could be carbon-free by 2020. Crazy not to try. Don't blame Bob Brown. This is Gaia's lesson. Children, learn your cataclysm!" [47].

53. Adam Bandt (Australian Federal Greens MP) has backed yesterday's comments from the Victorian Governor (see #51) on the relationship between climate change and flooding and has said Premier Baillieu is being irresponsible in denying the link: "The immediate task is to ensure the safety and welfare of Victorians affected by the floods. But this should not prevent us from having a discussion about the impact of climate change and the likelihood of these extreme events recurring, Scientists have been warning for some time that global warming would lead to more extreme weather events including more intense and widespread flooding. Increased ocean temperatures lead to more moisture in the atmosphere and more energy in the storms. This is basic physics."All the Governor was doing was pointing out the facts. If we don't want more of these disasters to become regular events, we have to take urgent action to combat climate change. Here in Melbourne there are reports of advice to Melbourne Water that we face an increased in area of flooding of up to 25% because of climate change.Ted Baillieu is being irresponsible in denying the link between climate change and extreme weather. And the Premier's assertion that engineers managed to set levees at the appropriate height have been proven to be untrue on the Loddon River.If he doesn't understand the climate problem he needs to get properly briefed because we will be facing this for a long time to come. He also needs to tell Victorians what he is going to do to both cut Victoria's carbon pollution and prepare for rising sea levels and more extreme weather including bushfires and heatwaves as well as floods." [48].

54. Ewan Saunders, Socialist Alliance Queensland co-convenor, January 4. “The latest flood crisis in Queensland underlines the urgent need for serious action on climate change. This flood disaster is the greatest for decades, now covering an area bigger than all of NSW, and affecting more than 200,000 people. The repair bill will amount to billions of dollars. Worse still is the suffering of the people of this state, and the loss of irreplaceable belongings, heritage and livelihoods.While floods are periodic natural occurrences here and throughout Australia, the size and severity of this flood exceeds any on record in recent times. Why? There is ample evidence that the wild swings in weather we have experienced in Australia lately are linked to worldwide, human-caused climate change. How can it be an accident of nature that Queensland's most devastating floods closely follow on the worst bush fires in Victorian history near Melbourne in February 2009. Yet, the elephant in the room -- climate change -- is rarely mentioned in official reports of these events. The recent findings of the Royal Commission into the Victorian bush fires failed to mention climate change as a factor in the disaster, which cost nearly 200 lives. Climate change is causing a noticeable rise in overall ocean temperatures and levels. This will undoubtedly contribute to even worse flood disasters in future, in Australia and elsewhere. Far from being sheltered from the worst effects of climate change, Australia will be one of the countries most seriously hit -- by both fire and flood. Our governments need to heed the message, and take radical action to tackle climate change -- by rapidly phasing out reliance on coal, and urgently changing to renewable sources of energy, such as solar, wind and geothermal. Moreover, federal and state governments need to urgently expand and co-ordinate national emergency action to combat fire and flood by creating a National Emergency Rapid Response Council, combining firefighting, SES, medical, police and military forces, under the control of expert officials elected by workers and volunteers in the various fields. In this way, the vast good will and energies of the dedicated people who staff our disaster relief agencies can be best mobilised to confront this growing threat to our society.” [49].

55. Don Henry, executive director, Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF): “It’s right for the government to help people rebuild after these devastating floods, but it should use fossil fuel subsidies [circa $10 billion pa] to fund the work. There are a number of tax breaks and concessions that drain the Federal Budget, while promoting fossil fuel use and greenhouse pollution. The largest of these fossil fuel subsidies is the Fuel Tax Credits program, which costs taxpayers more than $5 billion a year, the vast majority of which goes to mining companies as credits for use of diesel fuel. Another is the Fringe Benefits Tax concession for personal use of company cars, which is set up so that if you drive a company car, the benefits increase the more you drive it and the more you pollute the atmosphere. US President Barack Obama, in his State of the Union address this week, made a commitment to fund the development of clean technology by ending $4 billion a year of tax subsidies to oil, gas and other fossil fuel producers. Australia should take a leaf out of Obama’s book. While no single extreme weather event can be directly attributed to climate change, this summer’s floods are entirely consistent with what climate scientists have been warning for decades. By cutting greenhouse pollution we can reduce the severity of extreme weather events and help protect our people and our economy.” [50].

56. Greens leader and senator Dr Bob Brown: "coal barons [should be made to pay]… Burning coal is a major cause of global warming. This industry, which is 75 per cent owned outside Australia, should help pay the cost of the predicted more severe and more frequent floods, droughts and bushfires in coming decades. It is unfair that the cost is put on all taxpayers, not the culprits.” [51].

57. Greens leader and senator Dr Bob Brown: “After the hottest and wettest year in recorded history, the seas off northern Australia are also currently warmer than ever before. This heat has led to increased evaporation and so, rainfall. Sceptics and defenders of the coal industry may dispute this scientific data, but they don’t. Instead, they are arguing that there should be no debate – not, at least, until some undefined time in the future when the cataclysm has passed and its injuries are behind us. A week after the “inland tsunami” struck the Toowoomba region, with the flood crest having passed in Brisbane, and Rockhampton beginning to recover, Australia’s newspapers are now carrying letters expressing frustration at the absence of debate on the causes of the floods across the nation and, indeed, in Brazil, Sri Lanka and Pakistan. Like the drought, heatwaves and bushfires, these floods are predictable calamities and worse is in store as the planet is heated by human actions. We may collectively choose to do nothing about the rapidly increasing of burning of coal, here and overseas, from coal being mined in Australia by wealthy corporations largely owned overseas. However, that choice should not be made without informed debate. If there is a later time better for this crucial debate to begin, let the critics name it.” [52].

58. Dr Gideon Polya re floods levy: “Because of weather variability one cannot attribute a specific flood event to man-made global warming. However global warming has been associated with a 4- to 10-fold increase in floods since the 1950s. The floods will cost more than Gillard's measly $1.8 billion but pro-oil, pro-gas, pro-coal, pro-war, pro-Big Business Gillard won't make the greenhouse gas polluters pay for the disasters they are causing to ordinary Australians. It will only get worse (Google man-made climate change and floods)… [submitted] We should all contribute our fair share but since income directly relates to carbon pollution and hence impact on flood disasters, the rich should pay more. Further, as stated by the Greens, we need a disaster fund in the face of worsening climate change; stop wasting money on the Afghan War (Afghan Genocide); and tax the largely foreign-owned coal, gas and oil companies who have disproportionately contributed to the floods disaster through greenhouse gas pollution and consequent global warming.” [53].

59. Dr Gideon Polya re Neil Mitchell interview with PM Gillard over levy: “A good, strong, polite interview by Neil Mitchell that could indeed have been stronger. Thus if we are looking for savings, pro-war PM Gillard spends about $1 billion annually on the unwinnable war in Afghanistan that is associated with 280,000 avoidable under-5 year old Afghan infant deaths annually (2.3 million since 2001) and 350 avoidable Australian opiate drug-related deaths annually due to US Alliance restoration of the Taliban-destroyed Afghan opium industry (3,000 such Australian deaths since 2001). Value for money?... Some good ideas on how to pay for floods reconstruction: Ewan Saunders (Socialist Alliance) says stop wasting billions on the Afghan War and bring soldiers home to help with reconstruction; Don Henry (ACF) says abolish the circa $10 billion pa in fossil fuel subsidies; Senator Bob Brown (Greens)says tax the largely foreign owned coal companies who have contributed to the floods via global warming; and Senator Christine Milne (Greens) advocates a disaster relief fund to deal with disasters in the face of climate change.” [54].

60. Gideon Polya: “Greens leader Bob Brown is essentially correct in alleging coal industry complicity in current flood disasters. We know that breathing in pollutants from the burning of coal, gas, oil and cigarettes is associated with lung disease (carbon fuel pollutants and smoking kill about 13,000 and 18,000 Australians, respectively, each year) but we cannot prove that a specific case of lung cancer is due to any of these causes. Similarly, while human-made global warming has been associated with a huge increase in extreme flood events throughout the world, because the weather is variable one cannot attribute a particular event such as the La Nina-linked Queensland floods to climate change. However, the scientific message is that to minimise both deadly lung disease and extreme weather events such as the disastrous current floods we must stop burning coal, gas and oil and remove the resultant atmospheric pollution. Top climate scientists instruct that atmospheric CO2 must be urgently reduced to about 300 parts per million from the current dangerous 392 ppm for a safe planet for all people and all species.” [55].

61. Greens acting leader, Senator Christine Milne: “Helping to rebuild shattered communities left in the wake of these devastating floods is a top priority for Australians and the Greens firmly stand behind that goal. But it does a disservice to all those tragically affected by these floods - and all those whose lives will be thrown into turmoil by more floods, fires, storms and droughts in years to come - to keep insisting that these are one off events and ignore the role of climate change. It beggars belief that the government would choose to cut climate change programs like Solar Flagships, energy efficiency and the solar hot water rebate to fund disaster relief when such disasters will be made worse by climate change. We must recognise that less than 1C of global warming is making these human, economic and environmental disasters a part of life this century. We need to start planning now for the reality of climate change and redouble our efforts to return to a safe climate, not cut back on that effort. Contrary to speculation this morning by Saul Eslake, the Greens have had no discussions with the government about the proposed flood levy as yet, but we will be seeking to start those discussions as soon as possible. The Greens have proposed deferring the top end corporate tax cuts planned for July 1 2013, while keeping the cuts for small business. This would net the government around $1.7 billion in the forward estimates, protect low income earners and small businesses and enable the government to reverse its decision to cut critical climate programs. While we are open to the idea of a levy, the Greens see establishing a long-term, well-resourced disaster relief fund as a high priority in the face of climate change. Rebuilding in the wake of a climate-related disaster presents an opportunity to make sure new infrastructure is built with climate change in mind. This means building in resilience to worse disasters to come by reviewing planning laws and building standards as well as focussing on high efficiency, low emissions options like public transport and renewable energy infrastructure. Public funds from this levy or elsewhere should not be spent on more coal infrastructure that will only make the situation worse for all of us. The Greens' final position on the levy will be considered by the party room.” [56].

62. Bob Carr (former Labor premier of New South Wales, Australia): “My sympathies are extended to all the Australian families affected by these savage floods. But I want to push the debate on climate change because most of the sources I’ve consulted over the years have discussed more serious flooding as one of the accompaniments of global warming… But savage floods are absolutely consistent with all that has been speculated about and predicted in the context of “mankind’s craziest experiment” of global warming.” [57].

63. Bill McKibben (founder of 350.org) in the Preface to his book “Eaarth” (2010): “Much more quickly than we would have guessed in the late 1980s, global warming has dramatically altered, among many other things, hydrological cycles. One of the key facts of the twenty-first century turns out to be that warm air holds more water vapour than cold: in arid areas this means increased evaporation and hence drought. And once that water is in the atmosphere, it will come down, which in moist areas like Vermont means increased deluge and flood… [re increased precipitation] Not gentle rain but damaging gully washers: across the planet, flood damage is increasing by five pecent a year. Data show dramatic increases – 20 percent or more – on the most extreme weather events across the eastern United States, the kind of storms that drop many inches of rain in a single day. Vermont saw three flood emergencies in the 1960s, two in the 1970s, three in the 1980s – and ten in the 1990s and ten so far in the first decade of the new century.” [57, 58].

64. CSIRO on man-made climate change and rainfall in Australia (2007): “The global climate has warmed by one degree on average since 1950. This trend is mirrored over all of Australia with the exception of the northwest corner. The global climate models find that this trend cannot be accounted for by natural variation. The global temperature trend is overwhelmingly attributed to greenhouse gases … [re SW Australian rainfall] Attribution studies of the changes suggest that natural variability, along with anthropogenic climate change caused by the Asian haze, are dominant causes with a possible contribution from land clearing as well. There is thus a signal that we are already seeing the consequences of anthropogenic climate change not just climate variability. A similar picture is beginning to emerge fro the rest of southern Australia as well… There is early evidence that the relationship between the SOI [Southern Oscillation Index] and Australian climate is changing. The tropical Pacific Ocean has warmed to historically unprecedented levels, and the SOI has dropped to unprecedented levels. There is some evidence that the amplitudes of rainfall variations have increased as a consequence… A feature of Australian hydrology is that it is more highly variable from year to year than on any other continent. The difference between a one year flood and a one in a hundred years flood is larger than anywhere else.” [59].

