Quoll Tracks

It's not often I agree with Tony Abbott.

2012-01-27T12:27:00.000-08:00

“Look, I can understand why the tent embassy was established all those years ago. I think a lot has changed for the better since then. We had the historic apology just a few years ago, one of the genuine achievements of Kevin Rudd as prime minister. We had the proposal which is currently for national consideration to recognise indigenous people in the Constitution. I think the indigenous people of Australia can be very proud of the respect in which they are held by every Australian and, yes, I think a lot has changed since then and I think it probably is time to move on from that.”

And it's a sad day when comments as innocuous as these lead to the protest seen in Canberra on the 26th.

Advance Australia Fair?

2012-01-23T21:30:00.000-08:00

Republished with thanks to my mate Island Mick.

Australians all let us renounce,
That we are young and free;
We've fucked the soil and raped for oil
And desalinated our sea;
Our land abounds in Resource gifts
For sale to any who care;
In years to come when we're not dumb
We'll see that tax's weren't Fair!
In drunken strains then let us sing,
"How much can a koala bare!"

Beneath our polluted southern Cross,
We'll toil with hearts and hands;
To sell the coal and uranium ore
To faraway foreign lands;
For those who've come across the seas
We've boundless gold to sell;
With complacenecy and apathy,
To advance our deserved hell.
In pissed up strains then let us sing
"GET OUT OF MY FOLDING CHAIR!"

Are the wheels falling off Natural Sequence Farming?

2012-01-04T22:53:00.001-08:00

Heard some interesting rumours a month or so ago the Peter Andrews' supporters have been leaving him and he's been calling around other organisations (NGO's, local government) trying to drum up support and today I come across a couple of interesting posts, from the NSF Forum, posted by Duane Norris"

Peter Andrews has returned 'home' to South Australia to see if he can enlist support there for his 'agenda'.(italics theirs)

And from the Natural Sequence Association website:

The recently elected Chairman of the Governing Body of the NSA Inc, Duane norris, has tendered his resignation as Chair and Board member to the NSA GB Board on the 15th December, 2011.

Duane had been a Foundation Board member since the GB was formed

All very interesting.

Why Freaten Our Profits?

2011-08-29T03:11:00.000-07:00

The campain against the Federal Government's planned Carbon Tax continues with the latest add showing "ordinary Aussies" asking "Why threaten our jobs?" and directing you to their website. If you wait till the end you'll see the ad is paid for by the Australian Trade and Industry Alliance, who, after a little digging, are made up of:

The group is composed of organisations such as the Minerals Council of Australia, the Australian Chamber of Commerce, the Australian Coal Association, and the Plastics and Chemical Industries Association.

In other words the fossil fuels lobby is whinging again.

Nathan Tinkler Slams Coal Mining Rehab.

2011-08-25T20:31:00.000-07:00

From the "credit where credit is due" files, in the September edition of Australian Longwall Magazine coal mining magnate Nathan Tinkler slams the poor standard of rehab in NSW coal mines and also lets fly at jockeys and the Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group. Looks like I've found a mining magnate I might have some time for.

pint with Nathan Tinkler

Thursday, 25 August 2011

ASTON Resources founder Nathan Tinkler talks with Australian Longwall magazine editor Lou Caruana about coal mining, Maules Creek, NRL, horses and mine managers.

Nathan Tinkler.

Published in the September 2011 Australian Longwall Magazine

Australian Longwall: Would you say owning a coal mine is a passion, like owning a thoroughbred horse or a champion NRL team?
Nathan Tinkler: It is absolutely a business. If you don’t operate these things seriously they have the potential to bite you hard.

AL: What are the similarities and differences?
NT: All need to be operated and taken seriously but thankfully there are no jockeys in the coal business. You don’t want to do all that work and preparation into producing coal and then hand it over to a 50kg man with a chip on his shoulder who is getting paid regardless of the result he delivers.

AL: How do you think NSW shapes up as a coal mining state compared to Queensland?
NT: NSW is behind. Everyone seems to think they can impose new taxes and royalties but mention any change of legislation to bring the mining act into 2011 and it just seems too big a task.

The current land use debate in the Hunter Valley between agriculture and mining will not resolve anything.

The issues with mining in the Hunter Valley directly tie to rehabilitation and the distinct lack of it by all mining companies. Some of those pits have been open for 50 years and have not been rehabilitated.

It is unacceptable and we now have 50 metre high moonscapes between Singleton and Scone 80km), and Singleton and Denman (70km).

For all the hype in the media we are not actually producing much more coal in NSW than we were 10 years ago. Our social, community and environmental issues in the Hunter Valley are driven from the cumulative impact of overburden removal over tens of decades.

So while coal production has not increased greatly there has been a hell of a lot of overburden removed and piled high over agricultural land. That land is not useable until that overburden is put back in the hole.

Plantings with grass seed is not rehabilitation. These companies are not being made to deal with their obligations and legislation needs to change to deal with it.

The US went through this a decade ago and got a stronger and more social and community minded industry for it.

All mining towns get these days is overburden stacked 50m high around them and 1000 bed camps! Is it any wonder it is becoming impossible to advance new projects?

These are largely mining communities but that does not mean they need to be reminded of it every time they get in a car. The Hunter Valley is being ruined by a lack of governance on rehabilitation and miners are showing little to no social or community awareness in this regard while the dust and health impacts continue to accumulate.

AL: Do you think the Gunnedah Basin could develop into the new Hunter Valley?
NT: I believe it can and it is important that it is not allowed to become the eyesore that the Hunter Valley has become.

AL: Have you spent much time underground in longwall coal mines?
NT: No I haven’t. YouTube is about the limit of my experience with longwall mining.

AL: What steps remain before Aston Resources’ Maules Creek gets into production?
NT: Aston is still working its way through the complex maze of permitting and infrastructure.
While I believe they are making solid progress on this it is hard to believe we are a developed country with the speed things move.

I don’t think anyone has been employed in the Department of Planning for 20 years and NSW now officially has no path for approvals for major projects.

AL: Are you encouraged by Australian Rail Track Corporation’s recent decision to commit $284 million to link the Gunnedah Basin to the port of Newcastle through the Liverpool Ranges?
NT: I am. I just wish they would get on with it. While the money is committed there is a reluctance to spend it. There is still not enough forward planning.

The infrastructure planning in NSW is such that by the time approval is given it is already insufficient and outdated.

The challenge is to not let the Gunnedah Basin become caught up in that archaic planning. Plan for the future, let’s move forward and not close off opportunity.

We really do approach these things like a third world country.

AL: Do you think the big coal players have too much port capacity at Newcastle’s Port Waratah?
NT: Before NCIG [Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group] every producer or newcomer was basically asking Coal and Allied and Xstrata shareholders to build them port access. Hence it never gets done.

How PWCS [Port Waratah Coal Services] can be called an open facility is beyond me. Coal and Allied do not have a strong record of production.

I think they were after 30Mt in 2004 and that is still a milestone. Xstrata can deliver the tonnes but I am not sure they have the asset base to deliver the tonnes forecast.

NCIG is hardly any better. It is currently a myth of a coal port producing very little coal. The silence around the production levels is deafening. On top of that it gives Newcastle a black eye with a new single lane bridge linking half a million people to their local airport!

Well done NCIG – it was a good way to piss off the community.

While all the producers exporting through NCIG are waiting to get port access perhaps they could rehabilitate some of their mines?

AL: What about Abbot Point? Does that look like a worthy investment? Or is that going to be too expensive?
NT: Obviously too expensive, someone paid more. Good luck to them

AL: What’s harder, finding a good mine manager or finding a good NRL coach?
NT: Mine manager by a long way. Too many are spoilt from working with cost profiles and overheads that breed incompetence.

Our mining industry is being consolidated and that means most are being developed in large organisations where accountability is something that exists only in head office where the orders are handed down.

The old style mine manager, who was a respected member of the community and took pride in providing his staff and employees with sustainable employment opportunities, is now most often a foreigner who lives there for 18 months.

He does not want to know anyone, spends more time at head office, focuses on his own bonus and getting into the next department or senior management.

Obviously rehabilitation is not in those bonus arrangements in the Hunter Valley. Very hard to find one that has actually built anything or made a difference to an asset. But they are out there!

AL: Who’s your tip for this year’s NRL grand final winner? OK, if you’re going to say the Newcastle Knights, who will they be playing?
NT: Would love to say Newcastle but we don’t seem to be able to put 80 minutes together at the moment. Our injuries are a concern.

St George are a well drilled outfit and just wear you down, they give you nothingand have some great senior players and promising young players to give them depth. They can take a couple of injuries and still be there.

AL: Do you like to have a bet on the track or would you prefer the local TAB?
NT: I am a Pick 6 and quaddie fan at the TAB.

AL: Will any of your horses be racing in this year’s Melbourne Cup?
NT: Fingers crossed. I don’t have any qualified at this stage so will have to win one of the lead ups. Galizani would be my best chance at this stage.

And apparently this in my 100th post on here and they said I'd never make it (well ok, they said nothing at all really). Happy centenary post to me, happy centenary post to me....

What's wrong with this pic?

2011-08-24T03:16:00.000-07:00

Had an invite to a mining rehab conference turn up in my email today, one look at the front page was enough to tell me there's still a lot of clueless people in the industry, why else would this one get past?

Did you see what the problems are?

Ok, I'll tell you, firstly that land there has never been mined, check the trees and topography, the trees have been there for decades, secondly they've only planted Eucalypts, no understory, and finally they've planted them too close together a few years and they'll reach lock up stage and just sit there doing nothing.

Not exactly best practice there, other photos in the brochure were little better.

Phelps talks sense, but it doesn't last.

2011-08-15T03:17:00.000-07:00

The Hon Dr Peter "McBain' Phelps is at it again, he starts off talking sense:

I am saying that speed limits are a simplistic solution. They are an arbitrary figure that provides a point above which motorists can be charged for speeding. That is despite the 105-kilometre-an-hour paradox that I explained earlier. On one stretch of road travelling at 105 kilometres an hour is safe and on another it is completely unsafe. That is a demonstration of the ridiculous arbitrariness of speed limits. If members opposite were serious about this issue, they would have increased the scope and range of offences such as driving in a manner dangerous, negligent driving, reckless driving and so on. We would not need speed limits; we could have advisory speed limits. We would then rely upon the good judgement of highway patrol officers to ascertain whether it is safe to drive at 120 kilometres an hour along a dead straight stretch of road on a Saturday morning in dry conditions. That would be the sensible thing to do.

But don't worry, the meds soon wear off and he's back to normal:

......I am told that red light cameras are now also speed cameras.

Dr John Kaye: Are they a socialist plot as well?

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: They are a Bolshevist menace. They are designed to control traffic and individuals on our roads. They are normally programmed by some central planner who will tell motorists when they can come and when they can go.

The Hon. Duncan Gay: Please tell the House that I have no plans to remove traffic lights.

The Hon. Dr PETER PHELPS: The Minister informs me that he has no plans to remove traffic lights. Traffic light signalling is often irrelevant to road conditions, but what they say goes. Their operation is based on hypothetical models that determine that at a certain time and place there should be a certain amount of traffic and the red light should be activated. That is a Bolshevist mindset writ large. How many times have members been driving on a straight, open stretch of road with clear lines of sight for miles only to be confronted by a red light when wanting to make a right-hand turn? That happens much too often. The answer is roundabouts. Roundabouts represent freedom; roundabouts represent liberty; roundabouts represent democracy at its finest. They involve the great cost-benefit analysis and the fabulous Marshallian demand and supply analysis. One asks oneself, "Do I stay or do I go? There is an oncoming truck. Can I squeeze through in time? Must I slow down and stop or can I whiz through in time?" Such a system is entirely dependent upon traffic conditions and individual judgement. Of course, the Bolshevists hate individual judgement.

And this is why Canberra is such a paradise.

The rise of the Billy Tea Party?

2011-08-15T00:57:00.000-07:00

Anyone who's been to one of those Australiana theme parks knows that the "proper" way to make billy tea (for those who don't know a "billy" is a pot for boiling water on over a campfire, most properly an empty tin with a loop of wire over the top for a handle) is to boil up the water, throw in a handfull of tea leaves and swing the thing up and over your head (without the water falling out and scalding yourself) to settle the tea leaves. That's apparently the proper way.

Despite quite a bit of time spent in the bush and yarning with plenty of old timers I've never met anyone (apart from soon to be burnt city slickers and over enthusiastic schoolkids) who actually used that method, stirring with a stick or tapping the billy a couple of times with a stick or knife being the preferred method (though mostly it's done with teabags these days).

And hot on the heels of the frightening US Tea Party movement, stirred up by that vacillating idiot Tony Abbot and the crybabies of the mining industry, scared and angry people are loading up their trucks and busses and cars all over the country to converge on Canberra to winge about, well, here's a couple of examples:

Calls last month by Federal Green’s leader, Senator Bob Brown, for an independent inquiry into Australian media ownership and regulations, sparked Mr Pattel’s protest plans amid concerns the inquiry could restrict freedom of speech and other democratic principles.

“I was under some pressure to organise a protest and was holding back but when the Green’s overstepped the mark I was compelled to act,” Mr Pattel said.

“Freedom of speech is sacrosanct to the democratic principles of our country.

“Once we’ve lost that; what have we got?”

A politician calls for an enquiry and you decide to protest? Given that one of the owners of much of our media is a foreigner and his company has been implicated in some fairly dodgy behaviour (phone tapping, corruption etc) overseas then wouldn't it be a good idea to look at who owns what and encourage a diversity of views? Rather than restricting freedom of speech Brown's call seeks to preserve it (and the Greens do have a good record on this kind of thing).

Ok, let's look at another one:

''The first was reading the 340-page Clean Energy Bill 2011 [the federal carbon tax bill], and the other 12 bills to which it is attached.

''The words 'global warming' are not mentioned........

Let's look at the proposed Act, being lazy and just using the word search function, they're right that "global warming" isn't mentioned however by my count "Climate Change" is mentioned sixty six times. Obviously they put the wrong words into the search function.

So, one's protesting to protect Rupert Murdoch's fortune and another is protesting because they didn't plug the right words into the search function.

First victim of the Carbon Tax? Umm, no.

2011-07-07T17:06:00.000-07:00

Read this:

Holding Statement
Cement Australia to close Kandos manufacturing facility
Cement Australia has announced it will close its manufacturing facility at Kandos in New South Wales. The plant will be closed in an orderly and safe manner over the next four months.
Chris Leon, Cement Australia CEO and Managing Director said “it has been a challenge for some years for the Kandos operation to remain viable due to a combination of dated, inefficient technology and high fixed costs”.

“Despite almost $10 million invested in 2007 to improve the plant, attracting and retaining high quality, experienced professionals to Kandos also continues to be a challenge as the next wave of skills shortage looms,” he said.

“In addition, for trade exposed industries such as ours there are the additional pressures of the high Australian dollar. Current regulation and government imposts are also an increasing burden on manufacturing and the carbon tax will only exacerbate this.”

“Finally, the Kandos plant is also considerable distance from the market it serves and this unfortunately further undermines its competitiveness,” said Mr Leon.

Cement Australia’s 98 employees at the Kandos site will be supported through the transition and will receive their full entitlements. 34 people will be offered another role within the company.”

So how does this get reported?

