Climate change
Users browsing this topic:0 Registered, 0 Hidden and 0 Guests
Registered Users: None |
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: |  |
|
Some facts:
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/australias-angry-summer-this-is-what-climate-change-looks-like/
| Quote: | Australia is the most fire prone of all of Earth’s continents. But what has made its latest fire season so extreme? Wildfires need four ingredients: available fuel, dryness of that fuel, weather conditions that aid the rapid spread of fire and an ignition. Climate change is making Australian wildfires larger and more frequent because of its effects on dryness and fire weather.
Australia’s climate has warmed by more than one degree Celsius over the past century, and this change has caused an increase in the frequency and intensity of heat waves. I am 42, and I have lived through only six years with average temperatures below the 1961–1990 climatological average. My children have experienced none, and in all likelihood, they never will.
Increasing temperatures cause increased evaporation that dries the soil and fuel load. More than a decade ago, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that ongoing anthropogenic climate change was virtually certain to increase in intensity and frequency of fires in Australia. This assessment of the science evidence has been been repeated in countless reports, including the IPCC’s Climate Change and Land report, released in August 2019.
The effects of rising temperature on drying out the environment can be countered by rainfall or by the growth of vegetation that increases humidity locally. But in the southern half of Australia, where rain falls mostly in the winter, there has been a substantial decline in precipitation. In the southwest of the country, rainfall has declined by around 20 percent since the 1970s, and in the southeast, around 11 percent of rainfall has been lost since the 1990s.
One of the factors driving this long-term loss of winter rainfall is the positive trend in the Southern Annular Mode (SAM). This change is causing the westerly winds that circle the Southern Ocean to shift southward toward Antarctica, causing rain-bearing winter cold fronts to pass south of the Australian continent. The role of anthropogenic climate change in driving this trend in the SAM is also clear in the science.
Climate variability acts on top of these long-term trends that are pushing the Australian climate toward a more fire-prone state. And that variability is an important part of the story of why the 2019–2020 summer has been so extreme. |
Putting our heads in the sand and denying the obvious isn’t helping. All it does is help prolong inaction on a global emergency that we should have already been substantively addressing decades ago.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
 |
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^On your earlier comment, are Labor/Labour parties around the world taking the piss? Albanese makes Old Spice smell edgy.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Even now, their inability to come up with a coherent climate policy is damning. Only the blooodymindedness of the Liberals gives them cover. I mean, sitting on the fence on Adani for years and then (thanks to Palaszczuk, though no doubt approved by federal party leadership) fast-tracking it after the election, FFS – they’ve actually managed to go backwards on this issue since Rudd.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
watt price tully 
Joined: 15 May 2007
|
|
|
|
|
Wokko 
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
|
|
|
|
think positive
Side By Side
Joined: 30 Jun 2005
Location: somewhere
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| pietillidie wrote: | | ^Don't we already know that? |
some of us do, some seem to think stopping coal mining will fix it!
_________________
You cant fix stupid, turns out you cant quarantine it either! |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| It won’t stop bushfires, per se - but it might help to keep the planet habitable for humans in the medium term. |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Saw this Facebook post from Queanbeyan Fire and Rescue Station:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/951618864874073/permalink/2735127049856570/
| Quote: | 🔥 HAZARD REDUCTION OR BACKBURN? 🔥
K so we’re not going to wade in to politics, it isn’t our job. So maybe leave that out of this.
What it is though, is to establish some facts about hazard reduction burning and backburns which are two VERY different things.
To start, Hazard Reduction burns are exactly as the name suggests. They are specifically designed to minimise hazards (think: heavy ground fuel loading) around urban interface-bush areas. Usually small areas that are designed to lessen the intensity (not stop, that’s key) that a fire will impact that interface. Usually completed in the cooler months when fire behaviour is less intense and much more preferable in a strategic sense than.....
BACKBURNING. Backburning is a tactical option used AFTER a bushfire has started in attempt to burn the fire back on to itself, therefore creating the buffer zone of already burnt ground that can’t be reburnt, obviously. The problem with conducting a backburn is that they’re often done with little time to account for things like flame height, fuel loading, temperature and wind changes and can sometimes increase the size of the fire front. They are often a last resort tactic to again lessen the impact (again, not STOP) of a bushfire.
Political parties of any denomination do NOT influence the decisions of organisations like FRNSW, ACT Fire and Rescue, ACT and NSW Rural Fire Services and Parks and Wildlife Services when choosing when and how to do Hazard Reduction burns. It just doesn’t work like that. The main reason Hazard Reduction burns are cancelled or delayed is due to the predicted intensity of the burn exceeding the limits that would make it safe for firefighters, native flora and fauna and obviously you wonderful people.
Be safe and share the word around 🔥 |
Here’s their response to a question in the comments about protesters affecting hazard-reduction burns (probably thinking of stories like the one posted above):
| Quote: | Shane just as an aside, very rarely have we encountered public complaints to the fire services resulting in reduced prescribed burn sizes. We’re not saying it doesn’t happen but it’s mega rare.
Same with protestors. There might be some examples, but generally in my 13 years experience I’ve never seen a protestor at a prescribed burn. |
And here’s a response to a comment about supposedly onerous burn permits:
| Quote: | As a fire service we do have to strike a balance between allowing people to privately conduct land management and the overall interest of public safety and that of our native flora and fauna.
