Awhile ago I got to write on the new initiative by Greenpeace, entitled the Great Whale Trail. It was initiated in direct response to Japan’s strongly held views that they must kill numerous whales each year for what they called “scientific research.”

Greenpeace, rightfully so, disagreed hotly with this theory, and went about setting twenty satellite tags on humpbacks migrating out of New Caledonia and the Cook Islands. They worked in conjunction with scientists in the area, from the Cook Islands Whale Research and Opération Cétacés (New Caledonia).

The plan was to prove to the world that just as much research, if not more, can be gathered through non-lethal means.

Japan naively contradicted this theory, by saying that simply tracking a whale could not tell you whether it was male or female, pregnant, or various other factors. The simple and obvious explanation, is that no, of course you don’t need tracking to determine those factors. All you need to do is look at the whale!

Several months on, and the Great Whale Trail has been a great success.

Currently, all tags are currently offline, long before they reached the Antarctic feeding grounds. But before they went offline, the sheer amount of data collected was spectacular.

Whales headed off in different directions, in packs and alone, and the information received filled in migratory patterns that until now, had been a complete mystery to scientists. For example, though whales had been photographed in New Caledonia and in New Zealand, no one knew where they went in between.

One whale, named Saravah, made her way to the top of New Zealand’s east coast, before her tag went offline. Mikaela on the other hand, who departed from New Caledonia with Saravah, headed north along the western coast of New Caledonia, before heading west in to the area known as the Chesterfields.

The whales from the Cook Islands provided scientists with their greatest surprise. Instead of heading off individually like the New Caledonian whales, all eight whales started heading west. And though not travelling together, their group movement has posed more questions than it’s answered.

What surprised them further was that none of the whales, all the way in to October before their tags went offline ever showed any signs of turning towards Antarctica (October is late in the season). This differed from the Caledonian whales, who all but Mikaela headed south.

Greenpeace has made their point, and amazingly so. They have collected data that the Japanese could only hope for, and on their first attempt. In fact, the Japanese lethal studies program will yield almost no information on the research recommendations provided by the International Whaling Commission.

All of this adds up to one simple and irrefutable fact: you do not need to kill whales for research!

Greenpeace - Whale migration - the first scientific results are in

The Great Whale Trail

More from GO

Greenpeace versus Japan: Killing Not Necessary for Whale Research

2007 is quickly coming to a close, and for the environmental community that means two big meetings are about to occur. The first begins tomorrow (Monday the 12th) in the Mediterranean port city of Valencia, Spain. It is the meeting of the Nobel winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and they are coming together to make a concise report on global warming.

From their official site, a snappy little video plays explaining just what has come together to make this report. The fourth volume will be a condensed and concise version of three massive volumes released this year that contains our current knowledge on global warming. It contains more than 2500 scientific expert reviews, authored by more than 800 experts.

The fourth and final report will be the end result of six years work for more than 450 lead authors from over a hundred and thirty countries.

And the tag line that every news agency is running with:  “When the world’s paramount experts on global warming gather in Spain next week, they will not have to travel far to witness the impact of rising temperatures.”

“Many people think desertification affects only Africa, Asia or Latin America,” Juan Sanchez, a department head at the Centre for Research on Desertification (CIDE) near Valencia. “But we are also at risk.”

Over the past decade we’ve seen Europe suffer massive and tragic heat waves. But the problem is more than random increases in temperature. Most of Spain suffers from dry spells, but recently aridity is becoming more and more of a problem thanks to human development and changing rainfall patterns.

According to CIDE, approximately a seventh of Spain is at risk of desertification. For those of us who get a little lost on what desertification actually is, we once again turn to Wikipedia:

Desertification is the degradation of land in arid, semi arid and dry sub-humid areas resulting from various climatic variations, but primarily from human activities.

The areas most at risk are the Canary Islands, where 57% of the territory is threatened, and two eastern provinces on the Spanish mainland, Valencia (29%) and Murcia (37%). And sadly, unlike some countries at risk, there are areas of Spain that the UN believes are already irreversibly damaged. In fact, the figure sits at six percent of the territory of Spain.

Sadly the European Environment Agency (EEA) believes that Spain will not be the only one to suffer. They predict that by the end of this century, temperatures in Europe will rise by between 2.0 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) and 6.2 C (11.16 F).