Cement plant closure devastating for Kandos
07 Jul, 2011 03:02 PM
The first casualty of Labor’s carbon tax has been announced with Cement Australia
declaring the closure of the Kandos cement plant within the next four months.
Federal Member for Parkes Mark Coulton said this is a devastating day for the community of Kandos and for the 100 families that rely on this plant for a living.
“For nearly 100 years the Kandos cement plant has been the lifeblood of the local community – it has employed generations of locals and sustained a viable and vibrant economy,” he said.
“The fear is now that Julia Gillard’s carbon tax has not just proven to be the nail in the coffin of the plant, but the town of Kandos itself.
Mr Coulton said that while there were a number of factors that have contributed to the closure, none were more significant than the economic threat provided by the looming carbon tax.
“The 98 employees of the cement plant are the first victims of Julia Gillard’s carbon tax. These people are third and fourth generation workers in this plant. There is no
comfort for these people as they will now lose their jobs and the entire community of Kandos loses the reason for why it exists,” he said.
“Not only has Julia Gillard forced the closure of this plant, she has also threatened the closure of an entire town.
“There is no denying that cement manufacture is a high energy use and a high emitting industry. However, the irony here is that we have a situation where as a result of the carbon tax Australian industry will be forced to import cement from countries with far less stringent environmental controls that create far higher levels of carbon emissions during production.
"The people of Kandos have every right to feel betrayed by the Prime Minister. She must now explain to them why she has helped shut the plant that has sustained their community for generations."
The Kandos cement plant was established in 1914 and has been the backbone of the Kandos community and a major employer. The plant produces 450,000 tonnes of cement each year.
“This is a prime example of the carbon tax moving our jobs offshore and making our
industry uncompetitive,” Mr Coulton said.
“It is not like Australia is going to be using any less cement; it is not like we are not going to stop building roads, buildings or the thousands of other things that we use cement for.
“What it means is that we have exported the jobs from Kandos to a country
somewhere else that does not have restrictive legislation and higher charges.”

Of course sniffing various rats in all this I dug a little deeper, The Land has done a straight copy and paste from Mark Coultons press release. While the closure of the plant is bad news for Kandos and surrounding towns the Cement Australia press release indicates the plant was not viable even without the addition of a carbon tax.

I can't see a problem with this at all.....

2011-07-05T02:49:00.000-07:00

Do people actually think? Do they actually consider what might result from their actions and decisions? Check this out:

New grass acts as bird repellent
ASHLEY WALMSLEY
05 Jul, 2011 04:00 AM
A GRASS that deters birdlife is poised to find major success throughout the world, particularly with airports.
The avian deterrent grass, created by New Zealand company Grasslanz Technology Limited, is being commercialised by PGG Wrightson Turf.

It recently won the Australasian DuPont Innovation Award for Performance Materials, which recognises the commercialisation of outstanding science and technology in Australasia.

The grass will be marketed under the brand name Avanex and developed by AgResearch.

The secret behind the grass’ bird deterrent ability is a natural fungus (endophyte) that lives in the grass and produces chemicals that make birds feel sick when ingested, but does not harm them.

The endophytic grass also reduces insect numbers, thus making the area less attractive to insect-feeding birds. The birds are deterred from flocking in grassed areas.

It has been effective in reducing bird numbers at several New Zealand airports thus minimising the risk of bird collisions with aircraft.

It has a potential for use in airports around the world, as well as orchards, sports fields and golf courses, in temperate environments.

In accepting the award on behalf of Grasslanz Technology, business development manager for the Southern Hemisphere Bruce Belgrave, said it was important to acknowledge that this innovation has been the result of a team effort involving Dr Chris Pennell, inventor and scientist with AgResearch Limited, as the inspiration behind the innovation; Christchurch International Airport, which invested in the development and allowed the first trials of the innovation on an airport; PGG Wrightson Seeds; and foundation for Arable Research, which also invested in its development.

Cameron Henley, business manager for PGG Wrightson Turf said the product held significant safety benefits for airports and sports facilities worldwide.

“We are proud to be a part of the development of this exciting technology and to bring Avanex to the market,” he said.

PGG Wrightson Turf is an industry leader in the Australasian turf seed market.

“These products have a natural fit in habitat modification surrounding airfields where they discourage both plant feeding birds and insect feeding birds, however they also work extremely well in sporting fields and golf courses, deterring a wide range of potentially damaging grass eating insects,” Mr Henley said.

The grasses that carry these endophytic properties are ideally suited to large areas of Australia, particularly the cooler temperate regions where perennial ryegrass and tall fescue is found.

I agree that birds around airports is an issue but given that this grass is "suited to large areas of Australia, particularly the cooler temperate regions" has anyone considered what would happen if this grass were to get loose in our grassland areas? Dunno 'bout you but it scares the shit out of me.

Under attack by Commie Nazis

2011-06-23T02:03:00.000-07:00

With the news that the world's number two hunter of Commie Nazis is soon to be visiting Australia, I thought it was time to have a look at one of our homegrown McBain fans, New South Wales, Member of the Legislative Council (upper house of state parliament) and Liberal Party whip The Hon. Dr. Peter Phelps. Phelps was elected to the Upper House in May 2011 and didn't take long to start warning us of the dangers of Commie Nazis (and more recently here and here) as well as hunting Commie Nazis Phelps is also letting people know of the dangers posed by dragons:

I think government could well fund in the future a $10 million draconian research institute, whereby peer-approved papers could be produced which would demonstrate that dragons are responsible for global warming. That could then lead to a United Nations independent committee on dragon activities, where no doubt levies would be expected—

I note the dragon denialist sitting in the corner. I think we can say goodbye to every vote from every dungeons and dragons player. Dragon denialism is a blight on this Parliament. Dr John Kaye should listen to the scientific evidence. I refer him specifically to the Dungeons and Dragons Adventurer's handbook, third edition, which states unequivocally that dragons do exist, in a wide range of colours. Perhaps dragons should be investigated even more deeply with regard to their role in climate change, because it has the same sort of scientific relevance as carbon dioxide.

And while there is controversy over the role of dragons in climate change, we can rest assured:

"there are no dragons involved in the industrial relations situation of NSW".

Which leads me to wonder just what award dragons are covered by? Dragons may be in trouble but other fire breathers can breathe easy:

If you want to be a pot smoking Mullumbimby hippie, fine—

And if you were interested in just what qualifies Phelps as the Commie Nazi Dragon Dunter he is, well here some highlights of his biography:

Publications - Americans are from Pluto, I.P.A Review, 2006; Of Bridges and Blue-eyed Babies, Quadrant, 2000; Anxious Nation - Review, International History Review, 2000; Amnesty Infomercial, I.P.A. Review, 1999; Keen as Mustard - Review, International History Review, 1999.

Qualifications, Occupations and Interests - Bachelor of Arts (Hons), Sydney University, 1990. Doctor of Philosophy, Sydney University, 1997.
Advisor, Hon. Bronwyn Bishop MP, October 2010-January 2011. Advisor, Sen. Michael Ronaldson, February 2009-October 2010. Chief of staff, Hon. Gary Nairn MP, January 2006-November 2007. Chief of staff, Sen. the Hon. Eric Abetz, January 2001-January 2006. Chief of staff, Sen. the Hon. Chris Ellison, May 2000-January 2001. Advisor, Sen. the Hon. Chris Ellison, August 1999-May 2000. Assistant Advisor, Hon. John Moore MP, October 1998-August 1999. Assistant Advisor, Hon. Ian McLachlan, February 1998-October 1998.

Introducing The Mad Katters Tea Party.

2011-06-04T22:46:00.000-07:00

I couldn't resist it, North Queensland independent MP Bob Katter has today announced the formation of a new political party, and after what obviously must have been a long and arduous process has decided to call it "Katter's Australian Party" (coz naming a political party after yourself worked really well for "Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party") and has decided to follow a populist agenda:

MAKING A STAND: Katter's key policies

Stop the stranglehold of Coles and Woolworths on groceries

Cut individual chains' market share to 22.5 per cent each instead of current 80 per cent total share.

This would ensure greater competition and push down prices.

Supermarket fairness tribunal to prevent misuse of market share.

No privatisation

Prevent any further sell-offs of assets but also implement strategies to reverse some past and current assets.

No carbon tax

Stop the measure and focus on renewable energies such as ethanol.

Stop free trade

Protect Australian industries and jobs to revitalise industries such as agriculture and manufacturing.

New laws to make Parliament approve treaties, not just the Government.

All Government spending should be on Australian goods where practicable. eg cars

Rural Australia does need better representation, unfortunately this isn't it.

NSW Shooters and Fishers Party, a few squirrels short in the top paddock.

2011-06-03T14:40:00.000-07:00

Recently heard in parliament from Robert Brown, MLC for the Shooters and Fishers Party:

For The Greens to rabbit on about the protection of native species but not allow conservation hunters into national parks to kill foxes and, more particularly, cats that climb old-growth trees and eat all the birds and squirrels is plain hypocrisy.

He's wanting to protect squirrels from predation by cats?

But wait there's more, when challenged on it he then continued:

Yes, grey squirrels. There are feral squirrels everywhere. We will add them to the game and feral animal bill list.

Feral squirrels everywhere? Not in this country there's not, and given that the proposed Game and Feral Animal Control Amendment Bill would allow the setting up of private game parks, does this mean he wants to add them to the list of animals these parks can release?

Coal Industry Promises to Con Communities

2011-05-25T14:34:00.000-07:00

Let's face it, the coal industry rarely gets past the first syllable in their consultation process so let's call it for what it is. Following the recently released survey which pretty much said the community thinks coal mining sucks the industry is now promising to go out and consult more.

From the ABC

Coal industry promises to consult with mining communities
Posted Tue May 24, 2011 6:40am AEST

The Minerals Council says the mining industry wants to engage more with the community over concerns about dust and air quality. (ABC Local : Jill Emberson )

The New South Wales Minerals Council says a scathing community survey was a 'wake-up call' and it has begun talks with Upper Hunter residents in a bid to improve its relationship with locals.

The Mineral Council's Upper Hunter Mining Dialogue hosted an information meeting at Singleton overnight in order to better develop solutions to the community's concerns.

The independent survey rates the region's coal industry poorly, citing dust, air quality and the need for mine site rehabilitation as community concerns.

The Council's Deputy CEO, Sue-Ern Tan says the industry wants to address the issues.

"I think they were concerns that we knew we in the community but it was really getting them in black and white I guess was a bit of the wake-up call for us," she said.

"I think what it showed though was there was an interest in the community to keep talking and try to all work together to find a path forward for the broader Hunter community.

"That's not going to be easy but I think the best way to do it is by continuing that conversation."

Ms Tan says the Minerals Council is committed to significantly boosting its consultation with Upper Hunter mining communities.

She says the scathing survey also highlighted concern over pressure on community services and infrastructure.

Ms Tan says the whole industry wants to engage more with the community.

"Each individual company does it about their individual projects and does it actually quite well, but this is a broader problem," she said.

"This is the cumulative impacts of the whole industry in the Upper Hunter and while people might say, talk is cheap, it's not.

"You've got to start talking.

"There was a feeling of, where do we go to now?

"How do we try and find a way forward to ensure the Hunter has a strong and viable future?"

Here's the thing, we've heard it all before, we've heard the assurances, we've heard the corporate spin and we just don't believe you any more and no ammount of additional community con is going to change that.

Want to gain a little more respect? Well here's a couple of suggestions to start, audit your operations against the claims made in your EIS, don't leave overburden heaps bare for 10 years, do proper rehab job and not just throw out fucking Rhodes Grass seed everywhere, if you've put an area aside for an "offset" don't go and mine the thing five years later, oh and stop playing us for fools.

Cabin Fever.

2011-05-25T03:32:00.001-07:00

The world gets increasingly smaller when you’re sick, empty tissue boxes stack up like an impenetrable cliff, mucus impregnated tissues build up against them like blizzard blown snow.

The tissues wait, menacing, threatening, to collapse and wash me away in a slime filled snotalanche.

And so begins day six of my self imposed exile, boredom and tedium has well set in, drizzling rain stopping even the minor pleasure of walking into the sunlight, blinking tentatively like a new born bunny on it’s first venture from the burrow, warming in the rays of the sun ready to scurry back inside to the comfort and safety of a full tissue box.

I could clean the house, but then what would I do tomorrow when I get really bored?

And I’m out of tissues, so it’s the rough touch of toilet paper to soak the snot, and when my head gets really bad it’s under the hot shower for a steam and desnotification, echoing the words of Lady MacBeth, “Out damned snot”.

So the day drags on, 10:16 and apart from some washing up nothing done, nothing accomplished, the 8th deadly sin of wasting time has been committed.

Tomorrow, I hope I’ll be somewhat better tomorrow, I know I’ve been saying that for days but if I’m no longer a belching spluttering oil well of phlegm I might be able to do something, like buy some fresh food or even pick up some steel for a project (I made the mistake of doing the design for it on Monday so now there’s nothing left to do but build it with materials I don’t have).

I hate being sick.

.

Dedicted to Tony Abbott and the mining industry

2011-04-27T00:49:00.000-07:00

No explanation needed really, a classic of Australian poetry.

SAID HANRAHAN by John O'Brien

"We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
In accents most forlorn,
Outside the church, ere Mass began,
One frosty Sunday morn.

The congregation stood about,
Coat-collars to the ears,
And talked of stock, and crops, and drought,
As it had done for years.

"It's looking crook," said Daniel Croke;
"Bedad, it's cruke, me lad,
For never since the banks went broke
Has seasons been so bad."

"It's dry, all right," said young O'Neil,
With which astute remark
He squatted down upon his heel
And chewed a piece of bark.

And so around the chorus ran
"It's keepin' dry, no doubt."
"We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out."

"The crops are done; ye'll have your work
To save one bag of grain;
From here way out to Back-o'-Bourke
They're singin' out for rain.

"They're singin' out for rain," he said,
"And all the tanks are dry."
The congregation scratched its head,
And gazed around the sky.

"There won't be grass, in any case,
Enough to feed an ass;
There's not a blade on Casey's place
As I came down to Mass."

"If rain don't come this month," said Dan,
And cleared his throat to speak -
"We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"If rain don't come this week."

A heavy silence seemed to steal
On all at this remark;
And each man squatted on his heel,
And chewed a piece of bark.

"We want an inch of rain, we do,"
O'Neil observed at last;
But Croke "maintained" we wanted two
To put the danger past.

"If we don't get three inches, man,
Or four to break this drought,
We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out."

In God's good time down came the rain;
And all the afternoon
On iron roof and window-pane
It drummed a homely tune.

And through the night it pattered still,
And lightsome, gladsome elves
On dripping spout and window-sill
Kept talking to themselves.

It pelted, pelted all day long,
A-singing at its work,
Till every heart took up the song
Way out to Back-o'-Bourke.

And every creek a banker ran,
And dams filled overtop;
"We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"If this rain doesn't stop."

And stop it did, in God's good time;
And spring came in to fold
A mantle o'er the hills sublime
Of green and pink and gold.

And days went by on dancing feet,
With harvest-hopes immense,
And laughing eyes beheld the wheat
Nid-nodding o'er the fence.

And, oh, the smiles on every face,
As happy lad and lass
Through grass knee-deep on Casey's place
Went riding down to Mass.

While round the church in clothes genteel
Discoursed the men of mark,
And each man squatted on his heel,
And chewed his piece of bark.

"There'll be bush-fires for sure, me man,
There will, without a doubt;
We'll all be rooned," said Hanrahan,
"Before the year is out."

Easter carnage? What Easter carnage?

2011-04-24T16:59:00.000-07:00

Every holiday period and long weekend we hear the screaching of our political masters and police force amplified through a largely unquestioning and subservient media about holiday road "carnage". Police patrols are increased, double demerit points are enforced and despite having had years worth of notice all police leave is routinely cancelled and motorists spend far more time looking at their speedos rather than where they are going.