65. Dr James Hansen in “Storms of My Grandchildren” (2010): “Global warming does increase the intensity of droughts and heat waves, and thus the area of forest fires. However, because a warmer atmosphere holds more water vapour, global warming must also increase the intensity of the other extreme of the hydrological cycle – meaning heavier rains, more extreme floods, and more intense storms driven by latent heat, including thunderstorms, tornadoes, and tropical storms. I realized that I should have emphasized more strongly [in his 1988 testimony to a US Senate Committee] that both extremes increase with global warming.” [60].

67. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2006 (founded in 1848, AAAS serves some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals; the AAAS journal Science has the largest paid circulation of any peer-reviewed general science journal in the world, with an estimated total readership of 1 million): “The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society. Accumulating data from across the globe reveal a wide array of effects: rapidly melting glaciers, destabilization of major ice sheets, increases in extreme weather, rising sea level, shifts in species ranges, and more. The pace of change and the evidence of harm have increased markedly over the last five years. The time to control greenhouse gas emissions is now… In addition to rapidly reducing greenhouse gas emissions, it is essential that we develop strategies to adapt to ongoing changes and make communities more resilient to future changes. The growing torrent of information presents a clear message: we are already experiencing global climate change. It is time to muster the political will for concerted action. Stronger leadership at all levels is needed. The time is now. We must rise to the challenge. We owe this to future generations.” [62].

68. Omar Baddour ( chief of climate data management applications at the Geneva headquarters of the U.N. World Meteorological Organization, WMO) on extreme floods and drought: "We will always have climate extremes. But it looks like climate change is exacerbating the intensity of the extremes. It is too early to point to a human fingerprint" behind individual weather events.” [63].

69. Professor Andrew Watson (a climatologist at the University of East Anglia, UK): “[extreme events are] fairly consistent with the IPCC reports and what 99 per cent of the scientists believe to be happening. I'm quite sure that the increased frequency of these kind of summers over the last few decades is linked to climate change." [64].

70. Jean-Pascal van Ypersele (vice-president of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, IPCC) on Pakistan floods: “These are events which reproduce and intensify in a climate disturbed by greenhouse gas pollution. Extreme events are one of the ways in which climatic changes become dramatically visible.” [64].

71. Dr Peter Stott (head of climate monitoring and attribution at the Met Office) re Pakistan floods (saying it was impossible to attribute any one of these particular weather events to global warming alone): “ The odds of such extreme events are rapidly shortening and could become considered the norm by the middle of this century," [64].

72. Ghassem Asrar (director of the World Climate Research Programme and the WMO) on Pakistan floods: “There's no doubt that clearly the climate change is contributing, a major contributing factor… [re China mudslides, Russian fires, Pakistan floods] The connecting factor is that clearly the warming is a driver for all these events.” [65].

73. World Meteorological Organization (WMO) re China mudslides, Russian fires, Pakistan floods: “The occurrence of all these events at almost the same time raises questions about their possible linkages to the predicted increase in intensity and frequency of extreme events, for example as stipulated in the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report published in 2007.” [65].

74. Professor Peter Grace (Global Change, Queensland University of Technology (QUT)) says greenhouse gases and global warning are contributing factors to extreme floods: "We will have an increased frequency of quite major events similar to what we had, particularly the flooding event in south-east Queensland. It means a bipartisan approach to climate change. Without that we are not going to go much further in terms of preparing ourselves for climate change in the future." [66].

75. Experts from the German Weather Service (DWD), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) and the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) called a joint press conference in Berlin on Tuesday 15 February 2011 to highlight the dangers climate change could pose to Germany and warned that, already living in a damp climate, Germans should expect a lot more precipitation (reported by The Local, Germany’s news in English. [67]

76. Paul Becker (vice president of the German Weather Service, DWD) at a joint news conference of experts from the German Weather Service (DWD), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) and the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) (2011): “Particularly in coastal areas, the amount of (heavy rainfall and flooding) could double compared to the period between 1960 and 2000. By the year 2100 we expect torrential rains in winter, that is in the months of December, January, and February, across much of Germany (the DWD defined heavy precipitation as a downpour of up to 100 litres of rain per square metre in 24 hours).” [67].

77. Jochen Flasbarth (head of the German Federal Environment Agency, UBA), at a joint news conference of experts from the German Weather Service (DWD), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) and the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) (2011), underscored the threat to Germany's infrastructure including water supplies, energy and transportation from extreme weather: “These findings increase pressure to do something to counteract the unavoidable impact from climate change. Protecting our climate should be priority number one.” [67].

78. Christoph Unger (president of the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance, BBK), at a joint news conference of experts from the German Weather Service (DWD), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) and the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) (2011) said that due to Germany's demographic decline, fewer volunteers would be available to cope in the event of a extreme weather natural disasters: "If we want to keep our current high level of civil protection measures in Germany, we'll have to spot changing threats and react beforehand.” [67].

79. Volker Strotmann (German Federal Agency for Technical Relief, THW), at a joint news conference of experts from the German Weather Service (DWD), the Federal Environment Agency (UBA), the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW) and the Federal Office of Civil Protection and Disaster Assistance (BBK) (2011) is quoted as saying that German disaster relief agencies were already seeing a surge in incidents related to the changing weather and that the THW put in twice as many man hours in 2010 compared to 2009. [67].

80. Dr Michael Oppenheimer (climate-policy researcher, Princeton University, New Jersey, US) (commenting on findings published in Nature that climate warming is already causing extreme weather events that affect the lives of millions and that rising greenhouse-gas levels with the growing intensity of rain and snow in the Northern Hemisphere, and the increased risk of flooding in the United Kingdom) (2011): “This [finding of climate change link to extreme weather] has immense importance not just as a further justification for emissions reduction, but also for adaptation planning.” [68].

81. Quirin Schiermeier (Nature News analyst) (2011): “Likelihood of extreme rainfall may have been doubled by rising greenhouse-gas levels. Climate change may be hitting home. Rises in global average temperature are remote from most people's experience, but two studies in this week's Nature conclude that climate warming is already causing extreme weather events that affect the lives of millions. The research directly links rising greenhouse-gas levels with the growing intensity of rain and snow in the Northern Hemisphere, and the increased risk of flooding in the United Kingdom… There is no doubt that humans are altering the climate, but the implications for regional weather are less clear. No computer simulation can conclusively attribute a given snowstorm or flood to global warming. But with a combination of climate models, weather observations and a good dose of probability theory, scientists may be able to determine how climate warming changes the odds. An earlier study, for example, found that global warming has at least doubled the likelihood of extreme events such as the 2003 European heatwave… By running thousands of high-resolution seasonal forecast simulations with or without the effect of greenhouse gases, Myles Allen of the University of Oxford, UK, and his colleagues found that anthropogenic climate change may have almost doubled the risk of the extremely wet weather that caused the floods” [68].

82. Dr Gabriele Hegerl (climate researcher at the University of Edinburgh, UK), commenting on research by herself and her colleagues linking climate change to floods (2011): “We can now say with some confidence that the increased rainfall intensity in the latter half of the twentieth century cannot be explained by our estimates of internal climate variability”. [68].

83. Dr Myles Allen (University of Oxford, UK) commenting on research by himself and his colleagues linking climate change to floods (2011): “What has been considered a 1-in-100-years event in a stationary climate may actually occur twice as often in the future… Governments plan to spend some US$100 billion on climate adaptation by 2020, although presently no one has an idea of what is an impact of climate change and what is just bad weather… If rich countries are to financially compensate the losers of climate change, as some poorer countries would expect, you'd like to have an objective scientific basis for it.” [68].

84. Robert Muir-Wood (chief research officer with RMS, a company headquartered in Newark, California, that constructs risk models for the insurance industry) (2011). "This is a key part of our research agenda and insurance companies do accept the premise [that there could be a link between climate change and extreme weather]. If there's evidence that risk is changing, then this is something we need to incorporate in our models.” [68].

85. Seung-Ki Min, Xuebin Zhang, Francis W. Zwiers (Climate Research Division, Environment Canada, Toronto, Ontario M3H5T4, Canada) and Gabriele C. Hegerl (School of GeoSciences, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh EH9 3JW, UK) (2011): “Extremes of weather and climate can have devastating effects on human society and the environment. Understanding past changes in the characteristics of such events, including recent increases in the intensity of heavy precipitation events over a large part of the Northern Hemisphere land area, is critical for reliable projections of future changes. Given that atmospheric water-holding capacity is expected to increase roughly exponentially with temperature—and that atmospheric water content is increasing in accord with this theoretical expectation—it has been suggested that human-influenced global warming may be partly responsible for increases in heavy precipitation. Because of the limited availability of daily observations, however, most previous studies have examined only the potential detectability of changes in extreme precipitation through model–model comparisons. Here we show that human-induced increases in greenhouse gases have contributed to the observed intensification of heavy precipitation events found over approximately two-thirds of data-covered parts of Northern Hemisphere land areas. These results are based on a comparison of observed and multi-model simulated changes in extreme precipitation over the latter half of the twentieth century analysed with an optimal fingerprinting technique. Changes in extreme precipitation projected by models, and thus the impacts of future changes in extreme precipitation, may be underestimated because models seem to underestimate the observed increase in heavy precipitation with warming.” [69].

86. Pardeep Pall, Dáithí A. Stone & Myles R. Allen (Institute for Atmospheric and Climate Science, ETH Zurich, CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland), Tolu Aina (Tyndall Centre Oxford, Oxford University Centre for the Environment, Oxford OX1 3QY, UK) , Peter A, Stott (Met Office Hadley Centre, Fitzroy Road, Exeter EX1 3PB, UK), Toru Nozawa (National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-8506, Japan), Arno G. J. Hilberts & Dag Lohmann (Risk Management Solutions Ltd, London EC3R 8NB, UK) (2011): “Interest in attributing the risk of damaging weather-related events to anthropogenic climate change is increasing. Yet climate models used to study the attribution problem typically do not resolve the weather systems associated with damaging events such as the UK floods of October and November 2000. Occurring during the wettest autumn in England and Wales since records began in 1766, these floods damaged nearly 10,000 properties across that region, disrupted services severely, and caused insured losses estimated at £1.3 billion. Although the flooding was deemed a ‘wake-up call’ to the impacts of climate change at the time, such claims are typically supported only by general thermodynamic arguments that suggest increased extreme precipitation under global warming, but fail to account fully for the complex hydrometeorology associated with flooding. Here we present a multi-step, physically based ‘probabilistic event attribution’ framework showing that it is very likely that global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions substantially increased the risk of flood occurrence in England and Wales in autumn 2000. Using publicly volunteered distributed computing, we generate several thousand seasonal-forecast-resolution climate model simulations of autumn 2000 weather, both under realistic conditions, and under conditions as they might have been had these greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting large-scale warming never occurred. Results are fed into a precipitation-runoff model that is used to simulate severe daily river runoff events in England and Wales (proxy indicators of flood events). The precise magnitude of the anthropogenic contribution remains uncertain, but in nine out of ten cases our model results indicate that twentieth-century anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions increased the risk of floods occurring in England and Wales in autumn 2000 by more than 20%, and in two out of three cases by more than 90%.” [70].

87. Dr Pardeep Pall ( researcher at the University of Oxford and the lead author of a key study published in Nature linking climate change to floods) (2011): "We found that emissions substantially increased the odds of floods occurring in ... the record wet autumn of 2000 [in UK], with a likely increase in odds of about a doubling or more.” [71] .

88. Dr Francis Zwiers (director of the Climate Research Division of Environment Canada, Toronto, Canada) commenting on key research published himself and colleagues in Nature linking climate change to floods (2011) “It takes a long time to determine whether human influence on the climate system was a factor in any particular event… Warmer air contains more moisture and leads to more extreme precipitation.” [71].

89. Xuebin Zhang (Climate Research Division, Environment Canada, Toronto, Ontario M3H5T4, Canada), commenting on key research published by himself and colleagues in Nature linking climate change to floods (2011) "Our research provides the first scientific evidence that human-induced greenhouse gas increases have contributed to the observed intensification of heavy precipitation events over large parts of the northern hemisphere.” [71].

90. Sinclair, Knight and Merz (SKM, a leading projects firm, with global capability in strategic consulting, design and delivery) (2011): “The damage to public and private infrastructure caused by recent flooding across eastern Australia highlights the vulnerability of the built environment to extreme weather events. Flooding is part of the natural cycle of climate variability in Australia so the current discussion about whether the recent floods (or the record breaking drought that preceded them) were caused by climate change unnecessarily diverts attention away from the urgent need to adapt to climate extremes. The best available scientific information indicates that climate change may amplify some aspects of natural climate variability, resulting in the normalisation of weather events currently considered extreme. There is a growing body of empirical evidence (especially extreme temperatures, rainfall and sea levels) suggesting that climate change is already having this effect. In this context, government and industry need to consider whether current approaches to infrastructure and settlement planning and design provide an adequate basis for cost effectively managing the extreme weather events that might occur in future.” [72].