The EEA also singled out Spain, southern Italy, Greece and Turkey as areas where lessened rain will soon be the norm, and subsequently reduce water for farms, cities and hydropower plants.

“The Mediterranean is especially vulnerable and faces the threat of large-scale migration and the disruption of local economies,” Italian expert Antonio Navarra of Italy’s National Institute of Geophysics and Vulcanology, told AFP in a recent interview. “We are looking at major impacts that could be put tremendous stress on agriculture, water management, energy production and tourism.”

“In 25 to 50 years,” said Sanchez, “if we do not stop the process of climate change, temperatures will rise, torrential rains will be more intense and erosion will increase.”

(Torrential rainfall – following devastating forest fires – washes away already damaged soil, creating the erosion that Sanchez mentions.)

In the lead up to the December global climate change conference in Bali, this report holds special significance. If not for the jokes it will provide John Stewart concerning “cheat sheets” for politicians, then for the combined political power the document will represent.

AFP via PhysOrg - Climate change: Europe’s most arid country battles desertification

It is unarguably the world’s most picturesque and glorious continent, and one of the last places on Earth where man has not been able to achieve dominion. But that doesn’t mean Antarctica isn’t feeling the effects of mankind. In fact, for the first time in 1,800 years, its temperatures are beginning to rise.

Northern Thinking

The world is very much split in to two halves. The Northern Hemisphere contains approximately 90% of the planets human population and the majority of the landmass as well. When looking at an image of the globe from the top, you can see that the U.S., Canada, Greenland, Russia and bits of Europe all have a connection to the Arctic.

As a result much of the environmental news concerning ice-melt has dealt with the Arctic Circle. When thinking about ice melting, most of you are closest to the Arctic, and thus see that as the prominent ice-block.

Thankfully, you have loud-mouthed Australian’s like me to set the record straight: and I do so willingly and without hesitation.

Let us take a quick history lesson of my closest block of ice: Antarctica.

Antarctica 101

My brother and I have long held a fascination with Antarctica, and many books litter our house showcasing its beauty. We were first really introduced to it though, by Michael Palin, of Monty Python fame, but who has made himself in to a travelling virtuoso. His visit to the southernmost continent of our blue planet was a real eye opener for us.

Surrounded by what most people call the Southern Ocean, Antarctica comes in at number 5 in terms of land mass. Antarctica is, on average, the coldest, windiest and driest continent on the planet. It has the highest average elevation of all, and apart from its coast, is actually the world’s largest desert.

Antarctica does not have any permanent residents, but does have approximately 80,000 temporary residents, most inhabiting science stations dotted across the continent. Its lack of human population is not surprising, considering the continual days and continual nights that exist during summer and winter respectively.

But all of that is just a lead up to what concerns us right now: its ice.

The Antarctic ice sheet – which covers most of the continent – is one of the two polar caps on Earth. It is the single largest sheet of ice on the planet. Of the 14 million square kilometers and the 30 million cubic kilometers of ice on our planet, Antarctica holds 90% of the surface area, and 27 million cubic km.

There is not a consensus on how much fresh water the ice-sheet holds, but estimates range between Antarctica holding 60% and 90% of the Earth’s fresh water supply.

On average, the ice-sheet is as thick as 1.5 miles, five times the height of the Taipei 101 tower, the world’s tallest building. And while East Antarctica rests on a major land mass, the smaller West Antarctica has actually depressed its land mass some 2,500 kilometers down in to the ocean.

An Antarctic Warming Paradox

What makes the Antarctic continent so interesting is its reaction to global warming. For you see, the effects of global warming are both a blessing and a curse to Antarctica, depending on how far inland you go.

Various global warming models created have predicted that Antarctica would actually suffer from some of the worst. This may or may not have to do with the presence of the “ozone hole” being just north of the Antarctic coast (close to Tasmania and New Zealand).

However, a warming climate in the southern hemisphere would – theoretically – direct more moisture to the southernmost continent. In other words, all that water that is being evaporated would make its way south. This theory is backed up by NASA evidence that Antarctica has grown in mass over the past several decades.

However, evidence provided by University of Colorado at Boulder using a pair of NASA satellites orbiting Earth back in 2006 – four years after the original NASA report – has shown that Antarctica is actually losing ice. The team used measurements taken by the Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment, or GRACE, to determine that the Antarctic ice sheet is losing up to 36 cubic miles of ice, or 152 cubic kilometers, annually. By comparison, the city of Los Angeles uses about 1 cubic mile of fresh water annually.

