Gippsland Climate News

There are numerous examples in history of science challenging the status quo and then, at least for a short time, been resisted and sometimes politicised by these forces, usually conservative or reactionary. But inevitably this has been all to no avail as science as ‘fact’ or ‘truth’ always prevails in the long run.

Probably the most famous example was Galileo championing the Copernicus theory of heliocentrism – that the earth revolves around the sun. He was tried by the Inquisition, forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under ‘house arrest’. Heliocentrism directly challenged the accepted theory that the earth was the centre of the universe – and was probably perceived as a direct threat to religious order. It was an idea that had to be supressed.

Another example I have used before is the discovery in 1849 by Dr John Snow that diseases like cholera and typhoid were waterborne and controlling sewage was a quick and efficient way to eliminate them. I had relatives dying of these diseases on the Victorian goldfields almost 30 years later and it wasn’t until the 1870s that London began to be sewered. The slow process of adoption in this case was an initially conservative medical profession divided on the issue and a general and widespread public ignorance.

In World War I when General John Monash applied new tactics, principally using new technology, the war changed dramatically from slaughterhouse and stalemate to victory. Monash, an engineer, brilliantly combined the technologies and tactics – tanks, artillery, and aircraft – with exhaustive planning. Similar tactics were adopted in 1939 by the Germans in their ‘blitzkrieg’ with great initial success that made the ‘impregnable’ fortified Maginot line look the antiquated means of defence it was.

Which brings us to the Anthropocene and climate change which threatens the collapse of civilisation and even of human existence. There is no question about the science or the unanimity of scientists on this matter. The science has been established and accepted for more than 30 years. The lack of political action can be sheeted home to one thing – vested interests pouring huge amounts of cash into muddying the waters, creating doubt and influencing conservative and reactionary politicians. In this they have been successful and generally the scientific illiteracy of the general public, and our politicians in particular, has no doubt assisted this enormously.

But the end of this confusion and delay is approaching rapidly when the various harmful effects of a human caused warming world – possibly some combination of drought, heatwaves and bushfires – become obvious to almost everyone. Then even ‘blind Freddy’ and the ‘drover’s dog’ will ‘connect the dots’. And then, hopefully, the science denying members of our political elites will be dispatched with the ignominy they deserve.

Under the heading ‘Wind Farms Fan Unrest” the Weekly Times (19.9) had an article documenting the ‘community unrest’ against wind farms. A few things are noticeable about the article including the paucity of developments in Gippsland, the bias of a purportedly even debate against wind, and the lack of any mention of climate change. The article begins with the statement “A renewable energy revolution is under way in regional Victoria, with the fault lines between industry and landholders becoming more pronounced.”

The article then lists the various projects and quotes from State Energy Minister Lily D’Ambrosio with a reply from Opposition spokesman David Southwick. Despite the sub heading ‘Community Opposition’ there is nothing about this in the article at all or even of the ‘fault lines’ between industry and landholders. It is in an adjacent article “Plans for Turbines draws more ire” which covers the opposition to the project at Mortlake where a petition – presumably against the project – has 400 signatures.

Nowhere in either article is there to be found the voice of any of the landowners who has agreed to have the turbines on their properties, about how they are drought proofing their farms and how their communities will directly benefit from extra income and employment. Nowhere are the two words “climate change” mentioned or how this revolution is necessary to help Australia meet its Paris Agreement commitments.

One suspects here a few disgruntled landowners, the influence of pressure groups, and perhaps even editorial direction from above. Rupert Murdoch is rumoured to dislike wind generators and News Corp publications have been recently criticised for either the lack of information on, or opposition to anything related to, climate change. Also many in the bush are still failing to link extreme weather such as droughts and heatwaves with climate change.

Finally there is for Gippsland only the one project – the Star of the South offshore wind arm in South Gippsland still awaiting planning permits. The map (above) does not bother to include East Gippsland as there is no project to list, though there is at least one small solar farm on the drawing board. Both the state representatives for Gippsland East and South Gippsland are Nationals. They belong to a party that is promoting coal and is anti-renewable energy. Tim Bull member for Gippsland East has yet to accede that the climate change we are experiencing is man-made. As far as I am aware neither he nor the member for South Gippsland has made any gesture to support local projects of this sort.