In conclusion, because the day to day weather is highly variable one cannot attribute any specific weather event (such as the current Queensland and Eastern Australian floods) to man-made global warming. However increased precipitation will derive from increased sea temperature and consequently increased evaporation and increased atmospheric moisture - and accordingly one cannot exclude the likelihood of a major contribution of man-made global warming to such extreme precipitation events. Man-made global warming has already been associated with huge increases in the incidence of flooding and other climatic disruptions around the world over the last half century or so. The message is clear: what is needed, as stated by Professor Barry Brook, is “real, effective and urgent action to eliminate fossil fuels” (see #16).

References.

[1]. 2010-2011 Queensland floods, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%932011_Queensland_floods .

[2]. US National Academy of Sciences, quoted in “Increasing Queensland’s resilience to inland flooding in a changing climate: Final Report of the Inland Flooding Study”, 2010: http://www.climatechange.qld.gov.au/pdf/inlandfloodstudy.pdf .

[3]. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, 2007, Climate Change 2007: Working Party 1: The Physical Science Basis, T.3.4 Consistency Among Observations, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/tssts-3-4.html .

[4]. Scientific Advisory Group (SAG) report “Increasing Queensland’s resilience to inland flooding in a changing climate. Derivation of a rainfall intensity figure to inform an effective interim policy approach to managing inland flooding risks in a changing climate”, November 2010: http://www.climatechange.qld.gov.au/pdf/sag-report.pdf .

[5]. Increasing Queensland’s resilience to inland flooding in a changing climate: Final Report of the Inland Flooding Study, 2010: http://www.climatechange.qld.gov.au/pdf/inlandfloodstudy.pdf .

[6]. Tony Bartlett, “Climate change the new flood risk for Qld”, Sydney Morning Herald, 10 November 2010: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/climate-change-the-new-flood-risk-for-qld-20101110-17nb6.html .

[7]. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Annual Australian Climate Statement 2011, 5 January 2011: http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/climate/change/20110105.shtml .

[8]. David Karoly quoted in Bridie Smith, “Fates conspire to concoct a recipe for disaster”, The Age, 12 January 2010: http://www.theage.com.au/environment/fates-conspire-to-concoct-a-recipe-for-disaster-20110111-19mp7.html .

[9]. David Karoly quoted in Alyson Kenward, “Ocean temperatures show possible climate change connection to Australian flooding”, Global Climate Change (GCC) News Brief, 13 January 2011: http://hendrawanm.wordpress.com/2011/01/13/ocean-temperatures-show-possible-climate-change-connection-to-australian-flooding/ .

[10]. Professor David Karoly interviewed by ABC News on Queensland floods, “Climate expert says more extreme weather likely”, ABC News, 31 December 2010: http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/12/31/3104537.htm .

[11]. Ian Lowe, “Queensland floods: a message from our president Professor Ian Lowe”, Australian Conservation Foundation, 12 January 2011: http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=3281 .

[12]. Ian Lowe, “Drowning in a hothouse”, The Age On-line National Times, 14 January 2011: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/drowning-in-a-hothouse-20110113-19pr1.html .

[13]. Neville Nicholls and Will Steffen quoted in Joe Kelly, “Global warming will cause further extreme weather events, climate change chief says”, The Australian, 11 January 2011: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/global-warming-will-cause-further-extreme-weather-patterns-climate-change-chief-says/story-e6frg6xf-1225985772600 .

[14]. Will Steffen and Matthew England quoted in La Nina, global warming to blame for floods, NZ Herald, 13 January 2011: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=10699504 .

[15]. Barry Brook, “Qld floods highlight the cost of climate extremes”, Brave New Climate, 12 January 2011: http://bravenewclimate.com/2011/01/12/qld-floods-highlight-cost-of-climate-extremes/ .

[16]. Barry Brook, “Queensland floods highlight the cost of climate extremes”, Energy Collective, 12 January 2011: http://theenergycollective.com/barrybrook/49704/qld-floods-highlight-cost-climate-extremes .

[17]. Ellen Sandell, “It’s time to talk of climate change”, The Age On-line National Times, 14 January 2011: http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/its-time-to-talk-of-climate-change-20110113-19pr3.html .

[18]. Parliament of Australia, Parliamentary Library, “More extreme weather”: http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/ClimateChange/theClimate/moreExtreme.htm .

[19]. Dr John Holdren (2008), “The Science of Climatic Disruption” (power point lecture): http://www.usclimateaction.org/userfiles/JohnHoldren.pdf .

[20]. GRID-Arendal (a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP): “Number of flood events by continent and decade since 1950”: http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/number-of-flood-events-by-continent-and-decade-since-1950 .

[21]. GRID-Arendal (a collaborating centre of the United Nations Environment Programme , UNEP): “Number of Disasters per Year”: http://maps.grida.no/go/graphic/number-of-disasters-per-year .

[22]. Vicky Pope, quoted in Damien Carrington, “”Australian floods: La Nina to blame”, Guardian, 11 January 2011: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/jan/11/australia-floods-la-nina .

[23]. see CSIRO-Bureau of Meteorology , “The State of the Climate”, 2010: http://www.csiro.au/files/files/pvfo.pdf .

[24]. Phillip Sutton, Climate Emergency Network media release, quoted by Gideon Polya, “Climate Emergency Network, La Niña, Climate Change & Queensland flood disaster - stop burning coal & gas”, Bellaciao, 15 January 2011: http://bellaciao.org/en/spip.php?article20440 .

[25]. “Qld floods linked to climate change”, SBS World News, 14 January 2011: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1464847/Qld-floods-%27linked-to-climate-change%27b .

[26]. “Extreme floods and climate change”, Climate Action Centre, 2011: http://climateactioncentre.org/floodsclimatechange .

[27]. CSIRO, Dr Debbie Abbs, “Climate change to increase extreme rainfall”, CSIRO media release, 9 November 2004: http://www.csiro.au/files/mediaRelease/mr2004/rain2040.htm .

[28]. Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) Fact Sheet, “Flooding and climate change”, 12 January 2011: http://www.acfonline.org.au/uploads/res/Flooding_fact_sheet_12-1-11.pdf .

[29]. David Karoly quoted in Bridie Smith, “All the wrong stars aligned for perfect storms”, The Age, 12 January 2011: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/all-the-wrong-stars-aligned-for-perfect-storms-20110111-19mrr.html .

[30]. Dr David Jones quoted by Megan Levy, “”Climate chaos across world as :La Nina makes her mark”, WA Today, 14 January 2011: http://www.watoday.com.au/environment/weather/climate-chaos-across-world-as-la-nina-makes-her-mark-20110114-19qfs.html?from=age_ft .

[31]. Karen Kissane, “Disaster expert urges a retreat from the coast”, The Age, 15 January 2011: http://www.theage.com.au/national/disaster-expert-urges-a-retreat-from-the-coast-20110114-19rcg.html .

[32]. World Water Council 3rd World Water Forum, Press release, 27 February 2003: http://www.worldwatercouncil.org/fileadmin/wwc/News/WWC_News/News_2003/PR_climate_27.02.03.pdf .

[33]. “Climate change boosting floods, drought: experts”, News in Science, 3 March 2003: http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s796319.htm .

[34]. Dr Bob Brown, quoted in “Coal miners to blame for Queensland floods, say Australian Greens leader Bob Brown”, Courier-mail (Brisbane), 16 January 2011: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/coal-miners-to-blame-for-queensland-floods-says-australian-greens-leader-bob-brown/story-e6freoof-1225988809313 .

[35]. “Of droughts, flooding rains and climate change”, Editorial, 16 January 2011:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/editorial/of-droughts-flooding-rains-and-climate-change-20110115-19rt7.html .

[36]. Will Steffen, quoted in “Floods report to go to carbon price committee”, Sydney Morning Herald, 17 January 2011: http://www.smh.com.au/business/floods-report-to-go-to-carbon-price-committee-20110117-19trl.html .

[37]. Glenda Kwek, “Drought and floods: what’s coming next?”, Sydney Morning Herald, 18 January 2011: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/drought-and-floods-whats-coming-next-20110118-19ust.html .

[38]. Long Cao, Govindasamy Bala, Ken Caldeira, Ramakrishna Nemani, and George Ban-Weiss, “Importance of carbon dioxide physiological forcing to future climate change”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , vol. 107, pp 9513-9518, 2010: http://www.pnas.org/content/107/21/9513.full .

[39]. Dr Richard Betts, quoted in “Climate flooding risk “misjudged””, BBC News, 29 August 2007: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/6969122.stm .

[40]. Richard A. Betts, Olivier Boucher, Matthew Collins, Peter M. Cox, Peter D. Falloon, Nicola Gedney, Deborah L. Hemming, Chris Huntingford, Chris D. Jones, David M. H. Sexton & Mark J. Webb (Met Office Hadley Centre and other institutions), “Projected increase in continental runoff due to plant responses to increasing carbon dioxide”, Nature, vol. 448, pp 1037-1041 (2007): http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v448/n7157/abs/nature06045.html .

[41]. IPCC, “3.6 Human settlements, energy and industry”, Climate change 2001: impacts, adaptation and vulnerability”, 2001: http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/tar/vol4/index.php?idp=119 .

[42]. Global Greenhouse Warming.com, “Climate and floods” (2003): http://www.global-greenhouse-warming.com/climate-and-floods.html .

[43]. James Hansen, “Storms of My Grandchildren. The truth about the coming climate catastrophe and our last chance to save humanity”, Bloomsbury, London, 2009 (pp253-254; for further details see: http://www.stormsofmygrandchildren.com/ ).

[44]. Julian C. R. Hunt, Mark Maslin, Peter Backlund, Tim Killeen and H. John Schellnhuber, “Introduction. Climate change and urban areas: research dialogue in a policy framework”, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: vol. 365, pp2615–2629, 2007: http://pubget.com/search?q=authors%3A%22J%20C%20R%20Hunt%22 and http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/met.106/abstract .

[45]. Professor de Kretsaer quoted by Mark Dunn, “Victorian Governor David de Kretser blames floods on climate change”, Herald Sun, 18 January 2011: http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/victorian-governor-david-de-kretser-blames-floods-on-climate-change/story-e6frf7kx-1225990433262 .

[46]. Professor David de Kretser, interview with Neil Mitchell, “De Kretser blames “climate change””, 3AW, 18 January 2011: http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/de-kretser-blames-climate-change/20110118-19ulb.html and http://www.3aw.com.au/displayPopUpPlayerAction.action?&url=http://media.mytalk.com.au/3AW/AUDIO/180111_State_Governor.mp3 (Professor David de Kretser’s comments come right at the end).

[47]. Elizabeth Farrelly, "Clean energy alternatives to allay Big Coal's flood of tears", The Age On-line National Times, 20 January 2011:

http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/clean-energy-alternatives-to-allay-big-coals-flood-of-tears-20110119-19wj0.html .

[48]. Adam Bandt, “De Kretser is right on floods: Bandt”, The Greens, January 2011: http://vic.greens.org.au/content/de-kretser-right-floods-bandt .

[49]. Ewan Saunders, “Qld flood crisis shows urgent need for action on climate change”, Socialist alliance, 4 January 2011: http://www.socialist-alliance.org/page.php?page=1073 .

[50]. Don Henry, quoted in “”Cut fossil fuel subsides to pay for flood recovery”, ACF, 28 January 2011: http://www.acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=3290&eid=14125 .

[51]. Dr Bob Brown quoted in David Uren, “Coal barons must pay for flood damage, says Bob Brown”, The Australian, 17 January 2011: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/in-depth/queensland-floods/coal-barons-must-pay-for-flood-damage-says-bob-brown/story-fn7iwx3v-1225989034396 .

[52]. Bob Brown, “The role of global warming”, The Greens, 17 January 2011: http://greens.org.au/content/role-global-warming .

53]. “Do you support a flood levy?”, Radio 3AW, 18 January 2011: http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/do-you-support-a-flood-levy/20110118-19up3.html .