Now I mentioned that the global warming issue is changed as you move inland. And while the debate is on for whether Antarctica will benefit or suffer from global warming, its peninsula is already suffering heavily.

The Antarctic Peninsula - the northernmost part of the mainland of Antarctica – has warmed faster than any other location on Earth in the last 50 years.

U.N. Secretary on Antarctica’s Ice

It is this reason that saw the current U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon visit Antarctica recently. As he stood upon the “prehistoric Antarctic ice sheets melting beneath his feet”, Ban called for urgent political action to combat global warming.

“I need a political answer. This is an emergency and for emergency situations we need emergency action,” he said during a visit to three scientific bases on the barren continent.

Friday saw Ban flying across various parts of the continent, witnessing the effects of calving. The giant and beautiful icebergs are both majestic, and reminders of the terrible tragedy that is occurring on the continent.

“All we’ve seen has been very impressive and beautiful, extraordinarily beautiful,” he said late on Friday. “But at the same time it’s disturbing. We’ve seen … the melting of glaciers.”

We’re getting ever closer to the U.N climate change conference in Bali, and Ban is making the rounds in preparation for the talks. He hopes that enough political and environmental support can be garnered so that a new accord is created to follow on from the Kyoto Protocol, when it expires in 2012.

He has visited Chile, and its melting glaciers, and also hopes to visit the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. “Climate change is progressing much faster than I had thought,” he said. And in reality, it is progressing much faster than many of us had thought.

The final question remains, is it progressing faster than we can combat it?

Reuters via ENN - U.N.’s Ban says global warming is “an emergency”

The current conditions Australia, my birthplace and home, are facing at the moment do not make it one of the “Greatest Living Condition” contenders of the world. Various levels of water restrictions ranging from level 3 to 5 make life very difficult. However, that is nothing compared to the problems being faced by our farmers. Crop failures and livestock loss are adding up to millions and millions worth of dollars lost.

As I said, it’s not really your top spot for living at the moment.

Beyond my Borders

Sadly, Australia isn’t the only country suffering at the moment (though we are definitely one of the worst hit at the moment). All across the globe countries are suffering from various meteorological scenarios.

Africa is currently suffering from flooding that has affected more than a million people. 20 African countries are currently being belted by abnormal weather, stretching in an arc across sub-Saharan Africa from Mauritania to Kenya.

La Niña normally brings above average rains to Sahel – the boundary zone in Africa between the Sahara to the north and the more fertile region to the south. But due to the warmer conditions in the Indian Ocean brought about by La Niña, the rainbelt has broadened.

“In the East African countries, particularly Kenya, Somalia and parts of Tanzania and Uganda, La Niña could influence the short rainy season in October-November-December, in the way where less rain than average could occur,” said Omar Baddour, head of the World Climate Data and Monitoring Programme at the UN’s World Meteorological Organisation (WMO).

Moving north-west and we find that America has been affected by the same weather pattern, but in an entirely different manner. The south-west and east of America has been afflicted by drought, bringing water restrictions and wildfire concerns to the inhabitants.

Texas fire officials are bracing for what could be a bout of bad wildfires, given the predicted increase in heat. Worse, with added humidity and low rainfall, the entire area is suffering.

The Cause behind it All

The story title essentially gave away the answer, but that isn’t really the point. La Niña is causing havoc the world over and it’s not doing it by the textbook either.

Africa and America – while well beaten by La Niña – are suffering predictable and historically accurate meteorological effects. However the same cannot be said for Australia and Indonesia, as we receive the brunt of an irregularity.

“The drought that’s going on in Australia right now is a very serious drought and it is one of the atypical situations associated with this particular La Nina event,” said WMO climate specialist Leslie Malone.

“The textbooks would have said that Australia would have had a problem with more precipitation than they could handle rather than less,” she told journalists, underlining that the current La Nina was “untypical”

Not Helping…

So while Africa and America are suffering from typical La Niña events, Australia and Indonesia are suffering from an atypical La Niña event. But this is because (bare with me, I’m learning as I go) of what has recently been called the Indian Ocean Dipole.