Despite any opposition there can be little doubt that these projects will benefit the bush both in the short and the long term. They are also the start of many moves that must be made to mitigate climate change and therefore also a bonus. It is sad that our local members and their supporters cannot see this.

FOE Media Release

This afternoon, Lakes Oil, which is part owned by Gina Rinehart lost a $3b court battle to sue the Victorian Government for ‘lost future earnings’ for its ban on unconventional gas.

Lakes Oil initiated legal action in 2016 after the Andrews Government announced a permanent ban on unconventional gas in Victoria following a parliamentary inquiry and long-running community campaign.

Friends of the Earth organiser, Zianna Fuad states: “We refuse to be intimidated by multi-million dollar companies who have repeatedly broken the trust of the community, and now want taxpayers to pay the price for their failed business decisions. Gina Rinehart is out of touch with community and her intimidation tactics are not welcome here in Victoria.”

“Victorian communities fought tirelessly for more than 5 years to secure Australia’s first permanent ban on fracking. It is completely absurd that Lake’s Oil, who invested in this risky industry, has disregarded the democratic decision taken by the Vic government to protect land, water and climate from invasive drilling. Lakes Oil has been fully aware of community opposition for at least half a decade, yet continued to invest in the development of onshore gas despite losing its social license to operate in Gippsland.”

Community members, who have been watching this court case closely for the last two years, came out with relief, holding their banners and Lock the Gate signs.

“We’re glad to see that the Resources Minister and Treasurer Tim Pallas has remained strong on the onshore gas ban in the face of sustained pressure from Lakes Oil and the Federal Government. Any gas development, onshore or offshore, jeopardises our chances of tackling climate change, so we’d love to see other states follow Victoria’s lead,” states Zianna Fuad.

“Overall it sends a strong signal to other states who are currently fighting the fracking industry.  It proves that the bullying tactics used by mining companies are weakened when communities are united.”

It appears a new political party – the Climate Democrats (CDs) – has entered the considerable vacuum in Australian politics left by the Liberal Party abandoning climate science and common sense. But it is not an easy task to fill and will take time, and an enormous amount of energy and support, as the litany of previous attempts clearly illustrates.

By my reckoning this is the fifth attempt to create a single issue climate party in a little bit more than 10 years. The first was the Climate Change Coalition which disappeared in the Ruddslide followed by my own ineffectual attempts with the Global Warming Action Party Australia (my daughter joked that the acronym GWAPA sounded like a frog croaking). About 2010 the still unregistered Save the Planet Party (STP) started up in Victoria. Like other previous attempts the STP failed to garner much publicity and must be considered a left splinter of the Greens.

The Renewable Energy Party (REP) was formed in 2016 but unfortunately carried a fair amount of political baggage with its founder Peter Breen. I joined the REP on its successful registration – previously I had been a member of the STP – and was one of a number of candidates in the 2016 election who lost their deposits. Like the Climate Coalition before them they had been banking on instant success – a most unrealistic proposition. After a long period of silence and inaction from the committee with one exception they all resigned, leaving a few individuals (including yours truly) trying to save something from the debacle. In this we were unsuccessful and the REP was deregistered earlier this year.

There is a need to avoid the political baggage of the past if possible. There is a need for appealing across the political spectrum and in particular occupying the centre and the centre-right. The single issue climate change party should be challenging in the seats where the Greens (the only party with credible climate policies) have little or no sway. It is in these seats in the main held by Nationals and Liberals that the cancer of climate denialism is to be found. It is in these safe seats that the sitting members need to be threatened and made marginal. The party should be built up from a sound base with as little as possible individual ambition and no unrealistic expectations.

So I wish the Climate Democrats well and hope that they succeed where those before them have failed. As it seems unlikely that they will be registered anytime soon in Gippsland I will be supporting Independents – any with credible climate policies or understanding – then the Greens and the ALP. I will also consider joining the CDs once I have given them a close inspection.

A perceptive and important article on the climate emergency in the Age by Paul Gilding appeared recently. Gilding compared the current situation with the unprecedented emergency caused by World War II. The similarities between then and now are clear.