[54]. Neil Mitchell interview with PM Gillard, “Gillard backs levy to the hilt”, Radio 3AW radio, 28 January 2011: http://www.3aw.com.au/blogs/3aw-generic-blog/gillard-defends-flood-levy-to-the-hilt/20110128-1a7hu.html :

[55]. Dr Gideon Polya, “Qld floods linked to climate”, Green Left Weekly, Letters to the editor, 23 January 2011: http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/46469 .

[56]. Senator Christine Milne, Greens press release, 27 January 2011: http://greens.org.au/content/greens-remain-open-flood-levy-climate-program-cuts-make-no-sense .

[57]. Bob Carr, “Climate change and floods”, Thoughtlines with Bob Carr, 21 January 2011: http://bobcarrblog.wordpress.com/2011/01/21/climate-change-and-floods/#comment-421 .

[58]. Bill McKibben, Preface, “Eaarth : Making a Life on a Tough New Planet ”, Times Books, New York, 2010): http://www.amazon.com/Eaarth-Making-Life-Tough-Planet/dp/0805090568/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1271192669&sr=1-1 and http://www.billmckibben.com/eaarth/eaarthbook.html .

[59]. CSIRO, meeting summary, “The Australian Climate”, Hydrological consequences of climate change meeting, CSIRO Discovery Centre, Canberra, November 15-15, 2007:http://www.csiro.au/files/files/pkmh.pdf .

[60]. James Hansen, “Storms of My Grandchildren. The truth about the coming climate catastrophe and our last chance to save humanity”, Bloomsbury, London, 2009, pxv.

[61]. Executive summary, March 2009, International Alliance of Research Universities held an international congress on climate change, Copenhagen, “Synthesis Report from Climate Change: Global Risks, Challenges and Decision”: http://lyceum.anu.edu.au/wp-content/blogs/3/uploads//Synthesis%20Report%20Web.pdf

[62]. American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), AAAS Resolution: Statement on Climate Change”, 2006: http://archives.aaas.org/docs/resolutions.php?doc_id=447 .

[63]. Alister Doyle, “Analysis: Pakistan floods, Russia heat fit climate trend”, Reuters, 9 August 2010: http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/08/09/us-climate-extreme-idUSTRE6782DU20100809 .

[64]. Louise Gray, “Pakistan floods: climate change experts say global warming could be the cause”, The Telegraph, 10 August 2010: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/7937269/Pakistan-floods-Climate-change-experts-say-global-warming-could-be-the-cause.html .

[65]. SciDevNet, “Pakistan floods driven by climate change, say UN officials”, 19 August 2010: http://www.scidev.net/en/news/pakistan-floods-driven-by-climate-change-say-un-officials.html .

[66]. Francis Tapim and Bruce Woolley, “More natural disasters on Australia’s radar”, ABC News, 23 January 2011: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/01/23/3119109.htm?site=news .

[67]. “Torrential rain clouds Germany’s future”, The Local, 16 February 2011: http://www.thelocal.de/national/20110216-33143.html?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=177 .

[68]. Quirin Schiermeier, “Increased flood risk linked top global warming”, Nature News, 470, 316, , 16 February 2011: http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110216/full/470316a.html .

[69]. Seung-Ki Min, Xuebin Zhang, Francis W. Zwiers, Gabriele C. Hegerl, “Human contribution to more-intense precipitation extremes”, Nature, 470, 378-381, 17 February 2011: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09763.html .

[70]. Pardeep Pall, Tolu Aina, Dáithí A. Stone, Peter A, Stott, Toru Nozawa, Arno G. J. Hilberts & Dag Lohmann & Myles R. Allen, “”, Anthropogenic greenhouse gas contribution to flood risk in England and Wales in autumn 2000”, Nature 470, 382–385, 17 February 2011: http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/n7334/full/nature09762.html .

[71]. Deborah Smith, “Flood risk “doubled” by greenhouse pollution”, Sydney Morning Herald, 17 February 2011: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/weather/flood-risk-doubled-by-greenhouse-pollution-20110217-1awuz.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter .

[72]. Sinclair, Knight and Merz, “Climate change and the January 2011 floods”, SKM, 2011: http://www.skmconsulting.com/Knowledge-and-Insights/News/2011/Climatechangesfloods.aspx .

Climate Crisis Facts & Required Actions

Climate Emergency Facts and Required Actions

Just as we turn to top medical specialists for advice on life-threatening disease, so we turn to the opinions of top scientists and in particular top biological and climate scientists for Climate Change risk assessment and Climate Emergency Facts and requisite Actions as exampled below (for detailed documentation of everything below see the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group website: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/Home ). Professor James Hansen (top US climate scientist, head, NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies): “We face a climate emergency”. Nobel Laureate Professor Peter Doherty: “We are in real danger.” Professor David de Kretser AC (eminent medical scientist and Governor of Victoria, Australia) “There is no doubt in my mind that this is the greatest problem confronting mankind at this time and that it has reached the level of a state of emergency.” Dr Andrew Glikson (palaeo-climate scientist, ANU): “The continuing use of the atmosphere as an open sewer for industrial pollution has … raised CO₂ levels to 387 ppm CO₂ to date, leading toward conditions which existed on Earth about 3 million years (Ma) ago (mid-Pliocene), when CO₂ levels rose to about 400 ppm, temperatures to about 2–3 degrees C and sea levels by about 25 +/- 12 metres.” Please tell everyone you can.

Major Climate Emergency Facts

1. Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) concentration has increased to 390 parts per million (ppm) as compared to 280 ppm pre-industrial and is increasing at about 2.5 ppm per year with average global temperature about 0.8 degrees C above the pre-industrial.

2. Man-made global warming due to greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution from carbon dioxide, methane and nitrogen oxides is already associated with major ecosystem damage (Arctic, ocean, coral reefs), melting of glaciers and Arctic sea ice, sea level rise, methane release from melting tundra and positive feed-back effects accelerating GHG pollution and warming.

3. Consequences of atmospheric CO₂ concentration increase and warming to current 390 ppm: major ecosystem damage; current species extinction rates are 100-1,000 times greater than previously; to over 400 ppm: “new territory” not seen for millions of years with acute dangers from positive feedbacks; to over 450 ppm: major damage and death to coral reefs and associated fisheries; to over 500 ppm: major loss of ocean phytoplankton, ocean life, cloud seeding, the Greenland ice sheet and densely populated global coastal regions due to massive sea level rises.

Climate Emergency Actions URGENTLY Required

1. Change of societal philosophy to one of scientific risk management and biological sustainability with complete cessation of species extinctions and zero tolerance for lying.

2. Urgent reduction of atmospheric CO₂ to a safe level of about 300 ppm as recommended by leading climate and biological scientists.

3. Rapid switch to the best non-carbon and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, wave, tide and hydro options that are currently roughly the same market price as coal burning-based power) and to energy efficiency, public transport, needs-based production, re-afforestation and return of carbon as biochar to soils coupled with correspondingly rapid cessation of fossil fuel burning, deforestation, methanogenic livestock production and population growth.

1. “All men are created equal and have an inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness” … “Love thy neighbour as thyself” ... YET:

“Annual per capita greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution” in units of “tonnes CO₂-equivalent per person per year” is 0.9 (Bangladesh), 0.9 (Pakistan), 2.2 (India), less than 3 (many African and Island countries), 3.2 (the Developing World), 5.5 (China), 6.7 (the World), 11 (Europe), 16 (the Developed World), 27 (the US) and 30 (Australia; or 54 if Australia’s huge Exported CO₂ pollution is included).

Professors James Lovelock FRS (Gaia hypothesis) and Professor Kevin Anderson ( Director, Tyndall Centre, UK) estimated that fewer than 1 billion people will survive this century due to unaddressed, man-made global warming – noting that the world population is expected to reach 9.5 billion by 2050, these estimates translate to a Climate Genocide involving deaths of 10 billion people this century, this including 6 billion under-5 year old infants, 3 billion Muslims in a terminal Muslim Holocaust, 2 billion Indians, 1.3 billion non-Arab Africans, 0.5 billion Bengalis, 0.3 billion Pakistanis and 0.3 billion Bangladeshis.

In 2003 16 million people (about 9.5 million of them under-5 year old infants) died annually due to deprivation and deprivation-exacerbated disease, this already impacted by global warming. In 2009 22 million died avoidably annually - 10 billion avoidable deaths this century due to global warming yields an average annual avoidable death rate of 100 million per year.

2. ABC of tackling climate change: (A) Accountability – hold products, politicians and polluters accountable; (B) Badge e.g. bear witness with a “300 ppm CO2” badge; and (C ) Credo e.g. “Return atmospheric CO2 to 300 ppm for a safe planet for all peoples and all species”.

3. Three Ds for Older people and Climate Change Action: Devaluation (of pensions, superannuation and savings in a non-sustainable carbon economy yet continued growth is possible with renewable energy); Death (older people frailer, more susceptible to heat stress through deficient signalling); and Descendants (they will hate us for what we have done to their Planet).

4. Respect Science ( take advice from top climate scientists, top scientific bodies; science is about disproving through the critical testing of potentially falsifiable hypotheses); inform others (silence kills and silence is complicity); and have zero tolerance for lying e.g. under the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme or ETS Australia’s Domestic plus Exported GHG will increase by 80% by 2050.

5. Rational risk management successively involves (a) accurate data; (b) scientific analysis; (c) informed systemic change to minimize risk (obverse: (a) lies; (b) spin, selectively using facts to support a partisan position; and (c) blame and shame).

Biochar needed for 300 ppm CO2

Forest biomass-derived Biochar can profitably reduce global warming and bushfire risk

In late January 2009 SE Australia suffered a record-breaking heatwave (3 days in Melbourne with temperatures over 43^oC) that killed over 200 Australians in SE Australia and a consequent devastating bushfire tragedy in Victoria on Saturday February 7 that killed 209 people, with 500 injured, 100 in hospital with burns, over 1,834 homes destroyed, thousands of homes damaged, and over 450,000 hectares burned. [1, 2].

Top Australian climate scientists are saying that this dual tragedy is associated with man-made global warming due to greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution as summarized by the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group in “Global warming and Victorian bush-fire tragedy” and elsewhere. [3, 4].

Unfortunately, while top UK climate scientists have calculated that a 6-8% annual reduction in GHG pollution is needed to avert a catastrophic 450 ppm atmospheric CO₂, Australia (the world’s biggest coal exporter and a world leading per capita GHG polluter) is committed to increasing Domestic and Exported GHG pollution by 2% annually and ignores pleas by top climate scientists for an urgent global reduction of atmospheric CO₂ to about 300 ppm. [5, 6]

Biochar is a major component of reducing atmospheric CO₂, global warming and bushfire risk. Biochar can be made from pyrolysis of biomass from expertly-advised bushland fuel hazard reduction harvesting (e.g. straw, wood waste, woody weeds) and thus (a) reduce bushfire threat; (b) provide a valuable, soil-enriching and crop productivity-enhancing product for producing “terra preta” soil; (c) help combat man-made global warming by drawing down atmospheric CO₂; and (d) provide rural employment and farm income supplementation. [7]

It has been long recognized that man-made global warming (anthropogenic global warming, AGW) has been due to increased greenhouse gases (principally carbon dioxide, CO₂) in the atmosphere. Data from the US NASA Goddard Institute of Space Studies shows a 0.8^oC rise in average global surface temperature since 1880. [8, 9].

This has paralleled increased atmospheric CO₂ concentration from 280 (pre-industrial) to a current 387 ppm. [9].

Dr Andrew Glikson (an Earth and paleo-climate research scientist at Australian National University, Canberra, Australia): “The continuing use of the atmosphere as an open sewer for industrial pollution has already added some 305 GtC to the atmosphere together with land clearing and animal-emitted methane. This raised CO₂ levels to 387 ppm CO₂ to date, leading toward conditions which existed on Earth about 3 million years (Ma) ago (mid-Pliocene), when CO₂ levels rose to about 400 ppm, temperatures to about 2–3 degrees C and sea levels by about 25 +/- 12 metres”. [10].

Professor John Holdren (Harvard University, former chair of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Director of the Woods Hole Research Center, Chief Science Adviser to President Barack Obama) uses the term “climate disruption” to describe the worsening impact of AGW on the Planet. In particular AGW has been associated with a greatly increased impact of forest fires, from 0.5 million acres burned in the Western US in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s to 2.5-4.5 million acres burned in the 21st century. Further, the 14 hottest years on record have been since 1990 and recent decades have seen a huge increase in the severity of flooding in particular zones around the world. [11, 12].