So what is this carnage? How much more likely are you to die during one of these periods of carnage?

I did a little searching and did a little number crunching from this report found at Infrastructure Australia looking at the monthly road death tolls from 1993 to 2008. I haven't gotten into the full statistical analysis as it'd take me too long and secondly I haven't done much with stats for almost 20 years.

The monthly averages are:
January 140.125
February 130.6875
March 152.0625
April 141.5625
May 148.0625
June 140.5
July 141.1875
August 148.5625
September 141.5625
October 153.0625
November 140.0625
December 157.0625

Once you start looking at the daily averages thing even out a lot more, with December (5/day), October (4.9), March (4.9), August (4.8), May (4.8) having the higher daily averages. January (4.5/day), July (4.5), Februry (4.6), and November (4.6) are the safest months to travel on Australian roads. April in which Easter occurs has 4.7 deaths/day.

Now the road toll has come down quite a bit since then (1953 deaths in 1993 to 1464 in 2008) but from the figures we can see that our "deadliest" month, December, is only around ten percent more dangerous than our safest, January and July.

Taking the 2008 figure of 1464 road deaths we come to an average of just over 4 deaths a day, given that we're four days into to Easter holiday period simple maths will tell us to expect about 16 deaths, and that's close enough to what we've got.

Now none of this is meant to make light of the tragedy that deaths and injuries undoubtedly are but I'm just adding some perspective to the hype. People die at all times during the year on our roads and at roughly the same rate, high profile campaigns for a few weeks a year will do little to reduce the overall numbers, better roads, better training and more appropriate enforcement (when was the last time you heard of someone being booked for tailgating?) are the things which will make a difference.

Given the recent change of government in New South Wales and their attitude to speed cameras I will look on with interest for the next few months.

Coal Industry Surprised (but no one else is)

2011-04-20T11:50:00.000-07:00

Proving the old adage that money can't buy love, a recent survey has found that Upper Hunter residents don't like the coal industry. Coal mining executives are surprised at this, but then, they don't live here.

Upper Hunter coal industry receives harsh report
Posted April 15, 2011 09:22:00
Map: Singleton 2330 The NSW Minerals Council says it is surprised the Hunter Valley's coal industry has rated poorly in an independent community survey.

Participants in the Upper Hunter Mining Dialogue have received a research report examining opinions about the cumultative impacts of local mines.

The Australian Centre for Corporate Social Responsibility concluded a long-term commitment will be needed to improve the industry's relationship with the community.

"Overall the results do show that there is a lack of trust toward the mining industry as a whole and giving us below average scores on a range of questions about things like reputation, relationship quality and social capital," Minerals Council Deputy Chief Executive, Sue-Ern Tan said.

"I am personally very concerned about the findings, they will be and are very challenging for the industry,"

"I think the depth of concern is worrying and the low level of trust the community has really surprised me."

In response three industry working groups have been established to address the cumulative impacts of the region's open cut coal mines.

The research identified dust, air quality and the need for mine site rehabilitation as the community's main concerns.

"We have already established within the industry the three working groups as a first step and what we have done is look at the priority issues raised by the survey," Ms Tan said.

"They were clearly around dust, air quality, water, issues around rehabilitation and then what is happening with social infrastructure and the social issues in the towns thenselves,"

"So those are the three areas we are going to focus on."

The survey and the industry's response can viewed at the NSW Minerals Council website.

The report is available here.

Well here's a dumb idea!

2011-04-08T03:39:00.000-07:00

Considering Australia's longest running coal fire has been going for 6 000 years just how are they going to keep this one under control?

Australia urged to develop 'fuel of the future' By Pip Courtney for Landline Updated 1 hour 47 minutes ago Linc Energy's UCG pilot plant, located at Chinchilla on the Darling Downs. (Pip Courtney, ABC TV Landline) Video: Landline: Fuel of the Future? (Landline) Map: Chinchilla 4413 One of Australia's richest men claims the technology exists to dramatically reduce the country's vulnerability to international oil price shocks and even become an exporter of transport fuel. Mining magnate Peter Bond says Australia could be self-sufficient in diesel and jet fuel if state and federal governments permit the commercialisation of underground coal gasification (UCG). "We can be the Wal-Mart of energy. This could actually put peak oil for this country off for two generations," he said. "It's definitely one of the fuels of the future." But there are fears from farmers that the process could have harmful environmental and health impacts. UCG, a Soviet-developed process, involves burning deep unmineable coals on site at a temperature of 1,200 degrees Celsius. Gas produced by the burn can then be converted into synthetic fuels. There are billions of tonnes of stranded coals in Queensland. "The fact that you're coal rich and oil poor means that you can isolate and insulate your economy from having to pay out a fortune for Middle East oil," Mr Bond said. For nearly seven years Mr Bond's company Linc has been piloting the UCG process at its $70 million demonstration plant at Chinchilla, west of Brisbane. "We gasify coal really cost effectively from stranded coal 100 to 150 metres under the ground," Mr Bond said. "We can produce a barrel for $30." Linc says it is the only company in the world to combine UCG and gas-to-liquids (GTL) processes in one site. "I get a buzz from standing here knowing that the coal is being gasified under our feet and going across to the GTL plant, and several minutes later is turned into diesel," Mr Bond said. "I love the concept of being able to unlock billions of tonnes of energy of stranded coal. I used to be a coal miner and it just makes sense." Contamination scares The Queensland Government has approved three pilot UCG projects but last year two of them, Cougar Energy based at Kingaroy and Carbon Energy near Dalby, had contamination scares. Cougar was shut down and Carbon Energy has just been allowed to reopen with stricter controls. The highly publicised contamination events seriously damaged the fledgling industry. "There is no doubt in the case of Kingaroy that they made a mess of it," said Ian MacFarlane, the Federal Opposition's energy and resources spokesman. "It was either a mistake or a complete PR disaster, one of the two. People have lost confidence in it." Mr Bond says the scare "certainly doesn't help" the industry. "Any black mark is a black mark but at the end of the day we are a growing industry, an emerging industry, and as such you have to take all comers," he said. A government report into the three pilots has found no problems with Linc Energy however. "This project was identified as being the world leader in the UCG process," said Stirling Hinchliffe, Queensland's Mines Minister. 'Exciting opportunity' To put a positive face on the technology, Mr Bond last month put coal derived diesel from Linc's plant into a car and drove it 6,000 kilometres from Chinchilla to Perth in Western Australia. "It's a huge moment. This is the first time in Australia we've ever filled up a car with synthetic fuel," he said. Mr Hinchliffe has shown enthusiasm for the project, saying "everyone is interested in alternative fuel supplies in Australia". "This is a genuinely exciting opportunity to see the UCG process proven up, if that is possible," he said. Mr Bond met federal Energy Minister Martin Ferguson in Canberra, who is also optimistic. "I first started talking to Peter when I was back in opposition and I thought geez, this looks promising in terms of an alternative fuel strategy," he said. Australia spent $16 billion last year importing petroleum. "By 2015 that [deficit] could blow out to $30 billion a year. For that reason these UCG ventures are very important in the overall debate about Australia's energy security," Mr Ferguson said. "Peter Bond has taken substantial risks to get Linc to this point, to have this road trip to prove the value of synthetic fuel in Australia. "The trip has proved the capacity of us to create a new industry in Australia and in doing so to resolve our supply-side problems in terms of energy security from a transport point of view." With a personal fortune estimated at nearly $600 million, Peter Bond is Australia's 10th-richest man. A former coal miner who went from working in mines to owning them, he believes UCG can transform Australia's energy landscape, and even rival the booming billion-dollar coal-seam gas industry. He says if UCG gets the go-ahead in Queensland, Linc could have a commercial plant in Chinchilla within five years. "A commercial plant is over 22,000 barrels a day - that is, 7 to 8 million barrels a year - and that's a good start to Australia regaining some of its own fuel independence," Mr Bond said. He says there is enough coal at Linc's 4,000 hectare property to feed one plant for 80 years. 'Pretty scary' While the Queensland Government is yet to allow UCG to move beyond the pilot phase, Queensland's farmers are calling for caution. Unnerved by the Kingaroy scare, rural lobby group AgForce say it is worried about UCG's impact on underground water aquifers as well as the possibility of land subsidence. "It is all happening underground. Everything that goes on, from the lighting of the fire to the extraction of the gas and the inter-aquifer relationships, is all well hidden away out of sight," spokesman Drew Wagner said. "We don't know what the impacts will be. What we are reacting to is pretty scary. "These are not simple chemical compounds. These are highly carcinogenic. They are highly dangerous contaminants that once released in the groundwater could end up anywhere." But Mr Bond says UCG is safe and caution is being taken. "We don't do anything that could possibly hurt the water table or contaminate the aquifer in any way whatsoever," he said. "We manage everything in such a way that there is no environmental damage." A final report into the UCG pilots is due to be handed to the Queensland Government in November. "We look forward to getting an answer. I think in time we will get the positive answer but it will take work," Mr Bond said. Mr Bond is risking millions on the UCG industry, but he did not get rich without taking a few chances. "The combination of taking something that is possible and turning it into a reality is very exciting for an entrepreneur and to do it on a global scale for what UCG can do for you is a rare opportunity," he said. "It is a small Australian company that has turned into something bigger. It is one man's dream that has turned into something bigger. "It's all been done here at the back of Chinchilla and I think that's a great story."

You don't win friends with salad!

2011-04-07T01:11:00.000-07:00

Nor do you get all that fat on it, so why is it when we talk about grazing we concentrate on the grass leaves rather than the stems and seed heads where the starch and sugars are stored? Considering feedlots rely heavily on grains to fatten cattle why don't we let our grasses get just that bit bigger and in a lot of cases let some of them go to seed before we let stock graze them? I have spoken to some farmers who report horses getting fat on Blue Grass (Dichanthum sericium) as it's gone to head and have seen some paddocks where stock have deliberately targetted paspalum heads. Just my thought for the day.

A Load of Hot Air.

2011-04-02T17:53:00.000-07:00

Prior to the introduction of catylic converters one of the favourite was of topping yourself was to run a hose from your car exhaust, in through your car window, sit inside, start her up and wait for the carbon monoxide to do it's thing. The carbon monoxide would bind to blood haemoglobin forming carboxyhaemoglobin and prevent the exchange of carbon dioxide for oxygen. After the introduction of catylic converters suicide rates by car exhaust didn't fall (as I had presumed) it just swapped death from the effects of carboxyhaemoglobin to death by hypoxia (lack of oxygen), so obviously high levels of carbon dioxide are fatal to humans. High CO2 levels are also fatal to invertebrates, (which is a technique we used to use for fumigating seeds for storage). Given all that, why would someone interested in improving soil health want to pump something used as a fumigant underground? Sounds silly but this is what a number of farmers are starting to do, called Exhaust Emission Fertilisation the aim is to capture the exhaust gasses, cool them then inject them underground where the carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides and other gasses:

"stimulates the biological life within the soil so the new seeding and photosynthesizing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is done at a greater rate,”

Sounds great, it's just a pity that photosynthesis occurs above the ground. Despite all the claims there is a serious lack of scientific studies and actual evidence, the only study I've been able to find concludes:

The ANCOVA showed that the injection of exhaust did not improve or compromise crop production relative to the control. However, injecting exhaust while simultaneously applying fertiliser did initially reduce crop growth. In this season and on this soil, the crop was unresponsive to the application of fertiliser except for a small, significant increase in grain protein.

There may be some short term benefits as the acids present in the exhaust gasses react with nutrients bound up in the soil but in the long term these reserves will become depleted. Some proponents are reporting drops in soil pH. While the website promoting this system looks quite flashy it apears very short on providing actual information on how it works or any data to support their claims. I don't think I'll be buying it.

Sawfly, don't bother me.

2011-03-26T17:35:00.000-07:00

Latest willow sawfly news some quite good populations of sawfly appear to be well established at Murrurundi, Bathurst, Molong, Bylong and even in Widden Valley (home of Barramul Stud). That'll upset the NSF crowd

NSW Libs know their native animals!

2011-03-26T17:23:00.000-07:00

Copied and pasted from the NSW Liberals environment policy:

•Threatened species - We will protect threatened species across NSW, including better protection for Koalas, Tasmanian Devils and Flying Foxes.

How can they provide better protection for an animal which doesn't occur in the wild in NSW? Better cages, armed guards?

While we're speaking of my Tassie cousins, check this out: http://www.devilark.com.au/ A damn worthy undertaking if you ask me.

What's so special about NSF?

2011-02-20T13:41:00.000-08:00

I found an interesting blog entry by Willem Vervoort, Associate Professor Hydrology and Catchment Management at the Faculty of Agriculture, Food and Natural Resources at the University of Sydney, he concludes:

So the core of Peter's ideas are embedded in existing and well established ideas about biological farming and about water harvesting. They are not controversial to me. It will work as long as you have low salinity soils, low salinity input water and a relatively flat landscape and you are close to a water source. It also will work better in grazing systems as the nutrient loss can be managed better. Wheat and other cropping systems would really have to think hard about rotations and carbon balances.

All the rest of the ideas from Peter are only layering around this core and some of it I really cannot see any use for, or I find a bit silly.

Fun with numbers!

2011-02-12T21:00:00.000-08:00

I was having some fun over at The Land the other week with one of the denizens claiming undersea volcanoes are responsible for the melting of the Arctic ice cap. While he wanted to rant about conspiracies and all that he does raise an interesting point which has made me think, just how much heat (and of course energy) do volcanoes need to add to the oceans to actually make any difference? So I figured I might do some calculations, there are a number of assumptions I will make and I’ll be quite open about them, I will however be generally erring on the conservative side.

It’s going to get a little complex but none of the calculations are all that difficult, grab a bit of paper and a pen.

We’ll assume a rise in average ocean temperature of 1 degree over 100years, assuming that this is constant throughout the water column (if it were due to volcanic activity the difference would be higher the lower you go as that’s where the heat source is but to make it easy I’ll stick with a one degree warming throughout the column), so how much energy does this take?

From basic physics we know that it takes 4.2 Joules of energy to raise the temperature of one gram of water by one degree Celsius (I’m assuming fresh water, I do know it’s salt water but the difference in the end will only be minor), from a quick Google search (http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/SyedQadri.shtml) we find that the worlds ocean volume is around 1.3-1.4 billion cubic kilometres.

Assuming one gram of water equals one millilitre (yes, I do know the density will be a little different with salt water but in the end it really won’t make much difference), one cubic metre will equal one million millilitres (1 x 106 ml) , one cubic kilometre will equal one million billion millilitres (1x 1015 ml) and will require 4.2 x 1015 Joules to warm it by one degree, so the whole ocean will require 4.2 x 1015 x 1.3 x 109 or 5.46 x 1024 Joules of energy to raise it by one degree (this does make a very, very big assumption that there’s no energy lost from the system, counting in energy loss this figure would be much higher).

That’s a lot of joules, so what does this equate to? Another Google search on “world energy consumption” tells us the average annual energy consumption is roughly 5 x 1020 Joules (my search said 4.74 x 1020 but I rounded it up just for ease of calculation) so dividing or 5.46 x 1024 by 5 x 1020 gives us 10920 years of the worlds energy use would raise our oceans by 1 degree Celsius.
So what? I hear you quite rightly say, “the energy comes from cooling magma not from burning coal” so what we need to know are the melting point of magma and the specific heat capacity (specific heat capacity is how much energy it takes to raise one gram of a substance by one degree Celsius).