I won’t try and re-explain it any better than how Wikipedia has put it;

A positive phase [of the IOD which we are suffering from] sees greater-than-average sea-surface temperatures and greater precipitation in the western Indian Ocean region, with a corresponding cooling of waters in the eastern Indian Ocean—which tends to cause droughts in adjacent land areas of Indonesia and Australia.

The World Meteorological Organization recently announced that the Indian Ocean Dipole was currently wreaking havoc. The IOD causes cooler waters in the north-east of the Indian Ocean, while simultaneously causing warmer temperatures off the eastern coast of Africa, the western part of the Indian.

The End in Sight

All of this leads up to the fact that the WMO is predicting this current La Niña event to hang around in to the first quarter of2008. Sea levels have dropped 1.5 degrees Celsius over the period, causing the above worldwide problems.

Having strengthened over the past nine months, the oceanic temperature levels are indicated by the blue patch, stretching across the Pacific Ocean. The images were collected by the U.S-French Jason altimetric satellite, under NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif.

Our only hope is that the La Niña will come to a close, by the first quarter of next year, and not continue to strengthen. From a purely personal and patriotic standpoint, I know for a fact that we can’t last indefinitely like this. Farmers have only one planting season left, before the majority will go bankrupt without rain. Even so, loans are being processed and the national government is once again providing financial incentives and relief packages to stricken farmers.

The WMO and the National Meteorological and Hydrological Services (NMHSs) will be continually monitoring the Pacific. For further information, check out the collaborative report from the WMO, NMHS and the International Research Institute for Climate and Society.
AFP via PhysOrg - La Nina anomaly behind Australian drought: UN weather agency

IRIN News - La Niña: Worst is yet to come, warn climatologists

AP via MSNBC - La Nina predicted to stick around for 5 months

WMO - La Niña Established in Eastern Equatorial Pacific, Likely To Continue into 2008

Sometimes, when a country attempts to do the right thing, Murphy (ie, “Murphy’s law” Murphy) decides to present them with a hundred and one challenges to overcome. Murphy has recently set his sights on Norway, and is giving them a good tug.

Bordered by Sweden, Finland and Russia, the Kingdom of Norway is apparently one of the most peaceful countries in the world (though, by which measuring scale that was taken I’m not sure). Amongst the wealthiest countries of the world, Norway can thank the natural reserves of oil and gas reserves off their coast for their economic boom.

And though Norway apparently holds some of the strictest emission rules in the world, they want to do more.

Read the rest of this entry »

Over the past little while we’ve had the chance to keep a bit of an eye on what China was doing environmentally. Without a doubt, it’s hard for China to show much progress, considering just how far back they’ve fallen over the past decades. But, as we’ve discussed, the blame cannot be entirely placed at their feet. If it weren’t for the consumer driven, capitalist march of the western world, than China’s industrial center would not be so hard put.

Nevertheless, it stands that China is one of the top 3 polluters in the world. And, a joint study between the Swiss and Chinese has focused on what is almost termed the world’s most polluted river, the Yangtze River.

The Yangtze River or Chang Jiang is the longest river within Asia, and the third longest across the entirety of the planet. Measuring in at 6,300 kilometre-long (3,915 mile-long), the results of the joint water survey were “less alarming than expected.”

Read the rest of this entry »

I know some of you may be disappointed by a return to the despondent and depressed Josh, but I do try and keep a bit of variety. Just keep in mind my last two posts: a greener Google and a larger, more efficient wind farm. Keep those in mind as we discuss the top end of our planet.

There’s no need to rehash what we already know. The Arctic is melting. It’s a fact that we are going to have to come to grips with. Shipping lanes are being changed, animals and natives are being displaced, and ice is disappearing faster than my friends when I attempt to swing the conversation away from bodily functions to politics.

So it’s no surprise to see five of the nations likely to be hardest hit up north — Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Norway and Iceland — come together and issue a cry for help.

"The Arctic and the world cannot wait any longer," environmental ministers from the five nations said in a joint statement after talks in Oslo. "The climate is hurtling towards a turning point after which irreversible processes will have been set in motion."

The Arctic thaw to which they are referring is blamed on heat-trapping gasses emitted by the use and burning of fossil fuels, according to the U.N. Climate Panel.

The five Nordic nations fear that we are closing in on, if we haven’t already passed it, a point of no return. A point in our history’s timeline where once we cross it, there is nothing we can do to reverse the damages that global warming will wreak on our planet.