According to a seminal study on forest fires in the Western US by Dr A. L. Westerling and colleagues: “large wildfire activity increased suddenly and markedly in the mid-1980s, with higher large-wildfire frequency, longer wildfire durations, and longer wildfire seasons. The greatest increases occurred in mid-elevation, Northern Rockies forests, where land-use histories have relatively little effect on fire risks and are strongly associated with increased spring and summer temperatures”. [13].

The State of Victoria, Australia, has just suffered record-breaking heat wave temperatures (100 excess deaths in Melbourne and over 200 SE Australia excess deaths in late January 2009) and a tragic bushfire disaster (209 people dead, 500 injured, 100 in hospital with burns, over 1,834 homes destroyed, thousands of homes damaged, over 450,000 hectares (1.1 million acres) burned). [1, 2].

The week before the Black Saturday February 7 bushfire disaster saw a sustained heat wave in SE Australia with temperatures exceeding 43^oC for 3 successive days in Melbourne (Wednesday January 28, Thursday January 29 and Friday January 30) - in the late January 2009 heatwave over 100 people died in Melbourne and over 200 died in South East Australia (Victoria, South Australia and Northern Tasmania) as determined by Professor Neville Nicholls, Monash University, by comparing before and after Monday and Tuesday Death Notices. [2].

These tragedies occurred on top of a contributory background of sustained drought, man-made global warming and global and Australian government inaction. A detailed list of comments from leading climate scientists on climate change and the Victorian bushfire tragedy has been placed on the Web by the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group. [14].

Thus Dr Andrew Glikson (earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National University, Canberra): “The near-18 degrees C temperature spike (relative to mean base period 1971-2000) in southern Victoria on the 7 February, 2009 (http://bravenewclimate.com/2009/02/), needs to be looked at in a global as well as an Australian perspective…The increase in atmospheric energy (heat) by 1.6 Watt/m2 due to emission of >305 Gigaton Carbon since 1750, an increase of near-38% in atmospheric CO2 levels, enhances the heating of the cross-continental air current, reaching heavily timbered regions of SE Australia where vegetation, not acclimatized to extreme heat waves of 45 degrees C and higher and reaching tinder box conditions, as on the 7th February, 2009 (http://www.bom.gov.au/cgi-bin/silo/temp_maps.cgi?variable=maxave&area=nat&period=daily&time=history&steps=4)”. [15].

Professor Barry Brook (University of Adelaide) (re the January-February 2009 weather event and the Victorian bushfire tragedy): “The Australian Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) has released a detailed analysis of the 2009 southern Australian heatwave. Some of the figures presented are staggering, with numerous temperature records smashed. Indeed, a colleague at BOM pointed out just how exceptional this event was: “Given that this was the hottest day on record on top of the driest start to a year on record on top of the longest driest drought on record on top of the hottest drought on record the implications are clear. It is clear to me that climate change is now becoming such a strong contributor to these hitherto unimaginable events that the language starts to change from one of “climate change increased the chances of an event” to “without climate change this event could not have occurred.” I couldn’t have said it better. With the shifting climate we are rapidly moving into uncharted territory with unknown return times (but surely already well above what the long-term records might lead us to expect)”. [16].

Professor David Karoly (University of Melbourne; Victorian Government's chief climate change adviser): “It's very difficult to attribute a single event to climate change or to natural variability. What we have to do is really look at the balance of probabilities or the risk or likelihood of these events. And what we can say is it is possible to get extreme events like this, like the firestorms, just due to natural variability. But what we're seeing now is that the dice have been heavily loaded so that the chances of these sorts of extreme fire weather situations are occurring much more rapidly in the last 10 years due to climate change. So climate change has loaded the dice. And what we're seeing is a much greater occurrence of this extreme fire weather. And certainly in some situations, we're seeing unprecedented extremes. The hot temperatures on Saturday in Melbourne and in many parts in south eastern Australia were unprecedented. The records were broken by large amount and you cannot explain that just by natural variability. And climate change due to increasing greenhouse gases has been a major factor in increasing the temperatures and likely contributing to the drought in south eastern Australia.” [17].

Professor Will Steffen (director, Climate Change Institute, Australian National University , ANU) has commented : "Events like this, severe heatwaves and severe fires, become more likely with an underlying change in climate …People better prepare for the fact that the risk is increasing ... (for) more frequent extreme events that are related to temperature, like heatwaves, like bushfires … Our climate is getting warmer, as it is in the rest of the world, and I think there's no doubt about that”. [18].

Despite the warnings from top climate scientists around the world, governments are failing to respond to the climate emergency. Thus the Australian Rudd Labor Government has failed to take requisite action in response to the 2008 letter to PM Rudd from top US climate scientist Professor James Hansen. [19].

Australian climate scientist Dr Andrew Gliksen has written an Open Letter to PM Rudd (9 February 2009), stating: “Less than one year elapsed since Hansen’s letter was sent, and while isolated weather events are not necessarily related to climate change, a dangerous trend has developed consistent with projections of atmospheric science, relegating southern Australia to droughts and fire and the north to intense cyclones and floods [these events occurring simultaneously in January-February 2009 in Australia]. Given the gravity of the matter, I suggest you consider to urgently convene a climate summit, where your government can listen to reports of severe climate disruption around the globe and in Australia, and to what the science says regarding future generations your government was entrusted to protect.” [20].

The actions required in this mounting Climate Emergency include the following set out by the Yarra Valley Climate Action Group: 1. Change of societal philosophy to one of scientific risk management and biological sustainability with complete cessation of species extinctions and zero tolerance for lying; 2. Urgent reduction of atmospheric CO₂ to a safe level of about 300 ppm as recommended by leading climate and biological scientists; and 3. Rapid switch to the best non-carbon and renewable energy (solar, wind, geothermal, wave, tide and hydro options that are currently roughly the same market price as coal burning-based power) and to energy efficiency, public transport, needs-based production, re-afforestation and return of carbon as biochar to soils coupled with correspondingly rapid cessation of fossil fuel burning, deforestation, methanogenic livestock production and population growth. [21].

Biochar.

Biochar is a major element of required actions to draw down atmospheric CO2 concentration to a safe and sustainable level of about 300 ppm, as perceived by top US climate scientist Professor James Hansen and his colleagues: “Carbon sequestration in soil also has significant potential. Biochar, produced in pyrolysis of residues from crops, forestry, and animal wastes, can be used to restore soil fertility while storing carbon from centuries to millennia . Biochar helps soil retain nutrients and fertilizers, reducing emissions of GHGs such as N₂O. Replacing slash-and-burn agriculture with slash-and-char and use of agricultural and forestry wastes for biochar production could provide a CO₂ drawdown of ~8 ppm in half a century.” [22].

Professor James Hansen and colleagues cogently state the urgency of the problem “If humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted, paleoclimate evidence and ongoing climate change suggest that CO₂ will need to be reduced from its current 385 ppm to at most 350 ppm [i.e. to about 300 ppm]. The largest uncertainty in the target arises from possible changes of non-CO₂ forcings. An initial 350 ppm CO₂ target may be achievable by phasing out coal use except where CO₂ is captured and adopting agricultural and forestry practices that sequester carbon [e.g. return of carbon to the soil as as biochar as well as fallow, minimum tillage, and reforestation]. If the present overshoot of this target CO₂ is not brief, there is a possibility of seeding irreversible catastrophic effects. “ [22]

Unfortunately Federal Government policy is for (a) an indirect Carbon Emissions Trading Scheme (RTS) “market forces mechanism” (notwithstanding the current market failure and Sir Nicholas Stern’s description of man-made global warming as the greatest failure of market forces) and (b) the as yet hypothetical proposition of sequestration of CO₂ from coal burning, while (c) rejecting biochar. However top UK climate scientist Professor James Lovelock FRS strongly contradicts Australian policy on (a) carbon emissions trading: “Not a hope in hell. Most of the "green" stuff is verging on a gigantic scam. Carbon trading with its huge government subsidies, is just what finance and industry wanted. It's not going to do a damn thing about climate change, but it'll make a lot of money for a lot of people and postpone the moment of reckoning. “; (b) on carbon sequestration: “That is a waste of time. It's a crazy idea - and dangerous. It would take so long and use so much energy that it will not be done. “; and (c) on biochar: “There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal [biochar]”. [23].

Professor James Lovelock FRS holds out some hope for the planet through returning carbon fixed by plants to the soil as biochar (charcoal produced through oxygen-free pyrolysis e.g. in non-polluting electric furnaces): “There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal. It would mean farmers turning all their agricultural waste - which contains carbon that the plants have spent the summer sequestering - into non-biodegradable charcoal, and burying it in the soil. Then you can start shifting really hefty quantities of carbon out of the system and pull the CO₂ down quite fast … The biosphere pumps out 550 gigatonnes [550 billion tonnes] of carbon [carbon dioxide, CO₂] yearly; we put in only 30 gigatonnes [CO₂]. Ninety-nine per cent of the carbon that is fixed by plants is released back into the atmosphere within a year or so by consumers like bacteria, nematodes and worms. What we can do is cheat those consumers by getting farmers to burn their crop waste at very low oxygen levels to turn it into charcoal, which the farmer then ploughs into the field. A little CO₂ is released but the bulk of it gets converted to carbon. You get a few per cent of biofuel as a by-product of the combustion process, which the farmer can sell. This scheme would need no subsidy: the farmer would make a profit. This is the one thing we can do that will make a difference, but I bet they won't do it. “. [23]

Professor Lovelock’s estimates are consonant with those of Dr J.A. Harrison, specifically a terrestrial carbon fixation of 121.3 GtC/y (449 Gt CO2 = 449 billion tonnes of CO2) of which about half returns annually to the atmosphere through respiration and most of the remaining half returns to the air through the action of soil fungi and bacteria . [24].

Similarly, Dr J. Schloerer estimates that about 120 Gt C (444 Gt CO2) is fixed by terrestrial vegetation each year and 99% of this is returned to the atmosphere through plant, animal, fungal and bacterial respiration. [25].

The agricultural efficacy of biochar was well established by pre-Columbian Amazonian Indians and the European settlers referred to biochar-enriched soil as as Terra Preta. [7].

The technology for biochar generation by pyrolysis of biomass waste in the absence of oxygen (O₂) is well established. [26-33].

Extensive research shows that biochar addition improves soils and agricultural productivity in the following ways: increases the cation exchange capacity (CEC) in soils; enhances soil microbial functions (the porous structure of char forms a safe haven for microbes that make nutrients available to crops); improves the nutrient retention capacity of soils by preventing leaching and erosion (allowing farmers to use organic and inorganic fertilizers cost-effectively); improves water retention; capacity of soils (the porous structure of the material holds water and prevents the moisture from evaporating);and increases the pH of acidic soils (depending upon soil type, similar to the effect of adding of lime). [31].

“Best Energies” has a biochar pilot plant in NSW, Australia ) and has provided details of its system for low oxygen pyrolysis of all kinds of biomass (including straw, wood waste, woody weeds) with generation of biochar (charcoal, including mineral nutrients) and syngas generation (CO, N₂O, CH₄, H₂, lower molecular weight hydrocarbons, N₂, and CO₂). [26, 27].

Debbie Reed, executive director of the International Biochar Initiative (IBI; a US-based non-profit organisation, headquartered in Bowdoinham, Maine): “It’s a carbon-negative technology … and while removing carbon from the atmosphere, you are also helping food production.” [28].

Dr Evelyn Krull (CSIRO, Australia): “Other countries have taken a lot more action with regard to biochar research, for example the New Zealand Government had put about $3.12 million into Massey University. [33]

Dr Stephen Joseph (University of NSW, Australia): “Realistically we could pack a big tonne of carbon out of the atmosphere every year. And what I'm doing is to analyse the composition of the biochar. I'm finding it has a high carbon content, mineral matter and clay on the surface…Our research is to come up with a range of product that use wastes that can be put on very low application rates to improve the yields from different crops, and that are a stable carbon that can take carbon out of the atmosphere. And more importantly is to help farmers overcome the problems of reduction in rainfall and increase in temperatures”. [33]

Professor Tim Flannery (palaeontologist, mammalogist, climate activist, Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia): “You can quantify it [biochar] to the nearest kilogram as you make it, put it in the soil, we know it will stay there for thousands of years, we know it's safe, good for agriculture. Why wouldn't you recognise that when you're happy to recognise a technology [CO₂ sequestration from coal-fired power stations] that isn't in existence yet? Which, you're spending $600 million on just to develop. I see it as being one of the most significant things Australia can do. We should be seeking to offset our emissions, I would argue using these technologies to repay our historic debt to the world, calculate how much carbon pollution we've put in the atmosphere over the last century and seek to repay it using biochar and other biological carbon options”. [33]

Adriana Downie (Chemical Engineer, Best Energies biochar compoany, NSW, Australia): “Feeds in through a conveyer into the main dryer which is a rotary dryer you can see they’re spinning around … The volatile gases come off, we use that for energy generation, we're left with a very high carbon stable product we call biochar. It looks black like charcoal essentially … If biochar were to become accredited and be able to generate permits within the scheme that would be a real benefit to us to be able to justify the economics of rolling out the technology”. [33]

What Australian non-scientist politicians and other laypersons are saying about biochar.