Another Google search on “magma melting temperature” gives an answer of between 700 and 1300 degrees to melt it depending on the makeup of the magma, in this case for ease of calculation we’ll pick a mid point of 1000 degrees. As for specific heat capacity, granite has a specific heat capacity of 790J/kg/degree or 0.79J/g/degree (we’ll round it up to 0.8J/g/degree for easier calculations, don’t worry this works out as more heat released for less weight which helps out the conservative nature of the calculations).

Time for a breather? Just to reiterate, we’ve figured out how much energy it would take to warm the world’s oceans by one degree Celsius, what we’re doing now is figuring out how much volcanic magma we would need to heat it by that much, as I’ve said, I’ve made a number of assumptions but they should result in a fairly conservative answer.

Ok, the amount of energy going into melting something should be the same as that released when it solidifies and cools so to raise 1 gram of granite to melting point of around 1000 degrees from a starting temperature of 50 degrees (it’s a lot hotter at the bottom of the oceanic crust than it is at the top so I figured 50 degrees would be a reasonable average), would require 950 (the temperature difference) multiplied by 0.8 (the specific heat capacity) or 760 Joules, that would also be released as it cools and solidifies.

So, what does that mean? Fair question, how many tonnes of magma would need to cool from 1000 degrees to 50 degrees to release that sort of energy?

Taking our 5.46 x 1024 Joules of energy needed divided by 760 gives us 7.2 x 1021 grams or 7.2 x 1015 Tonnes. Granite has a density of around 2.7T/m3 and basalt around 3T/m3, for ease of calculations I’ll go with the basalt density which gives 2.4 x 1015 cubic metres or 2.4 million cubic kilometres of magma needing to be produced by the worlds mid ocean ridges, volcanoes etc over 100 years to raise the oceans temperatures by 1 degree celcius (remember I’m assuming no loss, the actual number would be much higher).

As this mostly happens in the oceans and the oceanic crust is between 7 and 10km thick, we’ll assume a thickness of 10km giving 240 000 square kilometres of oceanic crust formed in 100 years.
Actually, it isn’t, that assumes all the action happens at the mid ocean ridges where the crust is formed and nothing at the subduction zones so I’ll halve it assuming (quite reasonably I think) that there’s as much energy released at the subduction zone as at the mid ocean ridges, so we’re looking for 120 000 square kilometres of new ocean crust formed in 100 years (remember, this is a conservative estimate, the actual number would be much more). Again using Google there’s around 80 000km of mid ocean ridge which means they’d have to widen by 1.5km in a century, or again being nice 750 metres either side meaning the continents would have to move at least 7.5 metres a year this is around 150 times faster than they are currently moving and to move 150 times faster you’d need 22 500 times the energy (remembering basic physics F=MV2).

These figures are very much in the lower end of the ballpark so if there is an influence from oceanic volcanoes on sea temperature and climate change we can see that it is very, very little.

Mr Toad will not be happy.

2011-02-12T19:35:00.000-08:00

Willow species (Salix spp) with the exception of Weeping Willow, Pussy Willow and Sterile Pussy Willow (Salix babylonica, S.calodendron and S.x. reichardtiji) have been listed as one of twenty one Weeds of National Significance, these weeds have been listed due to:

the invasiveness of a weed species
a weed's impacts
the potential for spread of a weed
socio-economic and environmental values.

and are regarded as being a major threat to the Australian environment. In the cae of the Willow it has been listed because

Most species of Willow are Weeds of National Significance. They are among the worst weeds in Australia because of their invasiveness, potential for spread, and economic and environmental impacts. They have invaded riverbanks and wetlands in temperate Australia, occupying thousands of kilometres of streams and numerous wetland areas (CRC 2003).

Willows spread their roots into the bed of a watercourse, slowing the flow of water and reducing aeration. They form thickets which divert water outside the main watercourse or channel, causing flooding and erosion where the creek banks are vulnerable. Willow leaves create a flush of organic matter when they drop in autumn, reducing water quality and available oxygen, and directly threatening aquatic plants and animals. This, together with the amount of water willows use, damages stream health (CRC 2003).

The replacement of native vegetation (e.g. river red gums) by willows reduces habitat (e.g. nesting hollows, snags) for both land and aquatic animals (CRC 2003).

Willows have only invaded about 5% of their potential geographic range in temperate Australia (CRC 2003).

Tasfish has quite a good article on it. So you'd think that given the threat to the ecosystem that people wouldn't be promoting it's use? You'd think so but Natural Sequence Farming has been and is continuing to promote the planting of willows, even claiming they are the worlds number one riparian plant (whatever that means)!

Given that the results of the ARC Barramul Project were released last year and accoding to their website

proved Peter's NSF processes are what he has been saying all these years

you'd think the report would back them up. Well what does the report have to say?

* Casuarina cunninghamiana accelerates bench development and plays a synergistic role in channel contraction (P7)

* Clonal grasses, reeds and tree C. cunninghamiana assisted geomorpic processes.
* River training works were effective after 1981 because they coincided with the main period of natural channel contraction.
* Baramul NSF stream works assisted vegetation recovery but occurred after the main period of channel contraction. (P21)

* Significant positive feedback between C. cunninghamiana recruitment and the rate of channel contraction after extensive channel widening. (P23)

* The recolonisation of native vegetation such as Casuarina cunninghamiana (given appropriate seed source) plays an important and synergistic role in channel contraction, negating the use of such weeds as Salix spp in NSF (P44)

Native plants such as river oak (Casuarina spp) have proven extremely effective at stabilising stream beds and banks. Stock exclusion and limited grazing enhanced the establishment of native seedlings. The use of natives for this purpose is preferred over exotic weeds. (P48)

Well, nothing at all really, it gives a great wrap to Casuarinas and very little on willows. Mind you this all could be quite academic in a couple of years anyway as this year has been a fantastic year for the spread of the Willow Saw Fly, which now appears to be in a significant number of rivers and creeks in the Hunter Valley and in some areas causing significant damage (sorry, my camera batteries were flat but I'll get back out and get a few shots).

And see my previous post on weeds.

"Natural"? Probably not.

2011-01-01T16:44:00.000-08:00

I first heard of Natural Sequence Farming over a decade ago even being shown around Tarwin Park in around 2000 or 2001, it didn't really impress me that much at the time but I figured I'd keep an eye on it and wait for some actual scientific results.

So far there's been two studies on it and neither give the ringing endorsement that NSF proponents claim, firstly there was the CSIRO expert panel report, which, while it does have some good things to say about the concept:

(note: at the time the report was written the practice was know as "The Natural Farming Sequence" it was later changed to Natural Sequence Farming")

The panel believes that NFS is a successful and sustainable farming system for the current enterprise at Tarwyn Park, where it has led to substantial agronomic and environmental improvements on the property.
Central to the implementation of NFS at Tarwyn Park is the manipulation of the hydrologic regime, that has increased aquifer water storage providing effective sub-surface pasture irrigation. This has substantially increased pasture productivity, and avoids the evaporative water losses that occur with surface irrigation.(page 1)

isn't exactly unequivocal in it's support. Let's see what else they have to say:

P1.
The panel made its assessment on the basis of professional interpretations of verbal and written descriptions of NFS, and an inspection of Tarwyn Park on 23 May 2002. The lack of quantitative data and the limited resources for the study precluded quantitative assessment.

The panel only assessed NFS as implemented as Tarwyn Park, and comments on the applicability of the particular practices used at Tarwyn Park in other landscape settings. The practices required for the application of NFS in other settings have not been demonstrated or documented, and so cannot be assessed.

P2
NFS has done little to address issues of native biodiversity and landscape ecology at Tarwyn Park. There is low species diversity in the riparian and stream plant communities, and a near absence of remnant native trees on the farmed hillslopes. These plant communities are therefore expected to provide little habitat for birds and other terrestrial fauna.

The suite of practices implemented for NFS at Tarwyn Park are only appropriate for local groundwater systems (recharge and discharge areas within a few kilometres of each other) dominated by fresh groundwater in porous floodplain sediments.

P3
As the panel only visited Tarwyn Park, the assessment of NFS is limited to its implementation at Tarwyn Park. In the panel’s opinion, most of the reports of prior scientific studies are of poor quality. Because of this, and the resource restraints placed on the panel, the assessments are qualitative, based on professional interpretation of observations made at Tarwyn Park. Furthermore, it should be noted that very little data to describe conditions at Tarwyn Park before the implementation of NFS exist, and the panel did not have the opportunity to view comparable properties in the region–with or without NFS.

P6
There is little data to describe the current water, salt, and nutrient balances of Tarwyn Park, and no data to describe levels of productivity. Furthermore, there are no data to describe conditions at Tarwyn Park before the implementation of NFS. Our assessments of the changes that have occurred at Tarwyn Park are therefore qualitative, based on observation and our interpretation of the verbal and written descriptions of changes due to NFS with which we were provided. These changes are summarised below in terms of material balances (water, salt, sediment, and nutrients), productivity, landscape biodiversity, and farm economics.

P8
While the implementation of NFS at Tarwyn Park has increased the functional diversity of plant species within the pasture, biodiversity has not been increased on the property. The number of native plant species on the property is low, with all plant communities – floodplains, hillslopes, stream channel, and riparian zone– characterised by moderate to low species diversity. The pasture communities are the most diverse, although native species diversity and abundance in the pasture is very low. Because of the dominance of broad-leaf annuals in the pasture mix at certain times, it is likely that there is a significant export of the seeds of these species (for example, Paterson’s curse (Echium plantagineum) and thistles (Centaurea spp.)) to downstream properties. To downstream landholders pursuing more conventional agriculture, this is undesirable.

The riparian vegetation is dominated by a canopy of exotic willows (Salix spp.) and native river oak (Casuarina cunninghamania), very little understorey, and a mix of native and exotic grasses as ground cover. There is an absence of trees on the hillslopes adjacent to the floodplain, although native eucalypts dominate the forest up the steeper slopes towards the escarpments. The lack of trees implies poor habitat on the property for birds and other terrestrial fauna.

P9
It is the opinion of the panel that suite of Tarwyn Park practices can only work for local groundwater flow systems where the water balance is dominated by fresh groundwater held in highly transmissive floodplain sediments. Local groundwater systems are those which have recharge and discharge areas within a few kilometres of each other……..The sediments must also be sufficiently deep to allow substantial subsurface water storage. The valley and floodplain topography must be such that it is possible to move the majority of the stream flow out onto the floodplain. The salinity of the groundwater in the floodplain sediments must also be low. Furthermore, the salt sources must be discrete such that those areas of highest salt mass can be effectively quarantined from the water cycle that is operating on the floodplains.

In addition to the hydrogeologic setting, the suite of Tarwyn Park management measures are only suitable in fluvially confined floodplain systems that prior to disturbance were characterised by a “chain of ponds” stream system. In systems that previously had incised channels, stream energies would be sufficiently high to preclude the stability and effectiveness of low-cost grade control structures.

P10
Tarwyn Park benefits from the increased volumes of water and loads of sediment and nutrients, and provides an environmental service by acting as at least a medium-term store for a proportion of the salt load it receives from upstream. It is the panel’s view that implementation of NFS higher up the Bylong River catchment would reduce these inputs to Tarwyn Park. With reduced flow and nutrient inputs from upstream, sustainable productivity on Tarwyn Park would be lower. In addition, with less incoming water, the ability to store salt would most probably be reduced. Thus if the properties upstream implemented NFS, there would be a negative impact on Tarwyn Park. Similarly, implementing NFS on Tarwyn Park has reduced sediment and nutrient loads downstream of the property. These changes are believed to be towards the pre-European condition, nonetheless from a downstream agricultural perspective they could be viewed as detrimental.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement is it? In short it does work on Tarwin Park however applicability to other landscapes is limited and the property shows low biodiversity.

Since this report there has been research undertaken on Barramul Stud by a range of researchers which makes for interesting reading, but that's for next time.

Farewell 2010, G'day 2011

2010-12-30T23:06:00.000-08:00

It's been a very quiet year for me as far as blogging is concerned, I've been busy with the house renovations (and fucking lawn mowing, maybe it's time to get a sheep) and have been nursing quite a shitty, unreliable laptop. I'm still renovating but I've had enough of the old lappy and deemed it not worth the expense of fixing so now have a new one which does all sorts of shit so with any luck I'll find the time and inclination to keep this blog updated regularly.

Next year I'm planning a look at the pseudosciences that seem to permeate the environmental movement/industry. I'll probably upset a few people but having spnt far too much time this year trying to get them to answer simple questions I think it was time they were outed.

Farewell 2010 and wishing all the best for 2011, and as always if you have any comments or questions feel free to comment, it's quite rare that I censor/moderate posts (pretty rare that I get them but some people do read this blog).

Ok, back to the beers, good night and best wishes.

the Quoll.

Rumours.

2010-12-18T12:07:00.000-08:00

I heard a couple of interesting rumours this week, yet to be fully confirmed but could do with some follow up.

Firstly, apparently the NSW Department of Planning is trying to fast track the Bylong coal development, even going so far as do be doing its preliminary environmental assesment.

And secondly there's been a lot more sightings of deer in the Upper Hunter, including, it is claimed, Elk.

From Wikipedia:

The elk or wapiti (Cervus canadensis) is one of the largest species of deer in the world and one of the largest land mammals in North America and eastern Asia. In the deer family (Cervidae), only the larger moose (Alces alces), which is called an "elk" in Europe, and the sambar (Rusa unicolor) rival the elk in size. Elk are similar to the Red Deer (Cervus elaphus) found in Europe, of which they were long believed to be a subspecies. However, evidence from a 2004 study of the mitochondrial DNA indicates they are a distinct species.

Elk range in forest and forest-edge habitat, feeding on grasses, plants, leaves, and bark. Although native to North America and Eastern Asia, they have adapted well to countries where they have been introduced, including Argentina, Australia, and New Zealand. Their great adaptability may threaten endemic species and ecosystems into which they have been introduced.

Yeah, great, it's bad enough running into kangaroos on the road, how long before someone gets taken out by a feral elk? Maybe Santa would like to grab a few spares when he gets here.

I've also heard that some landholders are rumoured to be charging $2500 to shoot one, a great incentive not to get rid of them I suppose.

Save the Bylong Valley!

2010-11-29T19:48:00.000-08:00

This just in...

MEDIA RELEASEFor Immediate Release
Sunday, 13th November, 2010
Mining v. agriculture battle arrives in Bylong Valley
The battle for the protection of farming land from mining activity has opened a new
front today, with the announcement of the formation of the Bylong Valley Protection
Alliance.
The new group, established at a community meeting at Bylong over the weekend, has
appointed an interim executive and committee, pending full registration with the
Office of Fair Trading, which is expected to be completed in the coming weeks.
Around 40 people attended the meeting, which was addressed by local eco-tourism
operator Julia Imrie and Cathy Pattullo, a former resident of the Cumbo Valley, which was badly affected by noise from the nearby Wilpinjong mine.
Interim President, local Jodie Nancarrow, said that the name “pretty much says it all.
It’s about protecting the Bylong Valley - and everything that’s so special and unique
about it. And the biggest threat at the moment is mining.” Earlier this year, Anglo
American Coal announced the sale of its proposed Bylong mine to Kepco of Korea
for $403M.

The Bylong Valley – with its celebrated annual charity ‘Mouse Races’ - has become
even better known in recent years with the sealing of the Bylong Valley Way, and is
now a significant tourist gateway from the Upper Hunter to the Central West.
Also under threat from the proposed mining activity is ‘Tarwyn Park’, home of Peter
Andrews’ revolutionary method of landscape restoration and water management,
‘Natural Sequence Farming’, and familiar to many through the ABC’s ‘Australian
Story’.