The five nations also urged other nations to accept a new Kyoto-style agreement before the end of 2009. With only a month to go before many of the world’s nations meet in Bali, Indonesia, to discuss such a plan, this cry for help can only bolster the efforts of people like Al Gore and organizations like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. They asked these leaders to agree on "tangible measures to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases."

And though Norway is the fifth highest exporter of oils, the Norwegian Environment Minister Erik Solheim defended their outspoken words on global warming. "We have a special responsibility to be at the technological forefront…" he said, of curbing pollution from oil.

And if the cries of help aren’t enough to underscore the problem at hand, a recent scientific discovery should at the very least bolster the issue.

An inadvertent benefit — loosely termed of course — of global warming is the unearthing of oil and gas reserves in the Arctic Circle. The United States, Russia, Canada, Denmark, Norway and Iceland are all vying for further control of the north, so that access to these valuable resources can be safely secured.

Stories have abound over the northern summer, with Russian ministers, Canadian and Denmark ice-breakers and US submarines all traversing the Arctic seas as if it was a debutante ball. The latest such story is that of a rocky outcropping that was spotted in July of this year.

Located of the coast of Greenland — a territory of Denmark – the outcropping dubbed Stray Dog West is further evidence in Denmark’s eyes of legal claim to the North Pole. For a long time, the search for the northernmost point of land has consumed these Arctic residents, in efforts to narrow down ownership.

Russia has attempted to assert its right by evidence of undersea ledges and plates, extending from the Russian motherland. But the answer may not be undersea… at least, not for long.

"This little island could have a wide international significance," said Stefan Talmon, professor of international law at Oxford University in Britain. "With the ice melting, more and more of these islands could emerge and play a role in maritime delimitations."

The basic scientific goal is to prove that the seabed is a natural extension of one’s own land territory. If this is managed, then that country immediately acquires all right to exploit the natural resources found therein.

"Five potential claim areas have been identified off the Faroe Islands and Greenland, potentially including the North Pole," says Denmark’s Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation.

The planting of the Russian flag on the seabed at the theoretical North Pole angered officials in Ottawa and Washington. Canada has since announced that they will be mapping the entirety of their seabed, with plans to later build a deep sea port. The hope is to have patrol boats within ranging distance of the eastern entrance to the fabled Northwest Passage, the same passage that, for the first time in recorded history, has become open to travel.

Denmark’s attempt to use Stray Dog West as their foothold in the Arctic all comes down to one tiny issue: whether it is an island or a rock. If it is just a rock — proven by whether it manages to stay above high tide or not — then there are no obligatory fishing rights. As it is only 12 feet above sea level at the moment, rising waters may do in the Danish claims.

The Arctic. For so long it has been — to me at least — a fabled geographical location, like my closer neighbor the Antarctic. But now, just as I’m passing in to a life of hard work, it seems to be disappearing right beneath our proverbial feet. All the more reason to act I say, if for no other reason than for Michael Palin to make a second Pole to Pole journey!

ENN — Nordic nations sound alarm over melting Arctic

MSNBC — Rocky outcrop surfaces in Arctic tug-of-war

Photo Credit — Jeff Shea / Reuters

It’s true. I’m in love with Google, and everything they do! From the rumored GPhone, which is apparently to be announced soon, to the simplicity and reliability of their search engine. But, most importantly, and relevant to my role here at Green Options, is their role in leading businesses towards a greener tomorrow.

Boston, Massachusetts, hosted the 3rd annual Conference on Clean Energy this past Monday and Tuesday. Panel discussions by clean energy investors, entrepreneurs developing emerging clean energy technologies for startups and more were on the agenda, along with Robyn Beavers, Director of Environmental Programs at Google.

Google, who already has the largest corporate installation of solar-powered electricity, is apparently not satisfied… and well it shouldn’t be. According to Beavers, Google intends to generate a total of 50 megawatts of electricity from renewable sources, for all its operations, by the year 2012.

Beavers outlined a number of steps that Google is taking towards those goals. A 1.6 megawatt solar installation at its corporate headquarters in Mountain View, Calif, and solar panels on building roofs are just the beginning. Not to mention the solar-panel-roofed carports, under which their plug-in hybrids are charged.

"Wind, solar, geothermal, fuel cells — you name it, we’re looking into it," Beavers said.

