Destruction Reading about the scale of the devastation of the bushfires, I fear for what remains. Significant parts Tasmanian wilderness stands due to be used to replace what can no longer be logged elsewhere, burned to ash. We must address climate change with science and speed.

Weather vs. Climate Pretty sure I've seen this No comments:

Rules of the Road The first rule of cycling in the city: they don't see you. Melbourne is a cycling-intensive city, more so than Sydney, but both cities haven't got the infrastructure or the culture to keep their cyclists safe. What that means is that it's up to the cyclists, so today's rally is important. I commend Sydney's mayor, Clover Moore, for her efforts to establish bicycle lanes, and condemn both Labor and Liberal state governments for their efforts to rid themselves of both her and cycleways. Cities are not for cars, they're for people. That has to be balanced. And bicycles are better for the environment than cars. It isn't just about how many cars can be funneled into the CBD, but that seems to be the motivation of most of our politicians, and, unfortunately, the short-sighted, narrow-minded perspective of many citizens. This, too, is part of how someone can be killed riding a bike, and it needs to change.

Believers Yesterday was the People's Climate Mobilisation, and around the world, people gathered to let their politicians know the time for action is now, not later. BBC coverage includes the gathering in Glebe, where we formed a "human sign": Beyond Coal & Gas". Now that China has reduced its imports of our brown coal, we can hope they will make further progress towards emissions reductions, but also that our Prime Denialist, Tony Abbott, will take renewable energy production seriously, regardless of whether Treasurer Joe Hockey finds wind turbines objectionable intrusions on his aesthetic sense while driving between Sydney and Canberra, or not. (What did we do to deserve these lunatics as our government?)

Hot
We've had to add a new colour to the weather maps to account for temperatures higher than we've ever charted in the last hundred years.  And over the last week we've had terrific wildfires in Tasmania, New South Wales . . . well, pretty much everywhere.  And yet . . . .

When I moved here, Australia was in the midst of a mult-year drought.  This only officially broke in the last couple of years.  In fact, this year and last have been pretty cool and definitely wetter than my earlier experience.  Fire was a big deal then, too, and often started even before Christmas.  This year and last, that hasn't been quite the case, at least not anecdotally, if news media reportage constitutes anecdotal.  But after seeing the Tasmania reports, when we were told that yesterday would present "catastrophic" danger of fire, most of us took it seriously (except, allegedly, for three teenagers, who thought they'd see what happened if they set one off; thankfully the fire service were able to deal with it, and the police were quick to locate the suspects).  After all, with all this rain, there's been a lot of growth, and that means plenty of tinder for bush fires.

So it proved to be.  Not many properties affected, but lots of fire and tough conditions.  And yet . . . .

Today is cooler, which makes fighting fires easier, but the temperatures are set to soar over the coming days and to stay high for a while, including and in some respects to do a "heat dome" over the middle of the country, which is causing a pressure system to stay in place longer, allowing hotter temps, and hence the need for an expanded colour scale.

And yet in the news reports of the fires and of the weather nobody says "climate change".  Nobody says "global warming".

I heard one news reporter asking a meteorology expert whether the conditions were a change, a "new normal", and if we could expect more and worse.  Neither one said "climate change" or "global warming", but danced around the topic.

Not helpful.  Long periods in the high 30's, in the 40's, and expectations of temperatures in the 50's don't just mean we're going to have to be more careful about fires, that we're going to be hot sometimes.  They mean we're on "watch and act" status with the expectation of hearing the call to evacuate . . . globally.

Climate change is real, and cleaning out the gutters and cutting back the bush around our homes is only going to help a little.  Even when we use those activities metaphorically.

(Here's a map showing the weather move across the country.  No hot pink yet, but it'll come.)

Running the City


I understand why, but I also disagree with the decision to cancel the NYC marathon. O.k., the city is struggling to clean itself up, get the power back on everywhere, cope with the devastation of entire neighborhoods, and Central Park is a mess, but I still think they should have kept the race on.

Surge

It seems hard to believe that a late-season storm could be such a big deal, but Sandy looks to be a huge . I expect there will be significant damage, although my early impressions were that it’d be mostly affect coastal resort property and infrastructure (especially if you count beaches as “infrastructure”, as there will be a lot of sand lost). Then I saw the picture of that building crane’s boom bent over backward.

I suppose that the replica HMS Bounty pulled out to weather the storm, rather than try to stay in a harbor, so as not to be crashed ashore, but it doesn’t sound good for the lost crew members.

And other losses? Hard to believe it, but right now it’s going to actually harm Obama’s chances of getting back in. I do not look forward to hearing his failure to be re-elected was due to the storm, however. After all, he should be solid in most of the affected States in the first place.

