Gippsland Climate News

EV Expo

From the Baw Baw Sustainability Network (BBSN) Newsletter

The BBSN held their Electric Vehicle Expo on Thursday 25th February. There was a range of electric vehicles (EVs) on display at the Warragul Goods Shed and the Expo was part of the BBSN’s program of monthly events. Pictured above is the latest model Nissan Leaf from Traralgon Nissan. Also on display were an earlier model Leaf, Hyundai Kona, Tesla Model 3 and Model S, Renault Zoe, BMW i3, Mitsubishi Outlander, and some electric bikes from Drouin Cycles.

Visitors were able to chat to the various owners of the cars as well as attend talks from Shane Clayton from RACV Solar and Paul Paton from the Australian Electric Vehicle Association. Shane spoke about charging options, how EVs will fit into the grid and our lifestyles, and Paul on how you can purchase an EV.

The evening wrapped up with a panel Q+A on what it’s like to own an EV. The EV owners highlighted the benefits of charging from your home solar system, the impressive performance, and enjoyment in driving an EV. There is much less range anxiety now that the newer cars have bigger batteries and the charging network is steadily expanding. None of these owners would go back to an ICE (internal combustion engine) vehicle now.

Unfortunately, the visitor numbers had to be restricted due to COVID so we may hold another EV expo later this year so stay tuned!

About 120 people attended the opening of the Concerned Artists Resisting Extinction (CARE) exhibition entitled “Emergency: Species Loss” at the Art Gallery in Bairnsdale on Friday. Due to covid restrictions the opening was held in the open space between the gallery and the Court House. Officially opened by Mayor Mendy Urie, three of the artists, including Pat Waters from Briagolong, gave short speeches and other East Gippsland Shire councillors attended.

CARE is the brainchild of Munro wildlife artist Dawn Stubbs and, after a month in Bairnsdale, the exhibition will travel to Sale, Orbost, Maffra and other locations. 50 artists from across the region exhibited their paintings, sculptures and installations. Dawn noted: “Concerned Artists Resisting Extinction held its first meeting around 18 months ago with the idea that through visual and performing arts in all mediums, we would respond to Australia’s shocking record of species loss. We are not politicians so we aim to tell these tragic stories through holding exhibitions that challenge and bring awareness and attention to the public.”

Some works concentrated on specific threatened species such as the mountain pygmy possum, the greater glider, and the baw baw frog. One artist was concerned about the decline of fish species –the blackfish and a local galaxia. Others concentrated on our recent bushfires and the effects of logging on our native species, where the connections to our warming planet are clear. A few pieces directly connected species loss to climate change.

We have artworks by three of these artists on the walls of our unit – Deirdre Jack, Ray Dahlstrom and Penny Carruthers – and I know a number of the others. One piece missing from the exhibition was something on the grey-headed flying fox* – a threatened species, a colony of which is on the Mitchell River a 10 minute walk from the gallery. This colony suffers drastically in our increasingly frequent heatwaves and if it cannot re-locate will be a certain casualty of global warming. Perhaps one of our budding photographers can put together something on this theme for the next exhibition?

The famous quote from poet John Donne “Hark not for whom the bell tolls” (used by Hemingway as the title for his novel on the Spanish Civil war) is pertinent here for the threatened species for whom the bells are tolling are telling us “it tolls for thee.” Extinction is forever and humankind is not exempt from the laws of nature.

*Correction. There is a display of the flying fox in the Exhibition by photographer Lisa Roberts that I missed, though not in the heatwave context I had imagined.

The proposed Marinus Link and the Tasmanian Battery of the Nation (BOTN) plan have been getting a fair amount of publicity. The new cables presumably will either duplicate the Basslink cable or go to another location in South Gippsland. Marinus will increase the capacity from the current 600 megawatts to two gigawatts or more than the size of two of our remaining coal fired generators. An article by Emily Jarvie in Renew (No 154) examined the project in some detail.