You may wonder though, why it is that Google are so invested in going green. Well, run by youngin’s Larry Page and Sergey Brin, the company consumes a massive amount of power. Consider just how much you see Google online, and then trace that back to what is powering all that online presence. The power requirements for their operations and data centers are not small.

But the investments that Google has put in to these green initiatives will pay themselves off in 7 years — not that they need too, with shares selling for just under $700, and stockpiles of cash in back rooms. They have already managed to reduce their consumption from the power grid by 30%, and a subsequent reduction of 30% on their bills.

Why go green? Because it’s cheaper! Why else? Because someone has to lead the charge, and I’ve said all along it has to be big business. We know it won’t be governments! We’ve seen that time and time again. The big moves will only come when the big businesses make the move, and with Google and, more recently retailing giant Wal-Mart, investing in green and renewable initiatives, that leap forward is coming soon.

News.com — Google’s love for solar may extend to other renewables

Conference on Clean Energy

More from GO

Google Flips The Switch On Largest Corporate Solar Installation In U.S.

Tech Industry Goes Greener and Greener

After my less than subtle attack on those standing in the way of actual change, it comes as a nice surprise and relief to write on something else. In particular, it brings great joy for me to be able to bring you news of what could be the world’s largest wind farm.

Back in 2004, James Dehlsen, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Clipper Windpower of Carpinteria, Calif., told The Associated Press that the company intended to build a $3 billion wind complex with 1,000 turbines that could produce 3,000 megawatts of power, based in South Dakota.

Well, according to the senior vice president, Bob Gates, Clipper hope to double that output to 6,000 megawatts.

Currently, FPL Energy holds the number one spot for largest wind farm. The Horse Hollow 1, 2 and 3 projects add up to a sizeable 735 megawatts produced. Running 421 turbines and stretched across three counties of Texas, it will be dwarfed by the Clipper project.

In fact, according to Gates, each preliminary stage that is built — the plan will be to build the entire complex in stages — will be larger than the Texas plant.

There seems to be a bit of a barney going on as to who takes the cake for America’s windiest state. A study more than a decade ago placed South Dakota at number 4 in such a list. However, many critics and industry officials believe that South Dakota is the windiest of them all. (It also proves that you can find a critic for just about anything!)

The re-envisioned wind farm will cost $6 billion. But even at such a large cost, another question arises: what cost do you put on your future?

A 6,000 megawatt wind farm could, on average, provide enough power for about 1.6 million homes, according to the American Wind Energy Association. The current model of turbine being produced by Clipper are 2.5 megawatt turbines. However, the firm is also involved in a project to develop 7.5 megawatt turbines.

With the 2.5 megawatt turbines, it would take 2,400 to create the 6,000 megawatts of electricity. However, with 7.5 megawatt turbines, the need for as many would be lessened. The question is would Clipper be willing to produce the same amount of turbines, and thus produce more power?

This also suggests to us that the world of renewable energy sources, in specifics, wind, is a field that is not as far away from reality as we once feared. No longer are the scare tactics working, claiming that one would need cover entire states to provide enough power.

Now if only my people would stop complaining about them being a giant eyesore. I’m sorry, but in all the photos I see, they look kinda pretty!

Seattle Post-Intelligencer - Mammoth wind farm slated for South Dakota

Clipper Windpower

American Wind Energy Association

Photo Credit - Clipper Windpower

It might surprise many of you American readers to know that, down here in Australia, we don’t actually have wildfires. It’s a surprising fact isn’t it? From what I’m able to cobble together, Australia has never had a wildfire.

Granted, our bushfire seasons are horrific!

OK, so yeah, I’m just having a bit of fun with the different words and descriptions, but I have a point. Not an etymological point, but a point nonetheless.

A Brief Australian History Lesson

The Californian fires have once again brought to light the sheer flammability of our surroundings. I live in Victoria, an Australian state with a very high bushfire rate. Australia has the dubious honor of being the home to what may have been the worst bush/wildfires in the world.

Dubbed the Black Friday Fires, they occurred on the 13th of January, 1939, in Victoria. Almost 20,000 km² (4,942,000 acres, 2000 ha) were destroyed, a total of 71 people lost their lives, several towns were entirely destroyed, and a total of 1,300 buildings were destroyed.

A Royal Commission — a major government public inquiry into an issue in commonwealth countries — determined that three quarters of the state of Victoria was directly or indirectly affected. The Commission noted that "it appeared the whole State was alight on Friday, 13 January, 1939."