Federal Government Agriculture Minister Tony Burke: “Mr Burke said the government was examining "soil carbon", but [incorrectly] stressed biochar was an untested and unproven technology. "In terms of the importance of sequestering carbon in soil, we've been absolutely on the front foot on this the whole way through," he told Sky News on Friday. "Biochar is but one of those technologies, and Malcolm has certainly decided to put all of his eggs in one basket very early on, and certainly a long way in advance of where the scientists are at."” [34].

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong : “Soil carbon (including biochar) does not fit within the scope of the current Kyoto Protocol accounts, so is not included at this time in the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme … [biochar] It's a policy without costings, without detail and without hard data [incorrect]. It's policy which does not deal with what Mr Turnbull himself when a minister said was the best thing to do. That is emissions trading”. [33].

Leader of the Opposition Malcolm Turnbull: “The Minister for Climate Change, Senator Wong, has dismissed the Coalition’s Green Carbon Initiative on the grounds that “soil carbon (including biochar) does not fit within the scope of the current Kyoto protocol accounts”. The objective of Australian Government policy in this area must be to address climate change as soon and effectively as possible at the lowest possible cost. That means pursuing the best available options for abating greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of whether they are referenced by current international agreements or not. The task is to reduce emissions – not to adhere to arbitrary and outdated constraints contained in a complex treaty negotiated more than a decade ago. Does Senator Wong really believe it is in the national interest to completely ignore low-cost, high-impact, job-creating opportunities to improve the environment simply because they fall outside her narrow focus on an emissions trading scheme? Does Senator Wong really believe it is in the national interest for her backward-looking, bureaucratic mindset to limit the practical tools available to Australia to address climate change? Rather than glibly dismissing the Coalition’s approach, Senator Wong would be better off educating herself on the immense potential for biochar to contribute to lower emissions and a better Australian environment by speaking to the many experts who believe this to be true. Rather than using the narrow scope of previous international agreements as an excuse for inaction, Senator Wong should be working to ensure future agreements recognise that a broad range of tools can contribute to greenhouse gas abatement.” [35].

Green Carbon, carbon sequestration by natural forests, bushfires & biochar

Deforestation and forest degradation are major sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Thus Sir Nicholas Stern (the Stern Review) has estimated that 18% of annual man-made GHG emissions derive from de-forestation but that it would cost relatively trivial amounts to reduce this problem e.g. as summarized by Lisa Bachelor in the UK Guardian: “One major source of global emissions that needs to be tackled was identified by the Stern review: deforestation. This accounts for the equivalent of 18 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions - more than the transport sector. Stern believes that the costs of preventing further deforestation 'would be relatively cheap' compared with other types of mitigation. If deforestation were to cease in the eight countries (Cameroon, Congo, Ghana, Bolivia, Brazil, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia and Malaysia) responsible for 70 per cent of land-use emissions, he said, it would cost them around $5bn to $10bn a year. Action to address deforestation would also incur monitoring and enforcement costs, estimated to be around $12m to $93m”. [36].

According to Sir Nicholas Stern: "The problem of climate change involves a fundamental failure of markets: those who damage others by emitting greenhouse gases generally do not pay. Climate change is a result of the greatest market failure the world has seen. The evidence on the seriousness of the risks from inaction or delayed action is now overwhelming. We risk damages on a scale larger than the two world wars of the last century. The problem is global and the response must be a collaboration on a global scale… For $10-15bn (£4.8-7.2bn) per year, a programme could be constructed that could stop up to half the deforestation [that contributes 15-20% of annual GHG emissions]". [37].

Sir Nicholas Stern: “The problem of climate change involves a fundamental failure of markets: those who damage others by emitting greenhouse gases generally do not pay. Climate change is a result of the greatest market failure the world has seen. The evidence on the seriousness of the risks from inaction is now overwhelming. We risk damage on a scale larger than the two world wars of the past century. The problem is global and the response must be collaboration on a global scale. The rich countries must lead the way in taking action … there should be an international programme to combat deforestation, which contributes 15-20% of emissions. For $10bn-$15bn per year, half the deforestation could be stopped“. [37].

It should be noted that other man-made (anthropogenic) damage to forests in addition to deforestation (e.g. man-made climate change, drought, disease burden, biodiversity loss) could substantially increase this estimate of 15-20% of GHG emissions due to deforestation..

A very important scientific contribution to Carbon Accounting is “Green Carbon” by Mackey (2008) as summarized by the publisher, ANU E Press: “The colour of carbon matters. Green carbon is the carbon stored in the plants and soil of natural ecosystems and is a vital part of the global carbon cycle. This report is the first in a series that examines the role of natural forests in the storage of carbon, the impacts of human land use activities, and the implications for climate change policy nationally and internationally. REDD (“reducing emissions from deforestation and degradation”) is now part of the agenda for the “Bali Action Plan” being debated in the lead-up to the Copenhagen climate change conference in 2009. Currently, international rules are blind to the colour of carbon so that the green carbon in natural forests is not recognized, resulting in perverse outcomes including ongoing deforestation and forest degradation, and the conversion of extensive areas of land to industrial plantations. This report examines REDD policy from a green carbon scientific perspective. Subsequent reports will focus on issues concerning the carbon sequestration potential of commercially logged natural forests, methods for monitoring REDD, and the long term implications of forest policy and management for the global carbon cycle and climate change.” [38, 39, 40].

Some of the key findings of this scientific study are “that (1) Australia’s remaining intact natural forests constitute a significant standing stock of carbon that should be protected from carbon-emitting land use activities; and (2) there is substantial potential for carbon sequestration in forest areas that have been logged if they are allowed to re-grow undisturbed by further intensive human land use activities.” [39, 40].

Some of the key numerical findings of the “Green Carbon” Report are “the effect of retaining the current carbon stock [in the 14.5 million ha of eucalyptus forest in SE Australia] (equivalent to 25.5 Gt CO₂ (carbon dioxide) is equivalent to avoided emissions of 460 Mt CO₂ yr^-1 for the next 100 years. Allowing logged forests to realize their sequestration potential to store 7.5 Gt CO₂ is equivalent to avoiding emissions of 136 Mt CO₂ yr^-1 for the next 100 years. This is equal to 24 per cent of the 2005 Australian net greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors which were 559 Mt CO₂ in that year [excluding the Exported GHG pollution, notably the Australia’s world leading coal exports of 426 Mt CO₂ in 2005-2006 as compared to 559 Mt CO₂-e domestically]”. [39, 40].

To put this 25.5 Gt CO₂ in the 14.5 million ha of eucalyptus forest in SE Australia] on a global scale, the total post-industrial release of soil carbon due to new agricultural practices since the Industrial Revolution has been about 200 Gt Gt CO₂; the annual world fossil fuel pollution is 8.06 Gt CO₂ (of which Brazil annually produces 0.1 Gt CO₂ plus a further 0.2-0.4 Gt CO₂from deforestation). [4, 11].

The “Green Carbon” Report has some astonishing findings on the much greater carbon storage by Australian forests than hitherto realized “The report draws an interesting comparison with th estimated carbon stocks from the National Carbon Accounting System and also with the default estimates by the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) . Stocks of carbon in Australia’s native forests are on average three times grater than the IPCC estimates and can be sas muchj as twenty times greater in the most carbon dense forests”. [38].

According to the “Green Carbon” summary flier: “analysis shows that the stock of carbon for intact natural forests in south eastern Australia is on average about 640 tC ha-1 of total carbon (biomass plus soil) . The average net primary production (NPP) of these undisturbed, natural forests was 12.1 Gt C ha-1”. [38].

According to the “Green Carbon” Report: “[Natural forests] are more resilient to to climate change and disturbances than plantations because of their genetic, taxonomic and functional biodiversity … The carbon stock of forests subject to commercial logging, and of monoculture plantations in particular, will always bee significantly less on average (~40 to 60 percent depending upon the intensity if land us and forest types) than the carbon stock of natural, undisturbed forests. …The highest biomass carbon stocks, with an average of more than 1,200 t C ha-1 and maximum of over 2,000 t C ha-1, are in the mountain ash (Eucalyptus regnans) forests of Victoria and Tasmania. This is cool temperature evergreen forest with a tall eucalypt overstorey and a dense Acaciaa spp. (wattle) and temperate-rainforest tree understorey”. [39].

Crucial to such discussions are the extraordinary findings by top biologists and environmental economists and published in the top scientific journal Science that the total economic return from major biomes (ecological systems) studied can be typically about 50% greater when there is sustainable use and that the economic return from preserving what is left of wild nature is over 100 times the cost of so doing. The total economic value (TEV) of wild nature (e.g. pollination, forestry, fisheries, tourism) was estimated in 1997 as about $18-$60 trillion (average $38 trillion) as compared to a total World GDP (2007) of about $55 trillion . [40].

A major issue in bushfire management is fuel reduction, noting that logging, other land use, fuel reduction burning and post-fire salvage logging can impact upon the fuel load. The Wilderness Society has argued in a submission to the 2002/2003 Victorian Bushfire Inquiry for the importance of expert scientific assessment. [41].

The Wilderness Society argues for science-based assessment of forest management “Australia has some of the most magnificent and biodiverse forests in the world. New science also shows they are some of the largest carbon banks on Earth, helping to reduce climate change as well as maintain our water supplies. Yet many of these ancient forests, particularly in Tasmania, Victoria and New South Wales, are clearfelled, burnt, and turned into millions of tonnes of woodchips for paper and cardboard every year … More native forest is logged in Tasmania than the rest of Australia combined - including some of the tallest old growth forests in the world ... Victoria's forests are some of the most effective carbon stores in the world, and provide crucial water supply areas …Along the Murray River are the largest remaining red gum forests on Earth. With 75% stressed, dead or dying, these Australian icons urgently need to be protected ”. [42].

In response to the devastating Black Saturday 7 February Bushfires, The Wilderness Society has reiterated the importance of scientifically-based fuel reduction: “Fuel reduction burning has an important place in the fire management toolbox, and we support its place in scientifically underpinned fire management for the protection of life, property and the environment. The issue of fuel reduction burning often dominates the fire debate, as if it is the only fire management tool. But it’s important to remember that this is only one tool in fire management, and not the silver bullet that will fire proof the landscape.
Environmental groups want to see the science that supports the current fuel reduction program, including a scientific justification for so-called hazard reduction burns in specific areas and the scientific justification for the route and extent of fire break establishment. Environmental groups are particularly concerned about the lack of impact assessment of these programs on biodiversity, particularly given their uncertain benefits to reduce the extent, frequency and severity of fire. Views on these measures tend towards two extremes. One extreme is that we should fuel reduction burn all forest areas every 20 years and carve out thousands of kilometres of fire breaks, the other is that all our forests are wilderness areas which should just be allowed to burn and not manage our forests for fire at all.
For the Australian bush to be healthy and to protect people, property and nature we need a scientifically based balance between these extremes”. [43].

Professor Jared Diamond in his important book “Collapse” has argued (p437) that “ The problem of catastrophic forest fires in dry parts of the U.S. Intermontane West [an order of magnitude greater now than in the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s] could probably brought under control by management techniques that reduce the fuel load, such as by mechanically thinning out new growth in th understorey and removing fallen dead timber. Unfortunately carrying out that solution on a large scale is considered prohibitively expensive.” [44].

Biomass for Biochar would be more efficiently generated from economcally “best case” crop agriculture-based biomass production from growth region-adapted plants (photosynthetically Crassulacean Acid Metabolism or CAM plants in deserts, photosynthetically C4 plants in the tropics, photosynthetically C3 plants in temperature zones, arid zone-adapted plants in arid zones and in general plants growing in climes and ecosystems to which they have been evolutionarily adapted). Further, such biomass production could be coupled to collateral production of valuable plant products - indeed my encyclopaedic pharmacological reference text “Biochemical targets of plant bioactive compounds. A pharmacological reference guide to sites of action and biological effects” is a key reference world to such “high value” natural ecosystem or plantation crops. Thus, for example, growing indigenous, arid zone-adapted sandal wood [Santalum] species for timber, oil and biochar would be vastly more cost-effective in terms of financial return and environmental benefit than growing water use-intensive cotton or rice in Australian arid zones; harvesting of introduced pests such as Mimosa pigra could have the dual benefit or pest eradication as well as biochar production, especially if biochar production was effectively “on-site”by biomass low oxygen smouldering combustion or by renewable energy-run furnaces. [45].