Her article looked at the divide between lithium battery energy storage (shallow) and pumped hydro storage (deep) – a divide which is, unfortunately, becoming politicised with green groups supporting the former and Liberal governments the latter. A paper from the Bob Brown Foundation is quite critical of BOTN (and other pumped hydro plans) from a financial viewpoint, whilst for some conservative governments, help solving global warming issues can be put off until tomorrow.

But the climate crisis dictates that we need both and as the handling of the coronavirus has indicated finance is not a problem in an emergency. The Baw Baw Pumped Hydro proposals published in this blog last year copped some ‘green’ ire in the social media where the advantages of assisting the renewables revolution, water savings and helping a ‘just transition’ by providing jobs in the Valley were ignored.

There are other advantages for the Marinus link for Gippsland. Renewable energy from Tassie could completely replace Yallourn or Loy Yang B. Likewise the Star of the South offshore wind project can replace another and hook directly in to Basslink. As the Valley generators close (probably sooner than later) more capacity becomes available on the mains transmission lines to Melbourne and there will be plenty of room for further projects in the State governments’ Gippsland Renewable Energy Zone.

Projects such as Marinus are advantageous to the whole National Energy Market as is any strengthening of the network. It is not a matter of either/or but both, and States should not to try to pick winners as with local ‘picks’ – like coal to hydrogen and carbon capture and storage – they are often wrong. The climate crisis is above party loyalties. A fast-forwarded Marinus link will easily replace Yallourn, now to close in 2028.

Mitchell River Bairnsdale (Crunden)

A late start was not enough to dampen the positivity coming from East Gippsland Shire Council’s Bairnsdale community consultation held on Tuesday night 2nd March. Overwhelmingly the environment was seen as the most valued asset of our region.

The sessions have been well attended with good numbers in Lakes Entrance (15), and 35 in both Orbost and Bairnsdale. The Local Government Act requires councils to conduct consultations to determine a new four year plan which is done in conjunction with 10 year Financial and Capital Works Plans.

Small groups worked together to list what they valued most about living in East Gippsland, what were future opportunities and what were the challenges for our region.

It was gratifying as each table presented their discussion summaries that our beautiful region’s lakes, forests, mountains and rivers were the first thing mentioned. People born here through to new residents lived here out of love for the natural assets we enjoy.

Support for often hidden members of the community including LGBTQI, cultural and ethnically diverse people emerged along with the regional challenge of higher rates of domestic violence, unemployment, poverty and lack of public housing. Council officers pointed to the shire relying heavily on rate revenue for its income, where city based shires were able to raise revenue from parking and other sources. Participants identified many traditional concerns of residents everywhere, such as roads, parking, and community safety. Social justice, business viability, tourism and environment protection were strongly present across all of the tables.

While not always using the term climate change, each table made reference to challenges that were impacted by this threat. By contrast, opportunities pointed to changes in farming practices, setting up micro grids especially in remote towns and expansion of solar and other power options. Issues of infrastructure to support more public transport, EV charging stations, and improvements for pedestrian and cycle traffic were also raised.

The participants finished the session by each making a short statement of what they would like to see in the region in ten years. The last participant praised the many good ideas raised in this final segment but he cautioned that none of these long-term goals would be of lasting benefit or even achievable until climate change was comprehensively tackled by all levels of government. This community consultation information will be used along with online surveys and a Community Panel process to ensure the needs identified by the community can be integrated into the plan over the term of this council.

The time of year when the Department of Environment Land Water and Planning sets fire to the bush in controlled burns, and to the debris in logged coupes, is now with us. As a seasonal employee of the department forty years ago, I worked on these tasks. Also at my home in Ensay on a few acres, I would often burn some of the grasses and other areas I could not mow or otherwise reduce the fuel load for fire protection. These fires were of low intensity and very small, although twice in thirty years I had small burns get away from me. With global warming the task now is more complicated and difficult, as we need to both protect trees and the bush and limit burning as much as possible (for an earlier blog see here).