On the historical analogy he stated: “The evidence of the threat posed by Hitler was overwhelming and the case for action crystal clear. However, many were still deeply resistant to acting. Only when the threat became overwhelming – until it was accepted as an imminent crisis – was Britain triggered into action. When it was, Winston Churchill led the critical shift in thinking, arguing that no matter how uncomfortable, expensive or challenging to the status quo, sometimes you just have to do what is necessary. Not your best, or what you can afford, or what’s “realistic” – but what is necessary. In his case, that was going to war and assuming victory was possible. And so began one of the fastest and most dramatic economic mobilisations and industrial transformations in history. As a result, something that was rationally bordering on the impossible was achieved.”

Has the crisis occurred that will bring on the climate emergency? Probably not though the heatwaves and bushfires in the northern hemisphere this summer, possibly including the currently occurring hurricanes/typhoons in the Atlantic and Pacific oceans, are definitely ringing the alarm bells. At home we have the drought and winter bushfires in NSW and East Gippsland. Currently there is no end in sight for the ‘dry’ and an El Nino threatens, which could complicate and intensify an already dire situation. We have no idea how big or how severe the ‘crisis’ will be.

In the meantime Gilding points out that the Darebin shire council has already declared the ‘climate emergency’ in Victoria as a result of determined ‘grass roots’ action and this has been followed by a number of local governments in the USA. As well there is the “climate emergency” petition that has been circulating online for some years which many of us have signed.

Gilding noted that with “identified threats, resistance and avoidance, stronger and stronger evidence, acceptance of crisis and then dramatic response – is pretty much how these things always unfold. And so it will most likely be on climate change.” The type of action that will follow the emergency declaration is clearly enunciated by Gilding and by Churchill before him. By definition the emergency will not be debated, there will be no question of cost, rather it is a question of what has to be done – of what is ‘necessary’. This will be decided by scientists and engineers, and implemented by the politicians. A process that should already have been in process 30 years.

And whilst we await the climate emergency defining crisis perhaps you can work on your shire to declare the ‘climate emergency’ and in the meantime sign the petition.

Totally Renewable Phillip Island is seeking support for its first community energy project.

Totally Renewable Phillip Island’s first potential solar project needs your vote! Putting solar panels on the Phillip Island Early Learning Centre in Cowes is listed under the Victorian government’s “Pick My Project” scheme as “Renewing Our Kids’ Future”. It needs locals to vote for it to gain the funds. You don’t have to live on Phillip Island … residents living within 50 kilometres of Cowes with an interest in renewable energy can vote at Pick My Project. Register your name and address, then select “Renewing Our Kids Future” as one of your three preferred projects.

The project aims to install a 30kW solar system at the Centre. It was put forward by a parent, with Energy Innovation Co-operative as project partner. A June public meeting in Cowes heard of other communities in Australia and overseas setting community emissions reduction targets. The meeting voted overwhelmingly to support a “Totally Renewable Phillip Island” target that “Phillip Island will be a carbon-neutral community by 2030 through our collective efforts to use clean, efficient energy, reduce pollution and offset emissions”.

Phillip Island’s large number of groups, individuals and businesses already actively improving the environment, plus its high profile, make it an ideal local leader in working to achieve a community target. In late July, the solar “Renewing Our Kids Future” project was one of around 50 ideas for community action put forward at an open planning forum held at the Phillip Island Community Learning Centre (PICAL).

Representatives from the seven collaborating groups initiating the forum, plus Phillip Island Nature Park, Westernport Water, the National Vietnam Veterans Museum, Bass Coast Shire Councillors and other businesses and individuals, brainstormed ideas which were then “wrangled” into a (draft) basic structure, action plan and priority list.

At present there are five working groups beginning initial activities. This solar project is the first of the “clean energy” projects. Other work groups include transport, education, carbon sequestration, food & waste. Measuring current emissions and monitoring reductions plus communications are central, relevant to all themes.

If you need help to register and vote online visit your library or PICAL for assistance. Visit Totally Renewable Phillip Island’s Facebook page for updates or the Energy Innovation Co-op website. But first we’d like you to register and vote for “Renewing our Kids’ future”!