[Notes: Bylong is located approximately 90km north-east of Mudgee and 120km west of Muswellbrook. While technically ‘Upper Hunter’ in terms of geography it comes under Mid-Western Regional Council.]
Media Contacts:Jodie Nancarrow – Interim President – 02 63798252
(bylonggeneralstore@harboursat.com.au)
Craig Shaw – Interim Secretary – 0411 101988 (craig@craigshaw.com.au

Not so "Evil" after all?

2010-11-27T20:34:00.000-08:00

A few months ago motorcyclists protested in Sydney over the rising cost of compulsory third party insurance (CTP), placards were waved and chants were raised, the best placard slogan was contributed by yours truly "Evil Keneally can go jump" (like that one? lovely little play on words).

Despite my obvious pride in coming up with that one I do have to admit that maybe NSW State Premier Kristina Keneally is not so evil after all, first she canned the Bickham Coal Mine proposal and now this:

Tillegra Dam plans scrapped
The New South Wales Government has scrapped its plans for the Tillegra Dam in the Hunter region.
Planning Minister Tony Kelly has rejected the proposal and is now outlining his reasons at a media conference in Newcastle, which is also being attended by Premier Kristina Keneally.
The move comes on the back of immense opposition to the project which would have cost nearly $500 million.

The Government had argued the dam was needed to secure long-term water supplies in the Lower Hunter.

The New South Wales Greens said the Government risked losing up to four seats in the Hunter at the next election if it had approved the plan.

Greens MLC John Kaye says the decision to scrap plans for the dam is a huge victory for common sense and the environment, saving Hunter residents from big water bills.

"This was a dam that was never properly justified," he said.

"It's a dam that would have done huge damage to the Lower Hunter wetlands and it's a dam that would have been incredibly expensive. Half a billion dollars [was to be] taken out of the economy of the Hunter for no appreciable gain in water security.
"People in the Hunter understand how unnecessary, how expensive and how damaging this dam will be... [the Premier] will have to account for herself before the voters of the Hunter."

It's amazing how well pollies listen when the polls are telling them people think they stink. It'll be interesting to see what opposition leader Barry O'Farrel has to say about this, especially given his promise to keep the levy on water rates and spend it on something else.

Trying to take the "Con" out of Consultants

2010-11-26T19:49:00.000-08:00

Over the past few months I've had some reports land on my desk for me to read and comment on, some haven't been too bad, some have been truly abysmal. So here's the thing, your clients might think they're wonderful but the people who do the reviewing, commenting and sometimes even approving soon get to know who knows what they're talking about and who doesn't. People and companies that hand in good work have an easier time getting through the system, people and companies that hand in shit? Well, they tend to get scrutinised a lot more and it really is a pain for all concerned so in the interest of making it easier for all of us here's some suggestions on how you can improve things.

1) Use the fucking spellcheck and make sure you spell the location of the proposal correctly, it really is unprofessional when you've got the name of the road/town etc right on the title page and wrong everywhere else.

2) Don't get carried away with using big words, they may impress your client but if you've got spelling mistakes through the text as well as a tendency to throw in big words everywhere we'll just think you're an idiot.

3) Botanical nomenclature, serious, go and read up on it, it is capital letter for the first letter of the Genus, lower case for the species and the name should be in italics e.g. Eucalyptus robusta. It shows professionals that you are one too, or at least have a reasonable understanding (and again correct spelling and try to keep up to date with name changes, though the name change thing isn't as vital).

4) Nomenclature again "sp." means single species, "spp." means multiple species, if you don't know the difference learn it and use it otherwise we don't know if you're to multiple species or singular.

5) Ensure adequate time on site, one eight hour visit in winter is not long enough for a flora survey, fauna survey and targetted species survey, really, it's not. And try to get identifications past just the genus level (particularly when there's only three species in that genus in the area and all of them are very distinct)

6) If you're doing a targetted species search for endangered orchids (particularly terrestrial) do it at a time of year the flower is out because otherwise you're not going to fucking find it (and don't bullshit me with your PhD and try to tell me the survey was undertaken by "experienced staff", experienced staff wouldn't make that mistake).

7) Even the most flogged out property will have more than 27 native plant species on 360 Ha of land (and more than 7 native animal species), you have to remember that the document you write may be read by someone that knows the area.

8) Make sure the species you mention in the text are included in your appendix.

9) Mark the fucking location on a map of where you did the survey, don't just give grid co ordinates, it makes work for us and again, we'll think you're an idiot.

10) Use appropriate and recognised methodologies, if you're not sure ask someone and don't go on about which methodologies you didn't use and not tell us about which ones you did otherwise we'll just think you're making up shit.

Start off with those and it will make all of our lives a lot easier and remember if you try bullshitting your way through, you will be found out.

Get Fracked!

2010-11-22T20:47:00.000-08:00

The movie "Gasland" explores coal seam gas extraction in the US and in particular the process of "fracking" where high pressure chemicals are pumped underground to fracture the coal seam so the gas can be extracted.

If you're interested:
When: Tuesday, November 30 · 6:00pm - 8:30pm
Location: Greater Union Tower Cinemas
King Street
Newcastle, Australia

Election redux

2010-08-24T22:15:00.000-07:00

Did you see that? Just below, Quolltracks scooped the world, although my informants were slightly out and it was Julia Gillard making the announcement with Penny Wong and Tony Burke in attendence, the north coast NSW location was a bit of a surprise as they'd been looking for somewhere in central western NSW.

And now the election has been run and, well... not won, what next? Certainly it will be good for a lot of regional areas that have been poorly represented by the Nationals for many years, but other than that?

Well, the next 10 months will be interesting either way with the Greens only getting control of the Senate after next June (the traditional changeover time for the Senate), till then the conservatives will have control, if Tony Abbott gets in with a minority government expect a rash of contentious legislation to be put up before then, if Gillard scrapes in? She's in a more tricky position having a hostile senate for the next 10 months and being reliant on conservative independents, to get anything remotely contentious through will mean some serious horse trading so will be forced to be fairly cautious till getting a friendlier senate. The problem is that even then the indepeendents will still be calling the shots.

Interesting times indeed.

You read it here first

2010-08-10T21:22:00.000-07:00

Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong and Agriculture Minister Tony Burke are expected make an announcement on soil carbon this Saturday. Soil carbon has been talked about as being the silver bullet for carbon sequestration but I've yet to see anything other than wishfull thinking to back this up, yes there is potential but the figures seem to me to be wildly optimistic. The Libs had latched onto it a while ago (no doubt trying to appeal to the rural vote), Labor looks set to do the same. We shall wait and see what they come up with.

Shameless bump

2010-08-02T20:36:00.000-07:00

As there's an election on I figured I'd do my share of throwing shit (though it really wasn't me) and bump this earlier post.

Climate Change didn't all start with Al Gore

2010-08-02T19:46:00.000-07:00

Seriously it didn't. I was doing a bit of websurfing last night and was directed to a document in the Nixon library from September 1969 discussing global warming, referring to a document from November 1965.

Seems Al Gore didn't invent it all, the conspiracy must go back even further!

So who'd be a....?????

2010-02-22T01:17:00.000-08:00

Further to my last post Clive Hamilton has written on the abuse climate scientists have been subject to...

"In recent months, each time they enter the public debate through a newspaper article or radio interview these scientists are immediately subjected to a torrent of aggressive, abusive and, at times, threatening emails. Apart from the volume and viciousness of the emails, the campaign has two features - it is mostly anonymous and it appears to be orchestrated."

So who'd be a journo?

2010-02-06T15:50:00.000-08:00

I know I really shouldn't but I'm starting to develop a lot of sympathy for the journalists over at The Land. Normally I treat journos with a great deal of suspicion (says he with two in the extended family, though one does sport and the other horsey stuff) and have been known to yell at errors, blunders (and what I at least perceive to be) obvious biases (and don't get me started on science reporting) and quite obviously many others do as well.

Prior to the internet if you felt aggrieved or annoyed at an obvious error or bias it would be dust off the old Remington typewriter and rattle off a missive to the editor. These days with many papers publishing online and allowing reader comments more people are replying to stories (or at least people are replying to more stories - there's a subtle difference which we'll get to later) and doing it instantly without giving a great deal of thought as to what they write (and often without proofreading to see whether the writing make sense). Obviously it's a two edged sword people can write in giving, or asking for, more clarification on a story or giving an alternate view, that's the good side.

The bad? Well that's where we come back to reporting in the Land, it's quite Pavlovian really there are a number of words which will just set people off over there, Carbon Dioxide and Climate being two of the better examples.

Have a look over here.

The story is that rising atmospheric CO2 levels are likely to increase the growth rates of woody weeds, which you'd hardly think was controversial after all one of the sceptics big arguments is that CO2 is just plant food. You'd think that, but you'd be wrong. apparently that's all part of the conspiracy as well.

The other part of the story that I find quite interesting is that while C3 plants could benefit from extra CO2, C4 plants (which evolved later in the Earths history when atmospheric carbon dioxide had dropped below about 500 ppm) may be adversly affected (C4's have evolved a mechanism to concentrate CO2).

Quite a number of our important grasses use the C4 photosynthetic pathway, particularly our summer growing and tropical species, any adverse impacts on our summer grasses should be of concern to farmers and graziers and rightly so should be reported but comments such as:

The propaganda is sure being turned on! Two articles of pure bull in a row. One from an economist who would surely have a good understanding of matters of science, followed by a scientist, who surely has abandoned all thought of 'truth'!!

really do have you shaking your head. I do notice that it is mostly the same dozen or so making these sort of comments so there is some hope.

Barnaby "Up to the task"

2010-02-03T20:19:00.000-08:00

.......of finding $3.2 billion dollars out of 1400 million. Barnaby, the world's greatest accountant.

It's time to spill the beans!

2010-01-15T00:08:00.001-08:00

Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has been working hard recently to portray himself as a fair dinkum greenie, but I do have to wonder whether his enthusiasm for preserving nature extends to bats. Intrigued?

The story goes like this, shortly after entering Federal Parliament Tony Abbott was given the job of Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Employment, Education, Training and Youth Affairs, specifically looking after Green Corps.

Part of his responsibilities was turning up for launches and graduations, this did have it's hazards, one morning (according to a very trusted source) getting shat upon by a bat (well, flying fox, much bigger, much more shit) at Wingham Brush (near Taree, NSW), turning up to a following event at Lake Macquarie a couple of hours late and with bat shit very prominent on his shirt (and apparently neither tried to hide it nor make a joke of it).

I like bats.

The Peter Spencer Case.

2010-01-11T00:13:00.000-08:00

We've been hearing an awful lot lately about Peter Spencer, the farmer who's gone on a hunger strike wanting compensation for restrictions placed on him, and other farmers, by both State and Federal laws. There's been an awful lot of noise but very little actual information, so with just a little digging at http://www.austlii.edu.au/.

I've found both the decision of the Federal Court:
Spencer v Commonwealth of Australia (2008) FCA 1256 (26 August 2008)

and the NSW Supreme Court:
Spencer v Australian Capital Territory and Ors (2007) NSWSC 303 (4 April 2007) (against the A.C.T., N.S.W. & Commonwealth Governments).

I'm no lawyer and it's fairly heavy reading and I've only skimmed over it though it is interesting reading, to me the Federal Court appeared more than fair and quite sympathetic to Spencer's plight allowing him to resubmit his statement of claim a number of times but ultimately finding:

211 One cannot but feel the utmost sympathy for Mr Spencer if it be the case that Saarahnlee has been effectively sterilised by the State Statutes, with the effect that he can no longer carry on at Saarahnlee the activities which he was able to carry on prior to the enactment of the State Statutes. The question before the Court, however, is whether he has demonstrated that there is a serious question to be tried as to whether he is entitled to the final relief that he claims against the Commonwealth. Putting it the other way, the question is whether he has any reasonable prospect of obtaining that relief against the Commonwealth. Each question depends upon establishing that the Financial Assistance Act, the Natural Heritage Act or one of the Inter-Governmental Agreements is invalid in so far as it effects or authorises an acquisition or expropriation of part of Mr Spencer’s property in relation to Saarahnlee.

212 I have concluded that neither the Financial Assistance Act nor the Natural Heritage Act is a law with respect to the acquisition of property. Further, neither of those laws effects or authorises any acquisition of property of Mr Spencer’s that has been identified by him in the statement of claim. Similarly, none of the Inter-Governmental Agreements effects or authorises any such acquisition. It follows, in my opinion, that there is no reasonable prospect that Mr Spencer can obtain the final relief claimed in the proceeding. It also follows that there is no serious question to be tried as to whether Mr Spencer is entitled to that relief.

213 Accordingly, Mr Spencer’s application for interlocutory relief must be dismissed. Further, the proceeding itself must be dismissed.

The Spencer v Australian Capital Territory is interesting in that it combines action against the ACT Government for allowing feral animals onto his property with action against the NSW & Commonwealth Governments regarding native vegetation laws and for compensation for the sequestering of 100 000 Tonnes of Carbon/ year on his property (I may have missed it but I saw no mention of how this figure was arrived at).

The judgement concluded:

42 My conclusions may be summarised as follows:

43 The claim against
the State cannot succeed. The State has power to legislate with respect to the
use of land held in fee simple.

44 The claim against the Commonwealth cannot succeed. The claiming of political credit for a result obtained at the expense of a citizen founds no cause of action known to law.

45 The claim against the Territory is defectively pleaded, but it is not unarguable.
While the pleading in that respect should be struck out, there should be leave to replead against the Territory, and the proceedings against the Territory should not be summarily dismissed. However, as I am not satisfied that if the case goes to trial the plaintiff will obtain judgment for substantial damages against the Territory, the conditions for an interim payment are not satisfied.

46 It follows that I will dismiss the proceedings as against the State and the Commonwealth. I will strike out the statement of claim, but with leave to replead a cause of action in nuisance against the Territory. I will dismiss Mr Spencer’s motion for an interim payment.

47 My orders are:

1. Order that as against the second defendant, the State of New South Wales, and the third defendant, the Commonwealth of Australia, the proceedings be dismissed with costs.

2. Order that the statement of claim be struck out, with leave to replead against the first defendant, the Australian Capital Territory, upon condition that the allegations in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the statement of claim, or allegations to substantially the same effect, not be repeated in any amended statement of claim.

3. Order that the plaintiff pay the costs of the second and third defendants of their motions filed respectively on 9 March and 28 February 2007.

4. No order as to the costs of the first defendant’s motion filed on 13 March 2007, to the intent that the plaintiff and the first defendant bear their own costs of that motion.

5. Order that the plaintiff Mr Spencer’s motion filed on 12 March 2007 be dismissed with costs.

48 Ms England suggested that if any part of the proceedings survived, Mr Spencer should be referred to the Pro Bono Scheme. I was myself inclined to share that view, in the hope that it might facilitate the production of an appropriate statement of claim. Mr Spencer, however, does not wish such a referral. That is a pity, since if he has a viable cause of action it is far more likely to be pleaded properly if he has the benefit of legal assistance. But I see little point in compelling him to seek it when he apparently does not want it. If he reconsiders, he can make his own application for a referral.

So the cases against the NSW & Commonwealth Governments were dismissed with costs, the case against the ACT was defectively pleaded however he was given leave to replead with the suggestion he seek Pro Bono legal assistance. There is far more interesting reading in this case but it would appear that between this and the Federal case there has been an improvement in his case pleading.