The use of forest biomass to reduce forest fire hazard and to produce biochar is being actively pursued in the US and can be economic depending on circumstances and proper social costing of the value of biochar and bushfire mitigation. Thus Sustainable Obtainable Solutions: “Biochar is made by pyrolysis: heating biomass (wood chips or pellets, bark, manure, crop residues, etc.) with limited oxygen. Energy crops, such as short rotation woody plants or grasses, can be grown for biomass, or biomass waste can be collected. In the West, insects are killing trees in unprecedented numbers. This build-up of forest fuels increases wildfire risk dramatically. In the wildland/urban interface, converting dead and dying forest biomass to biochar can improve forest health while reducing fire hazards, sequestering carbon and producing energy”. [46].

According to Guillermo Rein (BRE Centre for Fire Safety Engineering, University of Edinburgh) “One process that promotes biochar conversion with the advantage of minimal or zero energy costs is the [low oxygen] smouldering process where the energy supply is released from the slow oxidation of a part of the biomass itself. Small, easy to operate and maintain reactors can be designed to be run by small local communities.” [47].

A number of geo-engineering proposals to lower atmospheric CO2 have been compared by Lenton and Vaughan at the University of East Anglia (UEA). “By 2050, only stratospheric aerosol injections or sunshades in space have the potential to cool the climate back toward the back toward the pre-industrial state , but some land carbon cycle geoengineering options are of comparable magnitude to mitigation “wedges”. Strong mitigation, i.e. large reduction in CO2 emissions, combined with global-scale air capture and storage, afforestation, and biochar production, i.e. enhanced CO2 sinks, might be able to bring CO2 back to its pre-industrial level by 2100, thus removing the need for other geoengineering. Alternatively, strong mitigation stabilising CO2 at 500 ppm [dangerous], combined with geoengineered increases in the albedo of marine stratiform clouds, grasslands, croplands and human settlements might achieve a patchy cancellation of radiative forcing. Ocean fertilisation options are only worthwhile if sustained on a millennial timescale and phosphorus addition probably has greater long-term potential than iron or nitrogen fertilisation. Enhancing ocean upwelling or downwelling have trivial effects on any meaningful timescale”.[48, 49].

According to a recent report in the UK Guardian, Professor Chris Turney (professor of geography at the University of Exeter, UK; founder of biochar company Carbonscape) has built a 5m-long prototype microwave, which “produces a tonne of CO₂ [carbon i.e. biochar?] for $65”. Tim Lenton (UEA) calculated that by 2100 a quarter of the effect of human-induced emissions of CO₂ could be sequestered with biochar production from waste organic matter, giving a net reduction of 40ppm in CO₂ concentration. Johannes Lehmann of Cornell University has calculated that it is realistically possible to fix 9.5bn tonnes of carbon per year using biochar, noting that global annual production of carbon from fossil fuels is 8.5bn tonnes. [50, 51].

In an Australian context, Crucible Carbon is developing high efficiency pyrolysis technology for the mass production of biochar. According to Inside Waste Weekly: “Managing director Matthew Warnken says … potential carbon abatement of 100-200 million tonnes annually is “extremely reasonable and would be very achievable”… first commercial demonstration plant, with construction to begin at a site in regional NSW early next year. That plant will process around 20,000-40,000 tonnes of feedstock annually, producing electricity and a biochar product that would be used to improve degraded soils … assuming realistic prices for the value of the biochar and energy outputs of the plant, a value of $20-30 per tonne of carbon sequestered would allow commercial biochar plants to be built with a three-year payback period”. [52].

Summary

Man-made global warming from greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution has increased average global temperature by 0.8^oC since 1900. Top climate scientist say that there is an urgent need to cut GHG pollution and reduce atmospheric CO2 from the present dangerous 387 ppm to a safe and sustainable level of about 300 ppm. Unfortunately Australia (the world’s biggest coal exporter and a world leading per capita GHG polluter) is committed to increasing Domestic and Exported GHG pollution by 2% annually whereas top UK climate scientists say that an annual GHG pollution reduction of 6-8% is needed to avoid a catastrophic 450 ppm CO_2. . Top climate scientists say that global warming has contributed to the January-February 2009 SE Australia heatwave that killed over 200 people and the consequent February 7 2009 Victorian bushfire tragedy that killed 209 people and burned 450,000 hectares.

Generation of biochar (charcoal from oxygen-free pyrolysis of waste biomass) is a major component of reducing atmospheric CO₂, global warming and bushfire risk. Biochar can be made from low oxygen pyrolysis of biomass from various sources including expertly-advised bushland fuel hazard reduction harvesting (e.g. straw, wood waste, woody weeds) and thus (a) reduce bushfire threat; (b) provide a valuable, soil-enriching and crop productivity-enhancing product for producing “terra preta” soil; (c) help combat man-made global warming by drawing down atmospheric CO₂; and (d) provide rural employment and farm income supplementation.

[1]. Wikipedia "2009 Victorian bushfires": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Victorian_bushfires .

[2]. Melissa Fyfe (2009), quoting results of research by Professor Neville Nicholls, Monash University, in "Heatwave left hundreds dead ", The Age: http://www.theage.com.au/national/heatwave-left-hundreds-dead-20090221-8ea4.html .

[3]. Gideon Polya (2009) “Global warming and Victorian bushfire tragedy”, Yarra Valley Climate Action Group website: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/global-warming-and-victorian-bushfire-tragedy .

[4]. Gideon Polya (2009), “Australian bushfire inferno. Global warming impacting humanity”, MWC News: http://mwcnews.net/content/view/28518/42/ .

[5].Gideon Polya (2009), Green Blog, “Gaza, lying and climate genocide”: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/global-warming-and-victorian-bushfire-tragedy .

[6].Gideon Polya (2009). Green Blog, “Letter to ALL Federal MPs over Climate Emergency and LYING”: http://www.green-blog.org/2009/02/03/letter-to-all-australian-federal-mps-over-climate-emergency-and-lying/#more-1056 .

[7]. “Biochar”, Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biochar .

[8]. NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) (2008): http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/ .

[9]. IPCC Fourth Assessment Report, Summary for Policymakers (2007): http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/wg1/ar4-wg1-spm.pdf .

[10]. Andrew Glikson (2008), “The Methane Time Bomb and the Triple Melt-down": http://www.countercurrents.org/glikson101008.htm ).

[11]. John Holdren (2008), “The Science of Climatic Disruption” (power point lecture): http://www.usclimateaction.org/userfiles/JohnHoldren.pdf .

[12]. Gideon Polya (2009), “Global warming,climate emergency” U3A course notes: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/global-warming--global-emergency-course .

[13]. A.L. Westerling, H. G. Hidalgo, D. R. Cayan, T. W. Swetnam , Warming and Earlier Spring Increase Western U.S. Forest Wildfire Activity, Science 18 August 2006: Vol. 313. no. 5789, pp. 940 – 943 (DOI: 10.1126/science.1128834; see: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/313/5789/940 .

[14]. Gideon Polya (2009), “Global warming and Victorian bushfire tragedy”, Yarra Valley Climate Action Group: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/global-warming-and-victorian-bushfire-tragedy :

[15]. Dr Andrew Glikson (earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National University, Canberra), “The Global warming connection of SE Australia’s heat wave” (Group e-mail, February 13, 2009).

[16]. Professor Barry Brook (2009), “Heatwave update and [Dr Andrew Glikson’s] Open Letter to the [Australian] PM”: http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2009/02/australian-january-february-2009.html .

[17]. Professor David Karoly and Dr Greg Holland, interviewed by ABC Lateline (2008), “More severe weather forecast, David Karoly warns”: http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25033531-421,00.html .

[18]. James Hansen et al. (2008), “Target atmospheric CO2: where should humanity aim?” , Open Atmos. Sci. J. (2008), vol. 2, pp. 217-231: http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126 .

[19]. James Hansen (2008), Professor James Hansen, Letter to Australian PM Rudd (2008): http://www.aussmc.org.au/Hansen_letter_to_Rudd.php .

[20]. Dr Andrew Glikson (2009), Open Letter to the Prime Minister of Australia” (February 9, 2009) : http://climatechangepsychology.blogspot.com/2009/02/australian-january-february-2009.html .

[21]. Gideon Polya (2009), “Climate emergency facts and required actions”, Yarra Valley Climate Action Group: http://sites.google.com/site/yarravalleyclimateactiongroup/climate-emergency-facts-and-required-actions .

[22]. James Hansen et al, (2007), “Target atmospheric CO₂: where should humanity aim?”, Open Atmos. Sci. J. (2008), vol. 2, pp. 217-231 : http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.1126 and http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf .

[23]. Gaia Vince (2009), “One last chance to save mankind“, New Scientist, 23 January 2009: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html?full=true and http://biocharfund.com/images/hansen%2C%20target%20atmospheric%20c02.pdf .

[24]. J.A. Harrison, “The carbon cycle “, Vision Learning: http://www.visionlearning.com/library/module_viewer2.php?mid=95&l=&let1=Ear .

[25]. J. Schloerer, 1996: http://www.radix.net/~bobg/faqs/scq.CO2rise.html .

[26]. “Adriana Downie talks about Best Energies pyolysis gasifier and making biochar (terra preta) “, Beyond Zero Emissions (2008): http://www.beyondzeroemissions.org/2008/06/03/adriana-downie-best-energies-bio-char-agri-char-pyrolysis .

[27]. “Best energies” (pilot plant, NSW) on biochar: http://www.bestenergies.com/companies/bestpyrolysis.html .

[28]. “Biochar industry seeks backing for climate-saving process”, Bioenergy Business, 10 December 2008: http://www.bioenergy-business.com/index.cfm?section=international&action=view&id=11751 .

[29]. Dr Evelyn Krull, “Biochar”, CSIRO Land and Water: http://www.csiro.au/files/files/pnzp.pdf .

[30]. Chris Goodall “Ten technologies to save the Planet” (Green Profile, 2008).

[31]. Biochar Fund – fighting hunger, energy poverty, deforestation and climate change simultaneously: http://biocharfund.com//index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=14&Itemid=37 .

[32]. USDA, Bioenergy Lists, “Sustainable forest bioenergy production using in-woods fast-pyrolysis conversion including bio-oil production and bio-char”: http://terrapreta.bioenergylists.org/usfsewnewsrmrs .

[33]. “Opposition supports biochar research”, 7.30 Report, 26 January 2009: http://www.abc.net.au/7.30/content/2008/s2474577.htm .

[34]. Sydney Morning Herald, January 30, 2009“Govt is not ignoring biochar says Burke”: http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/govt-is-not-ignoring-biochar-says-burke-20090130-7tcd.html )

[35]. Malcolm Turnbull, “Why is Wong ignoring biochar?”: http://www.malcolmturnbull.com.au/Pages/Article.aspx?ID=97947 ).

[36]. Lisa Bachelor, “The cost of compliance: will Stern Report hurt the developing world? “, The Guardian”, 2007: http://business.guardian.co.uk/windofchange/story/0,,2217315,00.html .

[37]. Alison Benjamin (2007), “Stern: Climate change a “market failure””, The Guardian, on Sir Nichols Stern’s Royal Economic Society (RES) lecture in Manchester: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/nov/29/climatechange.carbonemissions and Nicholas Stern (2007) “Bali: now the rich must pay”, The Guardian,: http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/nov/30/comment.climatechange .

[38]. ANU E Press (2008), press release re Mackey et al. (2008) “Green Carbon. The role of natural forests in carbon storage

Part 1. A green carbon account of Australia’s south-eastern Eucalypt forests, and policy implications”: http://epress.anu.edu.au/green_carbon_citation.html .

[39]. Brendan G. Mackey, Heather Keith, Sandra L. Berry and David B. Lindenmayer (2008), “Green Carbon. The role of natural forests in carbon storage. Part 1. A green carbon account of Australia’s south-eastern Eucalypt forests, and policy implications” (ANU E-Press, Canberra) (see: http://epress.anu.edu.au/green_carbon_citation.html ).