Well, stay home, and I hope everyone’s stocked up on bread and milk. (Why those two? Especially if the power goes, what are you going to do? Make cheese sandwiches?)

Gas
Australia's got a carbon tax, until 2015 - according to the plan - when we get a emissions trading scheme. I'm not opposed to either, but have my doubts about the overall efficacy of the plan on actually reducing emissions, although still willing to support positive efforts and evaluate whatever outcome is achieved, howsoever little that will be in my lifetime, especially with the Chinese, the Indians, and the U.S. unwilling or unable to act. For that matter, aren't India and China still among the developing nations, i.e., lumped in with Africa et al., and therefore those that will be on the outer with developed nations acting, not acting, and requiring their participation.

I guess it's one of the advantages of the Australian government's setup, that we can put through this kind of legislation, without having to have a "mandate", and without having to deal with a just-say-no opposition capable of siphoning off members of the party in power. Party-line voting can be trouble, too, but here's Australia taking action when the big players can't get it together to have it on the agenda even.

Sure, we have the usual suspects proclaiming doom, but, quietly, in other areas, you've got businesses and people looking for a way to make it work, and to make a profit, too. Will it cost jobs? Maybe, but it'll probably create some, too. Will it kill off entire industries? Please.

Running Hot & Cold
Kyoto was a farce, mostly because the U.S. bailing out was a great excuse for others to do the same or to do nothing. So my expectations from Copenhagen were not high, even though we have a President who recognizes the science and is willing to make an effort. Because the closer we get to actually implementing a way for every nation to participate it will indeed be the smaller, less industrialised countries that get left behind unless Europe and the U.S. are going to need to share the burden fairly and their innovations in carbon-reduction quite freely, which is unlikely to happen easily if at all. Otherwise, Third World industrialisation comes to a standstill to the point where they can’t compete and shut down entirely, leading to the worst kinds of anarchy, dispossession, and an increase in economic refugees, right alongside the waves of environmental refugees set to increase as global warming progresses, a juggernaut of inertia that carbon reduction will only slow over decades. So the haves keep what they’ve got and increase it at the expense of the have-nots, who continue to lose and lose. And then it’s still just an excuse to do nothing until we absolutely have to so it all takes that much longer and has an even more extensive effect on the less fortunate. It’s all very Aesop’s Fables.

Leader of the Pack
The Liberals are in disarray, as they have been since Labor took government, and I can't say much of Malcolm Turnbull's performance: he's generally just been cheap and petty, bringing nothing to his role in opposition of his reputed acumen. But he did manage to wrest concessions from Kevin Rudd on the emissions trading scheme and seemed to have his party lined up to put it into law. Suddenly, not so much. Joe Hockey leads for a challenge on Tuesday, with Tony Abbott not far behind, and following a spill attempt last week. Joe's a bully, and it seems an unprincipled one, too, now reneging on his acknowledgment of climate change and previous agreement to vote Labor's legislation in, but Abbott's worse. I have a sneaking preference for Abbott to take the leadership, if only because I don't think he could take the Liberals into government, but if he did: disaster. Abbott as PM would put the far right faction on the Liberals into a position of power even Howard managed to avoid, and the country would see a reversion to the 1950's in all the worst ways. Of course, I wouldn't put it past him to be announcing his ambitions only to act as a spoiler for someone else, Kevin Andrews maybe? Or even to enhance Hockey's chances? Still, even Hockey's support for labor-relations reform wouldn't be as damaging as the kinds of things Abbott would surely attempt. Nevertheless, I'd like to see Turnbull stay on. I think he has potential, if he'd step up his game, which would also see the Liberals move into a more viable position of contention at the next election. A strong opposition is the only way we get anything serious done.

Update: Tony Abbott wins, nation loses. Double dissolution, anyone?

Life, Meet Art
Finding Nemo: it’s all true.

Off On Again
Last year’s inaugural Earth Hour in Sydney has expanded, now, to 28 cities, worldwide, set to switch off their lights on 29 March at 8 p.m. Out in Camperdown last year, the effect wasn’t particularly notable, because it’s already pretty quiet out there, once you get off the main drag. Still, the expansion would seem to indicate the event’s success, even if only 39,000 individuals and about 2,000 businesses have registered their support, so far.

Warming Up
Over in Bali, the latest round of climate-change talks have been getting essentially nowhere. It’s nice we’ve got an agreement to have more talks, in 2009, but really it’s no more than agreements-in-principle. Still, I’m happy enough that Australia has pulled its head out and signed on to reduce its emissions. But the best moment has to have been when the U.S. delegation got called on its continued intransigence: “Lead or get out of the way!” Maybe an email campaign directly to Bush on this and other issues?