The logging industry is at the heart of this problem. It is quite clear that the bush is far more valuable as a carbon store than as timber for woodchips and paper. By ceasing logging, as any reasonable government that accepts the science would have done years ago, solves part of the problem. There remains the question of the emissions produced by the large scale, so called ‘controlled’, burns carried out in the name of bushfire protection.

Philip Zylstra Research Fellow on flammability and fire behaviour from the University of Wollongong noted that at “the heart of our traditional approach are hand-drawn dots on a graph from a leaflet published by Australian bushfire expert Alan McArthur in the 1960s. [There are] nine data points telling us that if we halve the fuel load – the leaf litter on the ground – we can halve the speed of the fire. It has never been backed by evidence, but in the absence of something better it became the bedrock of Australian fire management. One rule for all forests: burn them.” Our black summer bushfires have clearly shown that country that recently burned will burn again and that under severe conditions controlled burns are ineffective. Zylstra supports low intensity small scale ‘Aboriginal’ style burning, which has debatable relevance to Gippsland.

Research by David Cheal after the Black Saturday fires in 2009 has noted that all “fuel treatments (i.e. controlled or hazard reduction) were more effective when undertaken close to houses. For example, 15% fewer houses were destroyed if prescribed burning occurred at the observed minimum distance from house (0.5km) vs. the mean distance of 8.5 km. The results imply a shift in emphasis away from broad-scale fuel reduction to intensive fuel treatments close to property will more effectively mitigate impacts.”

With global warming, the forestry practices of fifty years ago are no longer valid. It is time to end logging, and most burning, as quickly as possible.

Climate change is being felt by everyone in Australia and farmers already are among the worst affected, with deeper and longer droughts along with worse floods and storms.

There are many opportunities for farmers to benefit by action. It is gratifying that Gippsland Federal representative Darren Chester has acknowledged the concerns of many farmers that climate change is affecting them, despite dissenting voices within his party.

We are already very aware of the intense and more frequent bushfires, decreasing crop yields across the state and longer more frequent droughts caused by global warming. This is happening with only 1.1°C rise in global temperatures. Current targets for reductions in carbon emissions are just not enough and will result in very high rises in temperatures – more than 4°C by the end of the century. The impacts on agriculture will be profound. Luckily, there is plenty that can be done to keep temperatures under 1.5ºC which is seen as our best bet for a reasonable future.

Farmers can benefit by acting now. They are finding that they are using less fertilizer and their soils are both retaining more moisture and have increased crop yields. These techniques build up carbon in the soil, reducing the carbon available to cause the greenhouse effect that warms the planet. There are also opportunities to trade the additional carbon that is stored in the soil with industries that are also trying to reduce their carbon impact.

Techniques that are restoring carbon to our soils include minimal tilling and use of perennial grasses and planting native trees and shrubs. Managing stock to allow native forest to regrow not only provides potential shade and wind-breaks, but trees are a great store for carbon. Many trials underway show a number of ways to improve beef herds by reducing methane a potent greenhouse gas.

Farming organizations are providing effective targets and support. The Meat and Livestock organization has set a net zero carbon emissions target for 2030 for beef production. The Australian Farmers Federation has a net zero target of 2050. Groups like Farmers for Climate Action and Carbon Farmers of Australia each have useful web pages and they are keen to support farmers to understand what they can do to make a difference.

An article in the current Renew magazine (No.154) by Remi Rauline et al entitled ‘Sharing the Sky’ caught my interest. The article introduced the term ‘agrivoltaics’ – using the land for both for agriculture and energy production to increase farm income and zero emissions electricity. The article concentrates on combinations of agriculture and photovoltaics though in Australia’s case it can also include wind generation.