And there you go, info you're unlikely to find from the usual suspects.

Onya Carmel!

2009-08-21T02:36:00.000-07:00

Sorry I haven't posted in a while, moving house, work etc has all gotten in the way but just watching ABC's Stateline it seems the Shooting Party's bill has been quashed by State Labor with a fair bit of input from Deputy Premier (& Environment Minister) Carmel Tebbut, of course it's all politics but if it quashes bad legislation then it's all good.

More later.

Media Release from the Invasive Animals CRC

2009-06-18T20:31:00.000-07:00

New law creates springboard for feral animal problems
The new NSW Game and Feral Animal Control Amendment Bill 2009 runs the risk of increasing Australia’s feral animal populations.

The Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre (IA CRC) is concerned with the new provision for game reserves to be established in NSW, where invasive game animals — many of which have been assessed by the national Vertebrate Pests Committee as ‘extreme’ risks — can be ‘housed’ and birds can be ‘released’ for private hunting.

"Game reserves could act as a potential springboard for invasive species. Some of the animals listed in the Bill are not established in Australia and are even listed as ‘high risk species’ in other jurisdictions. The biosecurity chain is only as strong as its weakest link and game reserves are set to be NSW’s weakest biosecurity link," said Professor Tony Peacock, Chief Executive Officer of the IA CRC.

The Bobwhite quail, for example, is prohibited in Western Australia. It is well suited to mixed habitats and known to compete with species of native quail, yet it is included in the proposed list.
"I’m somewhat flummoxed that we’re still having this debate 150 years after the ‘innocent’ proposal to bring rabbits to Australia. The rabbit has now become one of the most destructive invasive pests in Australia. The English gentleman responsible actually said at the time: ‘The introduction of a few rabbits could do little harm and might provide a touch of home, in addition to a spot of hunting’," said Professor Peacock.

The Bill also appears to conflict with the NSW Invasive Species Plan, the first goal of which is to prevent the establishment of new invasive species. The plan states: ‘The most effective way to minimise the impacts of invasive species is to prevent their initial incursion’.

Other species, such as feral spotted turtle doves, are already found in NSW and illustrate the risk of numbers of feral animals exploding. They first became established in Alice Springs in the early 1990s when just 10 birds were liberated from a backyard aviary. Since then, the population has steadily grown and today numbers are thought to exceed 8000 birds.

"Expanding the list could open a floodgate for possible establishment of problem animals. The biosecurity of the environment is a concern not only for the sake of Australia’s environmental assets, but also because of the scope for wild animals and plants to act as a reservoir for pests and diseases that have broader effects," said Professor Peacock.

"There’s a pretty basic cause and effect scenario that’s likely to result. By including these animals in the Act, there is an incentive to introduce populations that will create a new springboard for invasive animal problems," he said.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to read the proposed legislation it is here

More on the Game and Feral Animal Control bill

2009-06-18T02:16:00.000-07:00

Tony Peacock, CEO of the Invasive Animals CRC weighs into it over at Feral Thoughts

NSW Shooters Party: What a pack of dickheads.

2009-06-16T15:24:00.000-07:00

Hot on the heels of their fucking over of farming communities in Gloucester and the Liverpool Plains the Shooters Party are at it again. Their latest act of bastardry is introducing a bill called the "Game and Feral Animal Control Amendment Bill 2009", now the aim of this bill is:

Overview of Bill
The object of this Bill is to amend the Game and Feral Animal Control Act 2002
(the Act) as follows:
(a) to enable the Minister responsible for national park estate land to make that land available for the hunting of game animals by licensed game hunters,
(b) to expand the list of game animals that may be hunted in accordance with the Act and, in the case of any native game animals that are listed, to impose special requirements in relation to the hunting of those animals by licensed game hunters,
(c) to provide for the operation of private game reserves under the authority of a licence granted by the Game Council,
(d) to make it an offence to approach persons who are lawfully hunting on declared public hunting land or to interfere with persons lawfully hunting game animals,
(e) to make a number of other amendments of an administrative, minor or consequential nature.

Basically they want to open up National Parks for "recreational hunting" (on top of the 2 million hectares of public land they already have available) and want to establish private game reserves where feral animals can be released for the purpose of hunting (and they'd never get out would they?). The Shooters Party and the Game Council like to claim that the hunting is good for controlling feral animals (and at the same time maintain that it helps keep a healthy population of native "game species" - how does that work?) the Invasive Species Council has examined their claims:

Feral animals killed 2007-08 2006-07 Total (average/year)
Deer 410 291 701 (350)
Foxes 724 519 1243 (622)
Goats 1037 1039 2076 (1038)
Pigs 1081 983 2064 (1032)
Cats 136 143 279 (139)
Dogs 55 51 106 (53)
Rabbits 4076 2078 6154 (3077)
Hares 242 244 486 (243)
Total 7761 5348 13,109 (6554)

Given the funding given to the Game Council this equates to $323/feral animal killed in State Forests, obviously a very effective excercise.

So lets look at a few more things in the proposed bill:

Offence of failing to contain game animals in game reserve
(1) The holder of a private game reserve licence must not cause or allow a game animal (other than a bird) to escape from the private game reserve to which the licence relates.
Maximum penalty: 100 penalty units in the case of a corporation or 50 penalty units in the case of an individual.
(2) It is a defence to prosecution for an offence under subsection (1) if it is demonstrated that the defendant took all reasonable steps to prevent the escape of the game animal and, after the escape, took all reasonable steps to capture or kill the game animal.

So it's fine for feral birds to escape from a private game park and a maximum penalty of 100 penalty units should your stock of feral animals escape, a penalty unit is (from memory) $110 dollars so for a corporation the most it will cost you is $11000 or an individual $5500.

"But we went an hunted them after they escaped but they got away" which is where part 2 comes in, great excuse, fuck all responsibility. Lovely.

And one of the ammendments of a minor nature is:

[8] Section 8 Membership and procedure of Game Council
Omit “New South Wales Aboriginal Land Council” from section 8 (2) (e). Insert instead “Minister administering the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983”.

Sounds like a great bit of legislation. I'll have a bit more of a read of it and throw up some links later (and tidy up the post) but if you feel like writing to someone, here's a start:

The Hon. Ian Macdonald, MLCMinister for Primary Industries Email: macdonald.office@macdonald.minister.nsw.gov.au
Street Address: Governor Macquarie Tower, Level 33, 1 Farrer Place, SYDNEY NSW 2000

The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt, MP Minister for Climate Change & the Environment
Email: dp.office@tebbutt.minister.nsw.gov.auStreet Address: Governor Macquarie Tower, Level 30, 1 Farrer Place, SYDNEY NSW 2000

And more bad news....

2009-06-04T16:56:00.000-07:00

The drilling continues....

AGL drilling to go on in Hunter
DEBRA JOPSON
5/06/2009 5:36:00 AM

BOB KENNEDY'S five-bedroom house dropped 1.8 metres over six days when mining company Xstrata Coal moved into a seam under his 40-hectare vineyard near Broke in the Hunter Valley, but he is more worried about whether the nearby brook will keep bubbling.

He and fellow producers are concerned that the gas company AGL Energy's drilling will interfere with the purity and flow of subterranean aquifers which feed the area's agricultural lifeblood, the Wollombi Brook.

The people of the Broke Fordwich Winegrowers Association area have asked AGL to excise the 26 square kilometres that is home to 25 wine labels from the company's large exploration area.

"We market this part of the world as the tranquil side of the Hunter, because it really is unspoilt. Sydney Gas said there could be over 300 wells in our valley. We are concerned about the ambience and turning it into an industrial-type site," said Mr Kennedy, from the 400-member Hunter Valley Protection Alliance.

However, AGL, which recently paid $171 million to buy out its partner in Hunter exploration, Sydney Gas, intends to keep drilling, according to its group general manager of upstream gas, Michael Moraza.

(given that the asset - the gas - is estimated to be worth $10 billion at todays prices that's not a bad deal - SQ)

"Our intention is not to excise this area and we are not prepared to give any such undertaking to the community," he said.

Mr Kennedy says this makes the coal company and the laws which govern it look comparatively good.

AGL, armed with its exploration permits, Mr Kennedy says, has produced mainly "spin" in dealing with locals concerned about exploration drill holes disturbing coal bed methane gas close to Broke Public School, the effect on the water table and the prospect of a future gas plant.

Gloucester Council and its Hunter neighbours successfully put a motion to the Shires Association of NSW conference in Sydney this week calling on the Rees Government to forbid mining or exploration within scenic protection and urban and rural residential zones.

The motion said there should be special protection for agriculture and water, and environmental impact should be counted above economic benefit to the state when considering gas and coal extraction.

(any bets on their chance of succeeding? - SQ)

Any environmental impact of gas drilling around Broke would be minimal and transitory, Mr Moraza said. AGL has hired an independent consultant and project manager to deal with community concerns.

Fred Nile & Shooters Party love miners, hate farmers.

2009-06-04T01:43:00.000-07:00

West of the range they're not happy, not surprising really, they have some of the best agricultural land in the country with the misfortune in having a shitload of coal underneath it. These lands are the kind of areas we will be relying more and more to feed us in the centuries to come, unfortunatelly the state government, Shooters Party and Fred Nile see it differently.

Govt, Nile, Shooters unite against Greens bill protecting prime farming land from mining

Thursday 04 June 2009

Government MPs, the Shooters Party and Rev Fred Nile today indicated they will vote against a Greens bill in the NSW Upper House designed to protect prime agricultural land from mining. Greens MP Lee Rhiannon said farming communities from the Gloucester and Liverpool Plains regions would be understandably disappointed at the outcome.

"This vote will not kill off the campaign to protect our best food-producing land. Local farming communities and the Greens will now redouble our efforts to protect these rich, productive soils from mining," Ms Rhiannon said.

The Safeguarding Agricultural Land and Water from Mining Bill aims to protect prime agricultural land, and the rivers and aquifers that feed that land, from mining.

"Amid fiery debate between MPs, around thirty farmers walked out of the public gallery, shouting 'Shame! Shame!' while Reverend Nile was speaking. They were responding to claims by Rev Nile that farmers have been duped by the Greens.

"The government today missed the opportunity to recognise that the best food-producing land in NSW is a public asset that should be preserved for the future by law.

"Protecting prime farming land is critical because the world is facing the prospect of increasing food insecurity and decreasing harvests as a result of climate change.

"The road block to quarantining valuable agriculture land from mining is the NSW government which has been captured by the mining industry.

"The government pocketed $99 million from BHP Billiton and $300 million from China Shenhua to explore the Liverpool Plains areas.

"Windfalls from mining have blinded the government to the big picture issues of food security and climate change.

"The NSW Shooters Party also deserted farmers today to support the government in opposing this bill. Only yesterday the government allowed the Shooters to introduce their private members bill to expand hunting in NSW.

"Was this a deal? We will never know," Ms Rhiannon said.

Update from "The Land": Battle lost to miners but farmers dig in on land use war

Normal service will resume......

2009-06-03T14:41:00.000-07:00

Sorry I haven't posted recently, been housemoving to my own little shack in the country (does a half acre block count as "acreage"?), once I've finished unpacking and getting myself organised I'll get posting again. In the meantime feel free to say hello (especially if you're good looking and female).

Carbon Capture and Sequestration Bwahahahaha!

2009-04-24T19:39:00.000-07:00

I'm sure I've posted somewhere before on my thoughts on CCS, for those who don't know CCS is where Carbon Dioxide is captured at power plants, compressed into a liquid form and pumped underground. Now there's a huge number of reasons I think this is a bad idea, the energy used to do it, the volume needed to store enough to make a difference and the potential for some very serious shit to happen should it leak (Lake Nios anyone?) and certainly the technology isn't available and unlikely to be ready anytime soon (even if it could work).

Now personally I'd be much happier living a couple of kilometres above nuclear waste than I would over highly compressed CO2.

The Sydney Morning Herald has a good story today:

Mining stalwart sees no future in carbon plan

Paddy Manning, Sustainable InvestingApril 25, 2009

Kevin Rudd should meet Graham Brown before he decides to spend billions of dollars on carbon capture and storage. A coalminer for more than 20 years, Brown retired in 2007 and is happy to call a spade a bloody shovel.

Brown, 57, has his own theory on why good money is being wasted on a technology very few have faith in.

Brown, from the Hunter Valley, originally worked in the construction industry, in open-cut and underground coalmines, including for Rio Tinto and BHP Billiton.

He is a staunch unionist but does not toe the corporate line on CCS parroted by officials from the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union.

Brown's main motivation is to see his former colleagues retrained to be able to exit a fading coal industry. He joined the NSW Greens after meeting state MP Lee Rhiannon, who said the party's policy was to make the transition to a clean energy economy with no job losses.
Brown is not a politician and does not want to be one. But he is active locally and takes any opportunity to speak on the transition away from coal.

Last year he took part in a Greenpeace blockade of the Eraring power station, and attracted media attention as one of a handful of miners sympathetic to the action.

"I'm not the only one in the mining industry," Brown says. "There's quite a few and they're coming on board all the time. The blokes in the industry, they're fully aware that there's a problem with burning the coal. They're interested in where they fit into the situation."

Brown is not funded by anyone. He gets a kick out of putting some of the retirement savings he earned from mining back into the cause.

I saw Brown speak at a climate change rally in Sydney in November and was struck by his denunciation of CCS. He says most people working at the coalface know CCS is "just not do-able".

"In the beginning there wasn't a lot of view either way on it but now, because it's been going so long, a lot of the blokes are up to speed on it and they are fully aware that it's nonsense. It's never going to get off the ground. The technology's so expensive that it's not going to be economical."

The main problem is the sheer volume of carbon dioxide that needs to be captured and stored. It is hard to visualise. Brown explains it this way: for every tonne of coal burnt there is 2.5 to 2.7 tonnes of CO2 to store. How big is a tonne of CO2? About 500 cubic metres, as a gas at sea level at room temperature.

Now say coal-fired power stations in Australia emit 100 million tonnes of CO2 each year. The Government hopes CCS will trap 20 per cent of those emissions. If the gas is compressed 500 times, that is about 20 million tonnes a year.

Transporting 20 million tonnes of highly compressed gas is no mean feat. "Look at the infrastructure that needs to be in place to get 80 million tonnes of coal to port," says Brown. "Moving gas is a different kettle of fish to moving coal, I can tell you, because it's got to be stored in an intrinsically safe way - either pipe or trucks or trains".

Where to put it all? Brown says there is really only one place where significant volumes of CO2 can be stored - the Cooper Basin in South Australia, where Santos recently shelved a $700 million CCS project. If that project were revived, Brown says it has been calculated that we would need a B-double lorry carrying six tonnes of CO2 leaving NSW for the Cooper Basin every 20 seconds to store 20 per cent of emissions from the state's power industry.

Then there is the problem of getting the stored CO2 into the ground or, even harder, beneath the sea floor. "You really need a mining industry to get it into the ground," says Brown. "And that's going to create more CO2."

There is also the risk of leakage, made worse by the increase in underground temperatures. "You're talking about a lot of pressure, and there's heaps of cracks. It's only got to come out through a slow leak and it's all for nothing.

"The second you put it into the ground, the more it will expand. If you're going to put it a kilometre underground where the temperature might be 65 degrees Centigrade, it's going to expand a monstrous amount. And that in itself will be the big mechanism where the rocks will crack.

"They can put it in there but whether it will stay there is another thing. I've pointed that out - others have too - and it's not long before people start nodding their head and laughing because they understand that it's not possible."