[40]. Andrew Balmford et al, :Economic reasons for conserving wild nature”, Science, 9 August 2002:
Vol. 297. no. 5583, pp. 950 – 953, DOI: 10.1126/science.1073947: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/297/5583/950 and http://www.uvm.edu/giee/publications/Balmford_et_al.pdf .

[41]. The Wilderness Society Submission to the Victorian [2002/03] Bushfire Inquiry: http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/Bushfires/101-McFadzean,%20G.pdf .

[42]. The Wilderness Society, “Australia’s Forests”: http://www.wilderness.org.au/campaigns/forests .

[43]. The Wildernness Society”, “A bushfire action plan that protects people, property and nature” (20 February 2009): http://www.wilderness.org.au/articles/bushfire-action-plan .

[44]. Jared Diamond, “Collapse” (Penguin, 2005).

[45]. Gideon Polya, “Biochemical targets of plant bioactive compounds. A pharmacological reference guide to sites of action and biological effects”(Taylor & Francis/CRC Press, London & New York, 2003).

[46]. Sustainable Obtainable Solutions, “Biochar”: http://www.s-o-solutions.org/biochar.html .

[47]. Guillermo Rein, “Gains and threats from smouldering combustion to biochar production and storage”, BRE Centre for Fire Safety Engineering, University of Edinburgh: http://www.biochar-international.org/images/Session_1_Rein.pdf .

[48]. T.M. Lenton & N.E. Vaughan, The radiative forcing potential of various climate geoengineering options, Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics Discussions, 9, 2559-2608, 2009: http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/9/2559/2009/acpd-9-2559-2009-print.pdf .

[49]. Biochar and reforestation may offer better global cooling potential than ocean fertilization, Mongabay (28 January 2009): http://news.mongabay.com/2009/0128-geoengineering.html .

[50]. Alok Jha, “”Biochar’ goes industrial with giant microwaves to lock carbon in charcoal”, Guardian (13 March 2009): http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/charcoal-carbon .

[51]. Johannes Lehmann, Biochar for mitigating climate change: carbon sequestration in the black”: http://www.geooekologie.de/download_forum/forum_2007_2_spfo072b.pdf .

[52]. Opposition throws support behind biochar, Inside Waste Weekly (27 January 2009): http://www.insidewaste.com.au/StoryView.asp?StoryID=892422 .

For more on Carbon cycle and Biomass see “Carbon cycle”: http://www.atmos.washington.edu/~bitz/111/L2_Carbon_cycle.pdf and D.S. Chahal (editor) (1991) “Food Feed and Fuel from Biomass”, Oxford & IBH Publishing, New Delhi).

Postscript - further comments by top scientists re global warming and bushfires.

Professor Will Steffen (Executive Director of the Climate Change Institute, Australian National University, Canberra and contributor to IPCC reports), March 2009: “But nevertheless, all the modelling suggests, and indeed the observations suggest in the other parts of the world as well, that as the climate warms - and particularly in those areas where it is drying as well as warming - the risk of severe fires goes up. We've always had severe fires in Australia, but I think the likelihood of them is increasing. We'll see more of them. We saw a really bad one in the Canberra area in 2003; now we see Victorian fires in 2009. That's only a six year interval. That's not a long interval at all. And the likelihood of these big fires continues to go up so long as the climate shifts that we're seeing continue… Now just to put this in context, we're now seeing since pre-industrial temperatures arise of between 0.7 and 0.8 degrees. So we're coming up on one degree already. Now there's already, as I mentioned, inertia in the climate system, so we're committed to further change even if we cut emissions tomorrow. Now that further temperature rise will bring us to about 1.3 or so, so we're already getting right up to the 1.5 that some people are getting - are considering to be dangerous, and we're pushing - now pushing pretty hard at the two degrees… But the longer we wait and the longer we put in new carbon emitting infrastructure, the worse the problem is gonna get. Now, in terms of carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere, what does two degrees mean? It means we need to cap carbon dioxide at somewhere around 350 to 400 parts per million, and we're sitting at about 385 now. And we need to cap carbon dioxide equivalent, which means we take into account the other greenhouse gases - somewhere around 450 to 500, and we're sitting about 440. So, that really, really does put the accelerator on in terms of getting to grips with the problem”. (see ABC TV Lateline , 11 March 2009: http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2008/s2513666.htm ).

Further Postscript - George Monbiot (see “Woodchips with everything” “: http://www.monbiot.com/archives/2009/03/24/woodchips-with-everything/ ) has set up an incorrect “straw man” argument against a global biochar solution based on asserted huge areas of land required for biomass for biochar production.

Thus the key argument of Monbiot is as follows and implies that virtually ALL the arable land of the world would have to be used.: “But that’s just the start of it. Carbonscape, a company which hopes to be among the first to commercialise the technique, talks of planting 930 million hectares(8). The energy lecturer Peter Read proposes new biomass plantations of trees and sugar covering 1.4 billion ha (9). The arable area of the United Kingdom is 5.7m hectares, or one 245th of Read’s figure. China has 104m ha of cropland. The US has 174m. The global total is 1.36 billion(10)”.

However is George Monbiot correct? NO – he ignores a potential total GtC (billions of tonnes of C) from forestry, grassland and agricultural waste (from 1.34 billion ha of arable land).

Thus p224, Progress in Thermochemical Biomass Conversion, volume 1, IAE Bioenergy, ed. A,V, Bridgewater (Blackwell Science) (see: http://books.google.com.au/books?id=rdqGX0LEg7sC&pg=PA224&lpg=PA224&dq=Gt++biomass+%22arable+land%22&source=bl&ots=KfEmoUUg6T&sig=EuLvPTf4uJHK6Wq7jbpQ3WLHcnM&hl=en&ei=UdzISZXlDpmMsQPH3cyMAQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPP1,M1 ) informs us that we could obtain 1.7 GtC/yr (straw from agriculture) + 4.2 GtC/yr (total grass upgrowth from grasslands upgrowth) + 6 GtC/yr (possible sustainable woodharvest) = 11.9 GtC/yr.

From this one can see why biochar expert Professor Johannes Lehmann of Cornell University is correct calculating that it is realistically possible to fix 9.5bn tonnes of carbon per year using biochar, noting that global annual production of carbon from fossil fuels is 8.5bn tonnes. According to a UK Guardian report: "Johannes Lehmann of Cornell university has calculated that it is realistically possible to fix 9.5bn tonnes of carbon per year using biochar. The global production of carbon from fossil fuels stands at 8.5bn tonnes" (see: Alok Jha, “”Biochar’ goes industrial with giant microwaves to lock carbon in charcoal”, Guardian (13 March 2009): http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/13/charcoal-carbon and Johannes Lehmann, Biochar for mitigating climate change: carbon sequestration in the black”: http://www.geooekologie.de/download_forum/forum_2007_2_spfo072b.pdf ).

One can see also why Professor Lovelock FRS is also correct in his assessment: ““There is one way we could save ourselves and that is through the massive burial of charcoal. It would mean farmers turning all their agricultural waste - which contains carbon that the plants have spent the summer sequestering - into non-biodegradable charcoal, and burying it in the soil. Then you can start shifting really hefty quantities of carbon out of the system and pull the CO₂ down quite fast … The biosphere pumps out 550 gigatonnes [550 billion tonnes] of carbon [carbon dioxide, CO₂] yearly; we put in only 30 gigatonnes [CO₂]. Ninety-nine per cent of the carbon that is fixed by plants is released back into the atmosphere within a year or so by consumers like bacteria, nematodes and worms. What we can do is cheat those consumers by getting farmers to burn their crop waste at very low oxygen levels to turn it into charcoal, which the farmer then ploughs into the field. A little CO₂ is released but the bulk of it gets converted to carbon. You get a few per cent of biofuel as a by-product of the combustion process, which the farmer can sell. This scheme would need no subsidy: the farmer would make a profit. This is the one thing we can do that will make a difference, but I bet they won't do it” (see Gaia Vince (2009), “One last chance to save mankind“, New Scientist, 23 January 2009: http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921.500-one-last-chance-to-save-mankind.html?full=true and http://biocharfund.com/images/hansen%2C%20target%20atmospheric%20c02.pdf ).

Professor Lovelock’s estimates are consonant with those of Dr J.A. Harrison, specifically a terrestrial carbon fixation of 121.3 GtC/y (449 Gt CO2 = 449 billion tonnes of CO2) of which about half returns annually to the atmosphere through respiration and most of the remaining half returns to the air through the action of soil fungi and bacteria (see J.A. Harrison, “The carbon cycle “, Vision Learning: http://www.visionlearning.com/library/module_viewer2.php?mid=95&l=&let1=Ear )..

In short, George Monbiot is INCORRECT in this instance through setting up a “straw man” argument (pun intended).

PPS. Dr James Lovelock FRS has recently said what I have said above: "I usually agree with George Monbiot and love the way he says it but this time – with his assertion that thelatstmiracle mass fuel cure, biochar, doses not stand up – he has got it only half right.

Yes, it is silly to rename charcoal as biochar and yes, it would be wrong to plant anything specifically to make charcoal. So I agree, George, it would be wrong to have plantations in the tropics just to make charcoal.

I said in my recent book that perhaps the only tool we had to bring carbon dioxide back to pre-industrial levels was to let the biosphere pump it from the air for us. It currently removes 550bn tons a year, about 18 times more than we emit, but 99.9% of the carbon captured this way goes back to the air as CO2 when things are eaten.

What we have to do is turn a portion of all the waste of agriculture into charcoal and bury it. Consider grain like wheat or rice; most of the plant mass is in the stems, stalks and roots and we only eat the seeds. So instead of just ploughing in the stalks or turning them into cardboard, make it into charcoal and bury it or sink it in the ocean. We don't need plantations or crops planted for biochar, what we need is a charcoal maker on every farm so the farmer can turn his waste into carbon. Charcoal making might even work instead of landfill for waste paper and plastic " (see "James Lovelock on Biochar: let the Earth remove CO2 for us", UK Guardian, 24 March 2009: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/24/biochar-earth-c02 .

PPPS. In my view biochar (charcoal) is very likely what can save the Planet's biosphere.

The technology is straightforward and has been used by charcoal makers for thousands of years, specifically heating plant material to 400-700 degrees Centigrade in the absence of oxygen (anaerobic pyrolysis) to generate carbon (C) from plant cellulose (roughly (CHO)n) .

Carbon (C) is stable (unless you set fire to it and have plenty of oxygen - neither being likely underground) whereas plant cellulose (roughly (CH20)n) is oxidized by soil organisms to yield the GHGs CO2 and H2O or worse still, converted by anaerobic bacteria to methane, CH4, which is about 20 times worse than CO2 as a greenhouse gas (GHG) on a 100 year time scale.

The amount of biochar that can be made from plant waste each year is roughly the same as the amount of carbon released into the atmosphere each year from carbon burningby man.

Jim Amonette, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Richland, Washington, USA) , PNW Biochar Initiative Meeting, 21 May 2009: “29% of all C fixed by photosynthesis aboveground (ca. 10.2 GtC/yr) is currently used by humans! Of this 1.5 GtC/yr is unused crop residues, manures, etc. An additional 1.8 GtC/yr) is not fixed due to prior human activities (e.g., land degradation) and current land use. Current fossil-C emissions are ca. 8 GtC/yr. Increased productivity and expanded use of residues from biochar production could have a significant impact on global C budget…To balance the C cycle, annual human harvest of fixed biomass would have to double from about 8.2 Gt C currently (Haberl et al., 2007) to more than 15 Gt C. This would amount to harvesting about 40% of above-ground biomass C, and is comparable to levels of biomass C appropriation seen in India today (Haberl et al., 2008). The annual diversion of 11.3% of global biomass carbon (7 Gt C, roughly one-fifth of all above-ground biomass C produced) to a pyrolysis industry would have a profound impact on the global ecology and would be considered a last resort.” (see Jim Amonette, “An introduction to biochar with an emphasis on its properties and potential for climate change mitigation”, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, PNW Biochar Initiative Meeting, 21 May 2009: http://www.scribd.com/doc/23611995/An-Introduction-to-Biochar-With-an-Emphasis-on-Its-Properties ; Haberl, H. Heinz Erb, K., Krausmann, F., Gaube, V., Bondeau, A., Plutzar, C., Gingrich, S., Lucht, W., and Fischer-Kowalski, M. 2007.
‘Quantifying and mapping the human appropriation of net primary production in earth’s terrestrial ecosystems.’Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.104, 12942-12947 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 12942-12947 end_of_the_skype_highlighting).