Almost all the examples given in the article are overseas, where land is in short supply and expensive. Even so, the article listed a number of objections to solar projects in Victoria that were either delayed or refused due to objections from local farmers. An example of a dual land use project delayed is the Delburn wind farm west of Morwell though in this case wind and plantation timber rather than photovoltaics and cropping. Wind has the advantage over solar in that it does not take up so much land and can thus operate alongside most agricultural operations. It is notable that the wind farms at Waubra have drought proofed many of the farms in the district and helped revive the local community.

Using solar panels in irrigation areas such as the Macalister Irrigation district should concentrate first on covering channels with panels rather than farmland. This has a number of obvious advantages including evaporation from the channels is reduced, electricity production is enhanced by the cooling effect of the water and valuable land is not utilised. However when this is done perhaps then farmers can consider using some of the amazing advances made in Europe and Japan for their land.

Grazing stock with solar panels is an obvious, and easy, improvement providing control of undergrowth by the sheep and giving shade to the stock in summer but with a reduced carrying capacity. For grazing with cattle, heavier and higher construction is necessary. The high mounting of panels is standard for all cropping underneath to allow machinery access and is common in Europe and Japan for orchards and rice growing. Grazing under the panels is planned for the Perry Bridge Solar farm that is about to commence construction and presumably will also occur with their other Gippsland projects.

The advantages of agrivoltaics are many and include soil moisture retention, and utilising certain aspects of the light spectrum with translucent panels to boost plant production. The article concludes, “increased awareness of the opportunities of agrivoltaics, along with locally proven solutions, will build the confidence of developers to partner with farms to deliver agrivoltaic solutions.”

To deliver the 200 to 500% of energy required for the renewables revolution in Gippsland solar panels will be ubiquitous and found not only on rooftops of house and factory, but on water, and as agrivoltaic systems on farms. As usual Renew is always a good read and, in this issue, the article on agrivoltaics in particular.

For more than a decade I have been pushing for citizens to ‘vote climate’ particularly in Gippsland, but anywhere in Australia. To ‘vote climate’ essentially is to vote for the candidate who understands the science and the need for urgent action and is prepared to act on it. Preferences on this ballot should flow in strict order until a denier (One Nation or the Nationals?) or major party candidate (primarily the LNP) is numbered last.

The ‘bush strategy’ aim should be the defeat of as many National Party sinecure holders as possible and corresponding with a strategy for ‘safe’ city seats held by the Liberals – especially the climate deniers in their ranks. The strategy means that strong and popular independent candidates are needed and they should be supported and promoted wherever possible. Aside from strong and popular candidates having a ‘grass roots’ organisation will be an essential element, like that pioneered by ‘Voices for Indi’, which first saw the election of Cathy McGowan and now Helen Haines. The ‘Voices’ groups have been springing up around the country, mainly in NSW.

The strategy also requires that a significant number of voters from all the major parties disregard party loyalties and cast their first preference for ‘the’ prominent independent and that preferences from other candidates flow tightly to the promoted independent. Many things can go wrong with this so some luck helps. It also requires both Labor and the Greens to conduct low-key campaigns in these seats and to direct their preferences the right way. The campaign in Kooyong at the last election misfired with two strong ‘climate’ candidates – Julian Burnside for the Greens and independent Oliver Yates – tending to cancel each other out, though for the first time they reduced the sitting members’ vote enough to go to preferences.

But if the triumph of Zali Steggall can be repeated in half a dozen other places in the bush with the incumbent independents holding their seats, and perhaps the addition of a green or two, suddenly we can have a powerful cross bench. Best of all would be a repeat of something along the lines of the minority Gillard government – preferably without a malignant and aggressive opposition leader or some power monger who championed coal.

Contrary to the lies being spread in the media by many in the National Party (our local member may be an exception) there are many actions that farmers can do now to act on climate. I have examined this many times in this blog (see here and here for examples). These articles are based on the truism that farmers suffer most from the effects of global warming and have the most to gain from climate action – action on both a personal and government level. Actions that can be done immediately follow.