Brown says CCS is a no-brainer. "It just doesn't cut the ice any more. Most people know that it's a furphy." Brown says the coal companies know it too and until late last year, put little of their money into CCS. "They're not wasting money on it. They're just taking what they can from the Federal Government, and saying 'thank you very much'."

Their main interest is in ramping up extraction of coal-seam gas, Brown says. "Any kind of drilling technology that will be used to try and get this gas down, is also going to be reversed, to be able to be used to mine the carbon qualities of the coal in situ.

"They're having the taxpayer supply a lot of money for that research. They should be doing it themselves. They're going to piggyback on all this carbon capture and storage stuff and they will use that technology for their own benefit.

"It's not a matter of being solely for that but the coal companies already know that research needs to be done to get the gas out, and they will certainly use it if it's available. They might be greedy and they might have deep pockets, but they're not stupid."

For Brown, it means more job losses down the track. "If they can get the methane out of the coal seams, or convert the gas to hydrogen, without having to mine the coal, they'll use that gas and will hardly have to employ anyone."

What really annoys Brown is the attitude of officials at the CFMEU, in particular general president of the mining and energy division, Tony Maher.

He has lined up with coal companies and is backing CCS rather than focusing on retraining workers to get jobs in the green-collar economy.

"Tony Maher made some statements in Newcastle two years ago. I've got them on tape. In a submission to Newcastle council, he called the transition away from the coal industry to anything else the 'geriatric solution'. He made a statement we are by and large too old, and our skill base from the start is too low, to be trained in anything else, insinuating that we should stay in the coal industry because that's all we're good for.

"I played that tape to some of the blokes at work and I can tell you they weren't real happy with Tony, basically calling them untrainable boneheads.

"They didn't like it at all .. We can be trained in anything. Who do you think maintains the equipment in the mining industry? Doesn't he know that a lot of the truck drivers and plant operators are actually some sort of a tradesman? We definitely have the skills base.

"And who does he think is going to do the work in the renewable energy industry, and other industries as well, because statistics in Europe - and a study by Greenpeace on the Central Coast of NSW - show that there's six times more jobs in the transition away from coal than there is in it.

"I think we should be gunning for it. We definitely have the skills and he didn't do a very good service to his members. I don't see why miners should be thrown on the scrap heap by a bloody coal company. There should be a mechanism to let them flow on to other jobs."
paddy.manning@fairfaxmedia.com.au

So why do we keep throwing good money after bad? When are our planetary dynamic duo Wong & Garrett going to actually do something? Well anything really?

I'm back!

2009-04-24T19:34:00.000-07:00

Sorry I've been far too quiet of late but there's been far too much buying houses, riding motorcycles, drinking beer and watching medieval battle going on but normal service will resume....... well sometime.

"...the truth? WE CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"

2009-04-01T00:09:00.000-07:00

Didn't know whether to shake my head or laugh when I read this over at abc news, seems someone should tell Joe Tripodi that coal IS a non renewable resource and digging it out of the ground tends to more or less fuck up the area:

Anger at Rudd's adviser over coal comments

The New South Wales Government has questioned the impartiality of a top-level Commonwealth adviser after he raised concerns about a planned expansion of Newcastle's coal facilities.

Infrastructure Australia Advisory Board member Professor Peter Newman says the damage caused by coal will increase dramatically if Newcastle's port facilities are doubled.

Professor Newman has also questioned the credentials of "clean coal" technology.
"Coal is not a renewable resource, it's the major source of climate change emissions," he said. "A long-term future around increases in coal would be a mistake."

NSW Ports Minister Joe Tripodi says he now has serious reservations about Professor Newman's ability to be impartial.

"Mr Newman needs to decide whether he can comfortably meet his obligations," he said. "We need to remind him to not allow his personal views to affect his obligations."

The NSW Minerals Council is also concerned but NSW Greens MP Lee Rhiannon has welcomed the comments, saying they could mark a turning point in the way governments treat the coal industry.

"They now have the experts giving them clear advice," she said. "They need to come forward with a planned transition program, particularly for areas like the Hunter with a long reliance on the coal industry. The writing is on the wall. It is going to change."

Professor Newman has refused to say if he would consider stepping down from the Infrastructure Australia board.

More than $1 billion is being spent expanding Newcastle's Coal loading facilities.

More commentary on the Victorian Bushfires

2009-03-30T16:28:00.000-07:00

Andrew Campbell, former Executive Director of Land and Water Australia has written about the Victorian Bushfires and pretty much makes the same points (although more eloquently) as I previously have. Glad to know I'm not alone.

Pee on a Tree Day update.

2009-03-28T17:53:00.000-07:00

In response to much (well one) questioning, those who are a little embarassed about going out in the open and peeing on a tree go and find yourself a composting toilet or long drop. There problem solved now get back out there and tell people.

Place your bets...

2009-03-28T14:52:00.000-07:00

I had to laugh when I read this headline:

Garrett opposed to Kimberley gas plant: Oils drummer

In the article former bandmate Rob Hirst claims Peter Garrett won't allow the contentious Kimberly gas plant to go ahead, yeah right! In his time as Environment Minister Garrett has approved Gunns paper mill in Tasmania, a huge water desalination plant in Victoria, the McArthur River mine extension and of course he's done bugger all for the whales and that's just for starters.

So who's prepared to put money on him stopping the Kimberley gas plant?

June 25th International Pee on a Tree Day!

2009-03-28T14:32:00.000-07:00

I've just declared it, see my rantings about Earth Hour below.

Earth Hour! What a load of crap!

2009-03-28T13:54:00.000-07:00

Hi all, sorry it's been so long since I've posted but I'm back and I'm fiesty so here goes.

So did anyone turn their lights off for "Earth Hour" last night? Turn your lights off for an hour and save the planet? What a load of shit, 20 years of "awareness rasing" and this is the best we can come up with a counterproductive feelgood excercise.

Lets face it do you really think those coal powered turbines were shut down for an hour while you lit up your house with (most likely non renewable parafin wax) candles? Honestly the whole thing does a whole three parts of fuck all to reduce the problem and and will do very little to achieve Kevin Rudd's piss poor five percent reduction.

No doubt people will say I'm being too cynical and it's all about "awareness raising", this has been going on for the past twenty years and the best we can come up with is to turn the lights off and hide in the dark? (which somehow seems quite appropriate)

Wanna help the planet? Pee on a tree. Seriously, you'd save around five to ten litres of water a flush (well ok I should check that one), you'd save the energy used in collecting, treating, transporting and treating again. So if we can get a million peeple (spelling intended) to pee on a tree rather then flush it down the drain we'll save 5-10 million litres of water and the attendant energy use.

Y'know what? That's not such a silly idea, why not a national, no sorry International Pee on a Tree Day? If we make it June 25th that gives us two months, right, who's in? I know there's people who read this blog, surely one or two of you think this is a good idea and have some sort of creative ability? This could get really big and it'd really piss off those Earth Hourers (sorry just had to do that). We need logo's slogans, stickers, publicity.... Today the lemon tree, tomorrow the world!

Last comment on the Victorian Fires (for now anyway)

2009-03-09T00:43:00.000-07:00

As I mentioned the recent Victorian bushfires took place under some fairly extreme conditions, the Bureau of Meteorology put out a statement on the prevailing conditions on the 12th of February which makes for some very worrying reading: read it here

The Trouble with Humans.

2009-03-06T18:54:00.000-08:00

A couple of things about you humans is that you love simple one size fits all answers and when things go wrong you want to find a scapegoat to blame (see my previous posting "The Blame Game"). In the wake of the Victorian bushfires there have been the inevitable calls for more hazard reduction burning, wide firebreaks around towns and settlements (hence negating the reason many people moved there in the first place but I'm digressing) as the one size fits all panacea. Unfortunately unless you blacken every hectare, every year you will still have fires and more than likely loss of life and property.

I went through Victoria last weekend and while I did avoid my usual route which would have taken me right through the middle of the burnt zone I did go through some burnt area along the Hume Highway to the North of Melbourne. I didn't take any photos of the burnt area (just didn't feel right) but took some up the road and the following I think are pretty instructive:

The above images are fairly typical of what the ground around the Broadford area would have been like prior to the fires, what the photos show are the relatively low amount of fuel available to burn and the very dry conditions prevailing at the time. Under normal circumstances a fire in this fuel load is fairly easy to suppress, reading the burnt out area showed the conditions were far from normal. The low level of ash in some areas indicated the grass had been eaten to ground level but still burnt out, many of the trees and shrubs along the freeway show scorch to only around 30-50 cm and the tops of many low shrubs (1-2m) didn't burn indicating a very fast moving fire running along the ground for most part pushed along by high winds. Firebreaks (such as the highway) were ineffective, fuel level was already quite low and it would have been absolutely horrendous to be there trying to control it.

When we hear calls for more fuel reduction in this case certainly we need to ask just how much more could it possibly be reduced? There is a role for hazard reduction (and ecological) burns and under normal circumstances they are quite effective (and as someone who has had around 20 years of bushfirefighting experience I do know a little about it) but under extreme circumstances they're often little but a momentary lull.

The Blame Game.

2009-02-14T20:37:00.000-08:00

It was inevitable the blame game would start quickly and it was also inevitable that it would be "the greenies" who would be blamed for the tragic bushfires in Victoria, it was also inevitable that the armchair experts wouldn't identify which particular "greenies" they were nor would proof be offered as to what it was "the greenies" did. But all that doesn't matter but finding someone to blame and pointing the finger is all that really matters here, there's no point whatsoever letting the facts get in the way of rabble rousing.

I just posted the following on a forum I frequent and to save retyping I've shamelessly copied and pasted my own work, it will probably give you a better insight into things than perusing the daily fishwrappers:

Had a quick skim of this report: http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/imag ... report.pdf, one of the things which caught my eye is that a fire intensity of greater than 3500W/m2 is regarded as uncontrollable. A fuel load of roughly 500g/m2 under a Forest Fire Danger Index (FFDI) of 100 put out this sort of energy. That's a very low fuel load conditions last weekend in Victoria led to a FFDI of 300, which is fairly unheard of (at least not in those areas anyway), under those conditions fire on a dry lawn is pretty well uncontrollable (and I have seen conditions like that). Unless you've got a completely scorched earth under those conditions any fire will be difficult, if not impossible to control.

Another factor is that many areas where the fires have burnt are dominated by Wet Schlerophyll Forest, what this means is that there's a Eucalypt overstory but the under and mid story are dominated by rainforest plants and while there is a lot of growth and vegetation in there it is generally too moist to burn in anything other than small patches. The only way to get it to burn is for it to dry out, on the rare occassions it does dry out the fuel load is very high which means that there will be a high intensity fire.

Hazard reduction is useful, however it only a reduction of the hazard and not an elimination of it, it's quite possible for an area to have a hazard reduction burn in winter or spring and still carry an intense fire later in the summer. This was the case of the January 1994 fires in Port Stephens, a fire started on the side of the road (probably from some idiot tossing out a ciggie butt) where the Water Board had carried out a hazard reduction the previous winter, the first tanker was there only minutes after it started, it was very low humidity, high winds and temperature in the high 30's. I was on the first truck there, under normal circumstances with the short time taken to get there and the low fuel load we'd have gotten in out in a few minutes.

Under the conditions of the time it quickly jumped the road into tall heath and it was off. A few days later when we thought we had the fire just about locked away we got our morning weather report predicting temperatures in the low-mid 40's, high westerly winds and humidity of 8% (I found out later humidity had gotten to zero), just after lunch it went off. Areas we thought we'd secured a couple of days beforehand (backburning, full mop ups) had the fire go through again, we heard the fire, we saw the fire, got choked by the smoke and the front had passed us, a very terrifying 30 seconds or so.

I would imagine there'd be worse stories to tell from the Victorian fires, if you want somewhere to be fully fireproof that's easy, concrete everything within a 2 kilometre radius and have no plants whatsoever in your garden, if you want to live in areas surrounded by bush then you have to accept that there is a good chance there will be fires and manage and plan accordingly. With the whole "tree change" thing there are many people moving into these areas with no experience of fires, no knowledge of the precautions needed. But unfortunatelly under extreme conditions, extreme things happen and sometimes no matter how well you prepare it may not be enough.

A response to "Catch the Fire Ministries" excreble media release.

2009-02-13T16:43:00.000-08:00

A friend of mine tried to post a response to Danny Nalliah's media release blaming Victoria's abortion laws for being the cause of the bushfires. Unsurprisingly it wasn't published, so with his permission I'll post it here (Thanks Col.).

Indeed it is wise of God to allow the death of children to show indignation at the death of children. Then again there is a bit of history in this type of thinking:

Abortion:

Hosea 9:11-16 Hosea prays for God’s intervention. “Ephraim shall bring forth his children to the murderer. Give them, 0 Lord: what wilt thou give? Give them a miscarrying womb and dry breasts. . .Ephraim is smitten, their root is dried up, they shall bear no fruit: yea though they bring forth, yet will I slay even the beloved fruit of their womb.” Clearly Hosea desires that the people of Ephraim can no longer have children. God of course obeys by making all their unborn children miscarry. Is not terminating a pregnancy unnaturally “abortion”?

Numbers 5:11-21 The description of a bizarre, brutal and abusive ritual to be performed on a wife SUSPECTED of adultery. This is considered to be an induced abortion to rid a woman of another man’s child.

Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus.

Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”. Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers.

2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong?

Infanticide:

1 Samuel 15:3 God commands the death of helpless "suckling" infants. This literally means that the children god killed were still nursing.

Psalms 135:8 & 136:10 Here god is praised for slaughtering little babies.

Psalms 137:9 Here god commands that infants should be “dashed upon the rocks”.

The murdering of children:

Leviticus 20:9 “For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.”

Judges 11:30-40 Jephthah killed his young daughter (his only child) by burning her alive as a burnt sacrifice to the lord for he commanded it.

Psalms 137:8-9 Prayer/song of vengeance “0 daughter of Babylon, who art to be destroyed; happy shall he be that rewardeth thee as thou hast served us. Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.”

2 Kings 6:28-29 “And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him today, and we will eat my son tomorrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath hid her son.”

Deuteronomy 21:18-21 “If a man have a stubborn and rebellious son, which will not obey the voice of his father, or the voice of his mother, and that, when they have chastened him, will not hearken unto them: Then shall his father and his mother lay hold on him, and bring him out unto the elders of his city, and unto the gate of his place; And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones, that he die: so shalt thou put evil away from among you; and all Israel shall hear, and fear.”

Judges 19:24-29 “Behold, here is my daughter a maiden, and his concubine; them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you: but unto this man do not so vile a thing. But the men would not hearken to him: so the man took his concubine, and brought her forth unto them; and they knew her, and abused her all the night until the morning: and when the day began to spring, they let her go. Then came the woman in the dawning of the day, and fell down at the door of the man’s house where her lord was, till it was light. And her lord rose up in the morning, and opened the doors of the house, and went out to go his way: and behold, the woman his concubine was fallen down at the door of the house, and her hands were upon the threshold. And he said unto her, Up, and let us be going. But none answered. Then the man took her up upon an ass, and the man rose up, and gat him unto his place. And when he was come into his house, he took a knife, and laid hold on his concubine, and divided her, together with her bones, into twelve pieces, and sent her into all the coasts of Israel.” To put it very bluntly this poor, young lady was murdered by her mate for being raped.

Exodus 12:29 God killed, intentionally, every first-born child of every family in Egypt, simply because he was upset at the Pharaoh. And god caused the Pharaoh’s actions in the first place. Since when is it appropriate to murder children for their ruler’s forced action?