*first published Bass Coast Post

As Cait and Peter Ghys approached retirement, they decided to fulfil a long-held dream and build a straw-bale house. Next week they will join more than 200 homeowners nationwide in opening their home to the community as part of Sustainable House Day. They will pass on tips and advice, including on solar power, straw-bale building and design. The house, which was designed by their friend and architect Sue Mitchell, has a passive solar design and is rated at 8.3 stars. It has just been evaluated against the Victorian Residential Efficiency Scorecard, and received the maximum rating of 10 stars.

Peter says the house is not just energy efficient but beautiful to live in. It’s lovely and cool in summer and warm in winter. There’s no cooling other than ceiling fans, and the only heating we have is a wood heater, which we largely use because we like looking at it!

“We wanted to minimise our ongoing costs as we get older – I’m retired, whilst Cait is still working. We also wanted a house that was environmentally responsible.  Some things are easy; correct orientation of the house means the sun does a lot of the hard work in winter to keep the house warm.  Some things are harder, but worth it; the windows and doors are all double glazed uPVC, which were expensive, but wonderful – and I’ll never need to paint them!  We are very proud of the ten star rating that we got recently!

“We started thinking about building with straw bales soon after we met in the early 90s, but didn’t really do anything until we bought our retirement block outside Inverloch. Not sure if you’ve been in a straw bale house, but they are beautiful.  The external walls are around half a metre thick, allowing us to have very deep rounded reveals around the doors and windows.  The walls are lime washed on the inside. This looks really beautiful – sort of like buildings on the Greek Islands, or on the west coast of Ireland.  Being so thick, and dense, they provide fantastic insulation – a big reason why the energy rating is so high.  It’s warm in winter and cool in summer.  I could go on …

“I learned how to do straw bale at a workshop in Natimuk, so it was natural that we would use the same option for our build.  It works well; people pay to come; for this they get accommodation and all meals, plus instruction from someone who knows how to do it.  For the instructor, he/she gets paid for his time.  For us we get the walls erected pretty quickly at minimal outlay for labour.  We had a team of about eight people for the workshop, and got about half the walls done in the week of the workshop.

Cait and Peter’s Inverloch house will be open from 10am to 4pm on Sunday, September 16. Visitors must register to attend at Sustainable House Day to obtain addresses of all open houses.

*edited article first published in the Bass Coast Post

A note on electric vehicles. There are at present severely restrictive laws in Australia re electric bicycles. These laws were made ten or more years ago to control the production and sale of electric bicycles. They are based on a Japanese / European model. Things have changed drastically since then – modern, hydraulic or mechanically disc-brake equipped bicycles can stop as well as cars from 60 kph and they now come with sophisticated suspension systems while still being very light.

There are also trikes and quad bikes available now which are just as capable, and far more efficient, than any car or motor cycle. I have five electric vehicles at home – I modified existing bikes and a garden tractor. I often travel 100 of kms in summer on my trike, and have a max daily range of 200 km with a sunny road available. All for under $4000. The current crop of electric cars are far too heavy and powerful to give decent range at low price, and thus to give wider acceptance – they cannot be charged quickly on a domestic power outlet – my bikes can be charged in my off grid situation straight off a solar array via $20 to $60 adjustable voltage boosters / regulators.

There are also light electric cars available which cannot be easily imported or produced here because no categories exist for them in our Australian Design Rules for motor vehicles etc., and our policy makers, and the public are too focused on high-speed, poison-spewing internal combustion engine (ICE) powered vehicles, as a result of lobby groups and marketing having the upper hand in all spheres of Australian life via the marketing tube and the resulting general public’s fostered suicidal ignorance.

Re hydrogen – I have made hydrogen from water by electrolysis. I have also been working on an attempt to duplicate via basic electronics the process of the first stage of photosynthesis, but have had to put this on hold because of day-to-day time and energy limitations. Even with electrolysis, by using solar power to produce hydrogen on site (coastal salt water regions are good), cooking gas and oxy-acetylene gas replacement can be produced and even be used to run ICE engines. We need to start thinking of these technologies at local levels. It doesn’t have to happen on a massive scale to be very efficient.