1967 saw Tasmania – the only state with a higher likelihood to burn this year than Victoria — suffer a series of fires that later became known as the Black Tuesday bushfires. Over 60 people died, and thousands more were affected. So widespread were the fires that they even encroached upon the capital of Hobart.

And last in my tour of the named fires are the Ash Wednesday Fires. February 16, 1983, saw Victoria and our westerly neighboring state South Australia (original, aren’t we!) suffer from fires that took the lives of 75 Australians, and razed more than 2000 homes. The summer bushfires of 1982/1983 razed approximately 5,200 km² (1,284,000 acres).

El Niño

I’m not sure if many of you are aware, but I copped a thorough beating on Digg (the social news site) for my most recent story, looking at the links between global warming and the Californian fires. Apparently I was doing everything from politicizing the fires, to simply providing incorrect information, aka, sensationalizing the fires. I especially like the idea that an Australian is politicizing the American fires.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The simple fact is that a combination of global warming, and increased El Niño and La Niña events are causing havoc worldwide.

And being an Australian, I’m somewhat of an expert in this. Not to diminish the horror and tragedy of the Californian fires, but in terms of sheer magnitude and relative damage done, Australia has been copping it these past few years.

Just last year, we experienced what are being described as "…some of the worst bushfires in living memory," according to our premier John Brumby.

Wanna know the kicker? Here’s what he added next: "This summer could be worse, with the risk spreading across the state to the fringes of Melbourne."

Melbourne is to Victoria what San Francisco is to California: both a city of its own and a collection of what Americans would call ‘neighborhoods’ (thanks to Dave for helping me with that analogy). So what Brumby is saying is that the fires will likely begin to encroach upon urban centers.

For me personally, that likelihood is pretty high, considering that I only need to drive for 5 minutes before I reach areas ripe for fires.

Global Warming is not a Myth

What, as Donna Moss from The West Wing would say, "really grips my ass" is that people seem to want to be oblivious to what is going on. They hear the words ‘global warming’ and immediately start looking for the ballot box. They seem to misunderstand the implications. Whether global warming is caused by us or not, is not the issue. It simply is happening!

What we are trying to tell you is that the earth is warming, and with it various conditions are changing. As I mentioned, for California — and other areas across the world — the rain/dry equilibrium causes an increase in growth, which then dries out and becomes fuel for massive fires.

There are no questions asked. That is what is happening!

The Little Boy and Girl

El Niño and La Niña are pretty much to blame for a lot of what is happening. Australia has been at the mercy of El Niño conditions, providing us with droughts that are ruining lives across the entire country. But only are farmers being threatened with bankruptcy, but everything is drying out: we’re turning in to a giant tinder box.

To ignore the effects — like so many did for the better part of my lifetime — of El Niño and La Niña is stupidity in itself. And people are realizing that now, after the scientific community finally decided there was overwhelming evidence against them (no, I’m not bitter!). So why is it people are not willing to learn from their isolationist/buried-head syndromes, and see what is actually happening in the world.

No, I was not politicizing the tragedy of the Californian fires. And, no, I do not believe that an Australian life is worth more than an American life. But relatively, Australia has always been affected worse by fires than America has. In sheer terms of relative size and population density, it is a natural occurrence, and one that takes Australian lives with it.

Do I sound scared? I damned sure as hell do! I’m living cycling distance from suburbs that could very well ignite in a few weeks or months. I want people to know that what I’m reporting on, I have a stake in! Global warming is an issue that I’m seeing directly affect those around me. I have friends and family in fire brigades that will be out battling fires across the state, and in one case, across the country.

Whether you want to believe that we’ve had anything to do with global warming is up to you. I honestly couldn’t care less! But the world is getting warmer, and thus creating higher chances for melting polar caps, weird ocean changes and drought. When I say that global warming was the cause behind the severity of the Californian fires, I mean it. Yes, fires have been happening for a while, and would have popped up again, but not to the levels of which they are now!

I’ll halt my rant here. Be thinking of us Aussies as we enter our fifth season: the Bushfire season.

The Age - Fire season is approaching. Be ready

More from GO, ie, Josh’s Digg Beating

California Fires and Climate Change: A Match Made in Hell

Photo Credit - Tim A. Williams