Plant and/or protect trees. Trees are a carbon store and offer other benefits to farms in a warming planet not the least shade and protection in extreme weather. There are very few farms that do not have some unproductive corner or a fence line that can be planted or a place where a wind-break would be beneficial. Farms that are lucky enough to have a bush block should see it is well protected and maintained.

Install solar panels everywhere and electrify everything including fences, pumps, homes and sheds. Most of these installations will be depreciable. Isolated diesel pumps can be replaced with secondhand panels at low cost and no running costs. Dairies (or anywhere using large amounts heat or power) are the perfect location for large solar installations – either photovoltaic or solar thermal.

Soil carbon farming is a way of sequestering and storing carbon in the soil and getting paid for it. Already this is practiced in West Gippsland with the Soilkee process (image above). This practice generally has huge potential for drawing down large amounts of carbon in the atmosphere and creating a substantial income stream for farmers. It awaits smooth and rapid processes for measuring carbon uptake and calculating payments for this.

Plan both farm resilience and future actions. One example is the adoption of wind generators at Waubra north of Ballarat that has helped drought proof a number of farms. This example is a form of agrivoltaics (more in a later blog), a practice that involves farming and energy production existing side by side. Another would be for the adoption of feeding stock seaweed supplements to control methane output of stock. The CSIRO has developed a supplement which is about to go into commercial production.

The fact that the National Party is captive to fossil fuel interests should be making farmers very angry. Political action is the answer and can commence immediately. This will mean increased effort if you are already involved. At the very least, you can let your local member know your feelings. Consider joining or supporting Farmers for Climate Action. Make your views known in the various organisations you belong to and oppose or persuade those individuals within it who do not recognise the science of climate change. This shouldn’t be too hard to do and won’t cost you a penny. But in the end it may come down to who you and your neighbours vote for.

Following on from my last blog on the pathetic statement of National Party leader Michael McCormack I had intended to make a brief summary of some of the many climate actions farmers can take to move towards zero emissions. I queried the performance of our local member and asked which way Darren Chester would jump on this issue. This was overtaken by the 24 hour news cycle with a statement by Chester on Sky News, which has been reported in detail in an article by Katharine Murphy and Daniel Hurst in the Guardian.

Darren is reported as saying: “It’s important we take our time to listen to what people are saying to us, and even in the agricultural sector there are very different views… I have farmers in my electorate who are very interested to know whether this technology approach around sequestering more carbon in soils provides a real opportunity for them. They are open to the conversation…My job is to reflect the views of the community. I would just simply say we’ve got to be part of the solution as a National party – we don’t want to sideline ourselves from big debates.”

Darren Chester MHR has been aware of global warming for many years. In 2013 I stood in Gippsland as a Climate Independent with a policy of ‘fee and dividend’* to replace the carbon tax and again in 2016 as a candidate for the Renewable Energy Party. During that campaign I spoke at a community election forum at which Darren also spoke. I assume he was listening. Recently he has met deputations from East Gippsland Climate Action Network (including the new East Gippsland Shire Mayor Mendy Urie) and local Farmers for Climate Action members. As well there was the joint climate group/ XR demonstration (image above, see here for blog) outside Darren’s office during the brief interlude between the bushfires and the coronavirus.

Darren is to be congratulated for speaking out (however mildly and belatedly**) against the coal troglodytes in his own party. These Nationals and a few liberals are the tail wagging the LNP dog and have been delaying or denying action for the whole of Australia for many years – an action that is criminal. As many commentators (including ex PM Turnbull) have stated the LNP is a split waiting to happen. Perhaps that ‘split’ is fast approaching. Will Darren’s next move then be to join a part of the Libs using science based policy?

*policy advocated by US climate scientist James Hansen for many years.

**My blog on Darren five years ago was far more critical.