Yet people always howl about safety – what safety is there in our current mass suicide pact of fossil fuel abuse? I build / manage all my own power and infrastructure requirements at 70 years of age, and am in great shape for all that – no bits missing yet. Just stay with it in the here and now. Not many people do that today, it’s too scary. The secure comfort zones seem to live in the past, if we start getting realistic about our prospects.

*W Tree resident. More images on his facebook page here.

Thirty years ago the CSIRO published a substantial work (Pearman, G. [ed.] Greenhouse: Planning for Climate Change, 1988) detailing the multiple effects of climate change and proposed actions to combat them. Amongst many effects these scientists predicted climate change would make droughts more common and more extreme in the future. At this time these CSIRO scientists were amongst world leaders in this field. More recently, and most shamefully with the support of the Nationals, the Abbott government downgraded the work of their atmospheric physics department – a clear example of ‘shooting the messenger’.

The science of the greenhouse effect has been known for nearly 200 years. For more than 150 years it has been known that carbon dioxide (CO2) was the major greenhouse gas and that if it was increased the temperature of the earth would warm. For more than 50 years the steady increase of CO2 has been measured at Mauna Loa and more recently at Cape Grim. The obvious, and correct, conclusion is man’s burning of fossil fuels, in particular coal, has caused the warming experienced so far.

In line with these conclusions Gippsland has warmed on average by one degree over the last 50 years and rainfall has declined on average about 100mm. In drought years aside from reduced rainfall there is increased evaporation as a result of the warming and the consequent loss of soil moisture. This may be further exacerbated in El Nino weather events and these trends will continue within the normal patterns of weather.

Our local member, Tim Bull of the National Party, has recently been making noises about the local drought. In the current issue of the Great Eastern Mail he noted the drought areas of NSW were getting all the publicity and that areas of his electorate – Gippsland East – were also very dry. He further noted that a dire shortage of fodder loomed if we did not get decent rain. If the drought continues as predicted and with further warmer and dryer weather enhanced by a possible El Nino, disaster threatens. Mr Bull has been aware that climate change means warmer and dryer weather on average for at least four years and probably twice as long.

To connect the dots for the Nationals (and Mr. Bull) – mankind has increased greenhouse gases which has made our climate warmer and drier. In promoting coal and opposing the adoption of clean energy alternatives, by politicising the science, they have managed to adopt policies the exact opposite of what is required. Their supporters deserve better but perhaps in allowing the science to be politicised they too are partly to blame.

*An earlier version of this letter, without the second last paragraph, was published in the Bairnsdale Advertiser 7.9

We will be having a State Election in three months. And the precarious nature of federal politics means that we could actually have a federal election sooner rather than later as well. Currently the conservative, pro-coal National Party controls Gippsland East and South Gippsland. The current Independent member for Morwell is an ex National. Further west the seats of Narracan and Bass are held by the Liberals. Like the Nationals the Libs have no position on climate change and are antagonistic towards renewable energy.

But of all these seats only South Gippsland has been held consistently by the Nationals in modern times. Morwell should be a Labor seat and both Narracan and Bass (formerly West Gippsland) have been held by Labor although Susan Davies later was an Independent. Gippsland East had Independent Craig Ingram prior to the current National incumbent. The current sitting member of South Gippsland won in 2015 against a liberal candidate but required preferences to win. We may conclude from this the current monopoly of ‘safe’ conservative seats is not impregnable.

In a recent survey Sustainability Victoria found the issues of public health and jobs were foremost in Gippsland citizens eyes whilst climate change was down the bottom. Circumstances in the near future may alter this. If, for instance, the current green drought continues up to the election or we have a run of early serious bushfires. Many on the social media and even some farmer’s organisations are now making the connection between climate change and the current drought and noting the absurdity of the Nationals promoting coal yet claiming to represent farmers.

Opposition candidates who accept the overwhelming evidence of the science of climate change and can point out how these important issues are connected to, or influenced by, climate change are urgently needed. It is not necessary for the incumbents to be unseated – just that they be given a shock. It is possible that if strong Labor and Independent candidates are fielded, that the preferences of the greens and other independents flow though to them and there is some media support the election might produce a few surprises. And as the dry continues the odds of this occurring increases.

Every time someone mentions or complains about the drought reply with two words – climate change – and ask them who they are going to vote for.