There has been quite a number of instances in which privately held hazard reductions have been unable to be contained and ended up causing large wildfires that cause millions of dollars of damage, hence why there’s procedures in place for being issued permits to burn and the like.
We certainly understand your frustrations, lots of our Firies here at 428 are from the bush and have their own large properties.
That one fire that escapes can end up being the size of the Currowan or Gospers Mountain Fire, that’s our bottom line that we have to consider is protecting life and property. |
We should all be wary of the propaganda going around on this topic, particularly from conservatives looking to distract attention from the valid criticisms being directed at the government. Blaming the Greens is a particular cheap shot with no basis in truth, but to be expected. Anyway, hopefully this brings a little clarity to the discussion.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Yes, well it won’t - because the Deniers so badly need to find another scapegoat. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Wokko wrote: | | https://volunteerfirefighters.org.au/scientist-david-packham-on-whats-really-causing-the-bushfires |
Packham seems to be a legitimate authority on bushfires but one with a serious blind spot on climate change (which is apparently not in his area of expertise, not that there’s anything wrong with that). The oversimplifications here on both sides are deeply frustrating; of course these fires have proximate causes that have nothing to do with climate change, and any climate activist worth their salt will be able to acknowledge this (needless to say, many are not). It goes without saying that, if climate change were the sole cause, then we would have had equally or near-equally bad fires last year, and the year before, and fires of this size would now become an annual event. But of course it’s quite possible that we might not see another catastrophe like this for another three, five or even ten years, because, as Packham says, you need a whole range of other conditions in place for a bushfire to occur: fuel, ignitions and weather.
He himself acknowledges (around eight minutes in) what is included in that third category: temperature, drought and wind. What he doesn’t acknowledge is that all of those conditions have been and are being affected by climate change. That is not contentious; that’s not opinion; that’s fact. And these fires will get worse, and more frequent, if the world keeps warming at its current rate, precisely because we’ll on average be experiencing more heat, dryness and (if I understand correctly) wind speeds. You can only magically make up for that increased risk with better fuel management if we accept that firefighters are currently slacking off at their jobs in winter and spring and have significant room for improvement. Does anyone actually buy that?
I have no idea whether Packham is a climate sceptic or is just afflicted by a bad case of tunnel vision, but it’s obvious why 2GB are so keen to get him on air: he tells them what they want to hear, which is that bushfires have nothing to do with climate change, and that the only thing in our control is fuel. That plays into the insufficient-hazard-reduction narrative debunked by the post above, which, it should be noted, isn’t an obsession that has emerged from nowhere. It serves a very specific purpose, which is to distract and displace responsibility onto one’s critics: in this case, inner-city green/Green activists who supposedly hold sway over rural councils and communities and exist as a permanent thorn in the side of fire services. You couldn’t make this stuff up...
Contrary to Packham’s argument, there are in fact two causes of bushfires that are each partially within our control: one is the proximate issue of forestry management, which is a necessity every single year and needs to be done right. The second is climate change, a much bigger global problem that requires global co-operation, which in turn requires local commitment and action. Ignoring the second and solely fixating on the first is like putting up concrete blocks on footpaths to stop terrorist attacks without also seeking to confront and defeat the ideologies that make people want to kill other people in the first place. To say the latter isn’t the problem only shows a lack of conceptual thinking. |
|
|
|
|
PyreneesPie
PyreneesPie
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
|
| Post subject: | |
|
^ Brilliant post and one I agree with all the way through.
Basically, if this bushfire season doesn't convince every Australian that we need a vigorous policy against climate change, then not only Australia, but the whole world, is stuffed.
I always used to think that Dr Karl was too much of a sensationalist TV personality to take note of a lot of what he said, but this explains some of the reasons why some people choose not to see what's in front of them:
https://australiascience.tv/vod/dr-karl-do-you-believe-in-climate-change/?
Some anecdotal experience - I've lived in rural areas of Southern Australia for all of my 66 years, so I can say that we've always had hot, dry summers. They have always been the norm. What has become abnormal in my life-time is the wind factor. Hot northerly winds during summer have become far more frequent and fierce compared to my childhood days. The blessed cool changes are also far stronger. Wind ferocity enormously increases bush fire risk and is the first factor I take into account to determine fire risk every day in summer, regardless of what temperature is forecast. |
|
|
|
|
pietillidie
Joined: 07 Jan 2005
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Contrarianism is a common manifestation of narcissism. The belief that one has special insight, when it's not schizotypal or manic, is very likely to be narcissistic. This is why you find crackpots on the edge of science beavering away on pet issues, or wealthy but unappealing eccentrics supporting things like Brexit. Their egos have been injured by not being recognised, so they grab the chance to seek vengeance on the establishment, with the resultant attention giving them what they crave. This is not to dismiss all that they say, but it should make one wary.
And not all contrarians, I hasten to add, are narcissists; but it's a pretty well-known phenomenon. The number of genuinely brilliant undiscovered geniuses with the ability to see beyond everyone else is far lower than movies would have us believe.
Not to mention we all need a bit of that delusion to drive us forward, just not so much of it that we start thinking we could do a dozen years of study at the highest level in the hardest subjects publishing competitively in the best journals when we don't even have the entry-level maths to get into a basic undergraduate science course at a local university.
_________________
In the end the rain comes down, washes clean the streets of a blue sky town.
Help Nick's: http://www.magpies.net/nick/bb/fundraising.htm |
|
|
|
|
Wokko
Come and take it.
Joined: 04 Oct 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