Exodus 20:9-10 God commands death for cursing out ones parents Joshua 8 God commanded the deaths of 12,000 men, women, and children of Ai. They were all slain in the ambush that was planned by god.

2 Kings 2:23-24 The prophet Elisha, was being picked on by some young boys from the city because of his bald head. The prophet turned around and cursed them in the Lords name. Then, two female bears came out of the woods and killed forty-two of them. You would think that God could understand that sometimes the youthful make childish jokes. Calling someone “bald head” is far from being worthy of death.

Leviticus 26:30 “And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat.”

1 Samuel 15:11-18 God repents of having made Saul king since Saul refused to carry out God’s commandments (i.e., Saul refused to murder all the innocent women and children.) At least god realizes what an immoral, murderous pig he is on this one.

I Kings 16:34 Laying the foundation for a city using your firstborn child and using your youngest son to set up the gates.

Isaiah 13:15-18 If God can find you, he will “thrust you through,” smash your children “to pieces” before your eyes, and rape your wife.

Jeremiah 11:22-23 God will kill the young men in war and starve their children to death.

Jeremiah 19:7-9 God will make parents eat their own children, and friends eat each other.

Lamentations 2:20-22 God gets angry and mercilessly torments and kills everyone, young and old. He even causes women to eat their children.

Utterly Contemptible

2009-02-10T01:23:00.000-08:00

Words cannot describe the contempt in which I hold this idiot. What's even worse is the support his followers are giving him. SMH story here.

Victorian Bushfire Relief Appeal Links

2009-02-09T23:48:00.000-08:00

All on the one page: http://www.ourcommunity.com.au/bushfirehelp

Victorian Bushfires

2009-02-09T00:10:00.000-08:00

Geoscience Australia's "Sentinel" bushfire monitoring site has, not surprisingly, failed to keep up with demand however, they have some images available of where the fires are:

http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC1.shtml
http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC2.shtml
http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC3.shtml
http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC4.shtml
http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC6.shtml
http://sentinel.ga.gov.au/Overview/VIC7.shtml

I'll write longer about the fires at a later stage.

The Smithsonian's Avian Forensics Lab.

2009-01-25T12:42:00.000-08:00

The New York Times has a very interesting article (to me at least) on the Smithsonian Institute's Feather Identification Lab, their main work is in identifying what species of bird managed to get sucked into an aeroplane engine. As you can imagine they wouldn't have much to work with so it gets down to feathers, DNA and bird guts. Once they've identified the bird they can then make management recommendations for the airport to avoid similar impacts.

(oh and for one of those names suiting the occupation things, one of the scientists working there is a Dr Dove)

Maggie Thatcher: Environmental Hero. Yes "that" one and yes I am serious.

2009-01-22T18:58:00.000-08:00

Ok I admit it, I usually lean to the left on most political issues and tend to regard the right of politics with slightly more distrust than what is laughingly referred to as the "left" (personally I'm of the opinion that the last proper socialist Prime Minister we had in this country was Malcolm Fraser - and I know a few thinking lefties that agree with me). But having said that I do have a policy of giving credit where credit is due and despite having some major difference with her economic and social policies I do have to admit that following her conversion former British Pime Minister Maggie Thatcher was a very good environmental advocate. In fact if you really want to upset a climate skeptic, tell them it was Maggie and not Al Gore who was pushing all this.

Margaret Thatcher was probably one of the first prominant politicians in recent times to start talking about environmental issues. Despite being slow to initially come around to seeing the problems of chlorflourocarbons on the ozone layer....

".........when British scientists were able in 1988 to bring the ozone issue personally before Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who had an academic degree in chemistry, the U.K. position changed almost overnight and the British thereafter became a leading proponent of phaseout for all ozone-depleting substances."

The change was so rapid that in a September 1988 speech to the Royal Society she was warning of the dangers of global warming, ozone depletion and acid deposition, the latter two are no longer contentious. Thatcher studied chemistry at Oxford University which gave her the knowledge to analyse the information put to her and realise the issues were real and helped her understand the real issues. Even now that influence continues in the British Conservative Party with the Tories quite rightly pressing the Labor Party for not doing enough, totally the opposite situation to here in Australia.

It is a sad fact of life that scientists are rarely drawn to go into politics with parliament tending to being filled with lawyers, accountants, bankers and union officials (on both sides of the house).

Indonesia, I take it back.

2009-01-20T17:32:00.000-08:00

Well it did sound too good to be true. I wonder if this year the Japanese will prove definitively that firing an explosive harpoon into the head of a whale really does lead to it's death. It's the only possible research they could be doing.

From the ABC

Whaling ship repaired, will resume hunt: Japan
By north Asia correspondent Mark Willacy
Posted Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:26am AEDT Updated Tue Jan 20, 2009 7:25am AEDT
Japan says one of its whaling ships is heading back to Antarctic waters after having repairs done in Indonesia.
Greenpeace had earlier said the ship was returning to Japan.
The Yushin Maru II had made a port call in Indonesia to repair a broken propeller, and despite reports that the whaling ship was refused permission to dock Japan's fisheries agency says the ship has been fixed and is now heading back to Antarctic waters.
Greenpeace said last week that the ship had abandoned the hunt. Activists from the Sea Shepherd conservation group had confronted the Yushin Maru II on open seas, bombarding the whaling ship with tubs of rancid butter.
Japan has accused the group of eco terrorism.

So it's not just me? Well that's a relief!

2009-01-17T14:53:00.000-08:00

You may have noticed over there -----> that I've put a counter up for the purposes of seeing if I'm just talking to myself or not. And it appears I'm not, so that's one less reason to doubt my sanity (there's still a great long list though).

Oh and feel free to say "hello" if any of this is at all interesting.

Good onya Indonesia!

2009-01-16T19:39:00.000-08:00

Now Indonesia cops a bit of criticism for all sorts of things but in the spirit of giving credit where it is due (I might even do a friendly posting on Maggie Thatcher sometime) I must congratulate them on their decision not to allow a Japanese "scientific" whaling ship to dock for repairs. Lets just hope they don't give in to the inevitable political pressure the Japanese government is likely to apply.

From the ABC.

Indonesia refuse repairs for Japanese whaling ship
By Indonesia correspondent Geoff Thompson
Posted Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:38pm AEDT Updated Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:37pm AEDT

Authorities in Indonesia have complied with requests from Australian conservation groups to stop a Japanese whaling ship from being repaired in a Surabaya port.
The damaged Japanese whaling ship the Yushin Maru 2 has avoided attempting to dock in Australian ports because its crew fears prosecution under an Australian Federal Court order, says the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society.
The Yushin Maru 2 has been seeking to be repaired in East Java at Surabaya's state-owned shipyard.
But following requests from anti-whaling organisations in Australia, port authorities in Surabaya have refused to allow the Yushin Maru 2 to be repaired there.
Indonesia's foreign affairs spokesman Teuku Faizasyah says the Australian Government made no formal request to deny port access to the Japanese whaling ship.

Another Damn Act of Political Bastardry

2009-01-16T15:47:00.000-08:00

Using the principle of there being no point in having power unless you abuse it this week the New South Wales state government declared (it starts at page 131, interesting the Huntlee development at Cessnock has been declared as well, so why do we have local government if the state does all the approvals?) the Tillegra Dam to be "Critical Infrastructure" under Part 3a of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. This means that public input into the process is limited and there's no right of appeal, it also means approval is in the hands of the Minister for Planning.

Now as we've seen State Government aren't putting any money into it, the Central Coast (for whom the announcement was originally directed) isn't putting any money into it and neither are developers so it's all going to fall back onto ratepayers in the lower Hunter to finance the $400 million or so project. As well as this it means Dungog Council is going to lose rates revenue meaning they'll be even harder pressed to provide services for ratepayers (and those of us who pass through every now and then), like, umm, better roads, they're already in a shocking condition in many spots and are bound to get worse (another earlier post here).

Now while doing a little background googling for this post I found an interesting page for the modelling of how the whole thing would look, which despite my thoughts on the matter looked pretty cool and then I read down and found this:

"When Hunter Water Australia and the NSW premier's department approached Arterra, the company was given only three days to produce visualizations. The problem was how to create quality visualizations within such a tight timeframe................
...............The end products were provided to the media (television and press) at the announcement of Tillegra dam funding."

Indicating pretty much what we already knew that it was a rush job designed to shore up votes in the last state election.

Journalistic Claptrap!

2009-01-09T20:24:00.000-08:00

Over at the Dilly Telegraph (sorry Daily Telegraph) we're seeing a great example of piss poor journalism, it starts off like this:

NASA tells Barack Obama Australia is destroying earth with coal emissions

Now NASA never said anything of the sort, go a little further into the article you'll see:

AUSTRALIA'S use of coal and carbon emissions policies are guaranteeing the "destruction of much of the life on the planet", a leading NASA scientist has written in a letter to Barack Obama.

The head of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, Professor James Hansen, has written an open letter to Barack Obama calling for a moratorium on coal-fired power stations and the use of next-generation nuclear power.

In the letter he says: "Australia exports coal and sets atmospheric carbon dioxide goals so large as to guarantee destruction of much of the life on the planet."

So we've already seen a bullshit headline designed to stir up the masses and sell newspapers and now it looks like Hansen is using the letter to attack Australia (well if that doesn't stir people into a patriotic frenzy - and sell more fishwrappers - nothing will). But what did Hansen really say? Well with about 30 seconds on "the google" we can find Hansens letter. You'll need to scroll down a bit as there's various notes and other bits of correspondence there but when you do you'll eventually find:

The physics of the matter, together with empirical data, also define the need for a carbon tax. Alternatives such as emission reduction targets, cap and trade, cap and dividend, do not work, as proven by honest efforts of the ‘greenest’ countries to comply with the Kyoto Protocol:

(1) Japan: accepted the strongest emission reduction targets, appropriately prides itself on having the most energy-efficient industry, and yet its use of coal has sharply increased, as have its total CO2 emissions. Japan offset its increases with purchases of credits through the clean development mechanism in China, intended to reduce emissions there, but Chinese emissions increased rapidly.

(2) Germany: subsidizes renewable energies heavily and accepts strong emission reduction targets, yet plans to build a large number of coal-fired power plants. They assert that they will have cap-and-trade, with a cap that reduces emissions by whatever amount is needed. But the physics tells us that if they continue to burn coal, no cap can solve the problem, because of the long carbon dioxide lifetime.

(3) Other cases are described on my Columbia University web site, e.g., Switzerland finances construction of coal plants, Sweden builds them, and Australia exports coal and sets atmospheric carbon dioxide goals so large as to guarantee destruction of much of the life on the planet.

Indeed, ‘goals’ and ‘caps’ on carbon emissions are practically worthless, if coal emissions continue, because of the exceedingly long lifetime of carbon dioxide in the air. Nobody realistically expects that the large readily available pools of oil and gas will be left in the ground. Caps will not cause that to happen – caps only slow the rate at which the oil and gas are used. The only solution is to cut off the coal source (and unconventional fossil fuels).

So did you see it? (You should've I put it in bold for you) One line, hardly a letter bagging just Australia, it sticks the boot into many other countries. And as for our carbon dioxide goals well Kevin 05 has figured a 5% cut is good enough which will do nothing to reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere so technically the statement is right.

And the letter is signed:

James and Anniek Hansen
Pennsylvania
United States of America

He and his (I'm presuming, I couldn't be bothered searching) wife have signed it as private citizens, not as the head of NASA's Goddard Institue nor as a Professor from Columbia University, so NASA hasn't told Barack that Australia is destroying the earth. More hard hitting factual journalism brought to you by the Dilly Telegraph.

From the front.

2009-01-04T17:16:00.000-08:00

I've previously mentioned the actions by the locals opposed to coal mining on the Liverpool Plains. I was out that way last week and took a couple of pics. Their website here, good luck guys.

An Open Letter to Fred Nile.

2009-01-02T11:42:00.000-08:00

New South Wales politician Fred Nile has been feeling a little neglected of late so has decided to stir things up by calling for a ban on topless bathing (supposedly for the sake of Muslims and Asians that want to go to the beach, which is a little hypocritical considering some of his statements about Mulims in the past), I wish I could claim credit for the following letter but credit where credit is due my old mate Drunkwombat is responsible for the following (reprinted with permission - Thanks DW):

A letter to Reverend Fred Nile MLC

G’day Fred, me ol’ China!

Haven’t heard from you for ages! I thought you’d dropped off the perch when you were trying to get the Dykes on Bikes off the road because they were a traffic hazard! Times flies when you’re having fun eh?

So it was of great surprise to hear you trying to protect the muslims and the asians from the sheer terror of women topless sunbathing at Bondi Beach. I know it must be hard for them to deal with all that ‘uncovered meat’ as they so eloquently put it. I mean, how does a man have the will and fortitude to walk past a half naked woman on a beach and NOT rape her? The male adult population of this fine land seem to be able to saunter by without barely a glance (well, maybe just a little one!) with no problems at all, but ever considerate busybodies like yourself insist on knowing whats good for the rest of us.

The women folk who choose to sunbathe topless are obviously comfortable with the situation, other wise they wouldn’t do it. Right? Tan lines are far worse, obviously, than being perved on.

So, Freddy, what’s bothering you? Really? Get right down to it.I know; you were walking around Kirribilli House and found John Howard’s old DOG WHISTLE, didn’t you? After giving it a few little peeps, you thought you’d try and stick it to all those liberal minded, free thinking left wing pinkos. I can imagine your little internal dialogue now “Oh yes, when the perverts say they don’t want topless sunbathing banned I’ll cunningly reply that you are a bunch of Cronulla type beach racists and then they’ll be stuffed! Hooray for me !!!”

Sorry Fred, me old mate. A decade of Howardism has left us with finely tuned ears for this kind of wedge politics. At least ol Johnny could get away with it on occasion. You, you old git, can’t It must be hard these days, being a man of the cloth. Hard to get a crowd of paying punters for your Sunday morning magic show and sing along. But when people evolve and develop the ability to think for themselves and not feel guilty about everyday activities, getting up early on a Sunday for a dose of scaremongering just didn’t cut it anymore. Especially when you’re coming down of a gut full of rum and disco biscuits.

So Fred, chill the fuck out okay! Get them Christians that are your supporters and go do something genuinely good, like help poor and sick people (which, if you read the fine print is ‘company policy’ for you God botherer types) If Allah don’t surf, that’s his problem. I wouldn’t go to Riyadh and demand I can run around with no pants, because I would respect the local customs (and they’d probably shoot me). C’mon Fred, put your feet up. CHILLAX MAN!

Yours SincerelyTim (aka Drunkwombat)Dungog

PS-If I’ve offended you, do the Christian thing: Forgive me.

More on Tillegra Dam

2008-12-26T18:08:00.000-08:00

Greg Ray over at the Herald has a good piece on the farce that is the Tillegra Dam project.

Central Coast and Tillegra
23/12/2008 9:18:00 AM
IT is beyond doubt that water supply authorities on the Central Coast wanted Tillegra Dam to be built.

The coast's WaterPlan 2050, its blueprint for long-term water security, lists the dam as the first among a range of options to drought-proof the region.

By unexpectedly announcing the dam in November 2006, when the coast's drought was dire and reserves were under 15 per cent, the NSW Government was giving the Central Coast what it wanted and playing good politics in the lead-up to an election.

For some months the Hunter had been piping large amounts of water to the coast but there were limits to what it could supply. Tillegra, previously considered a future option if Hunter water demand grew vigorously, promised to remove those limits, drought-proofing both regions for many, many decades.

Now, however, the Central Coast has changed its mind.

Gosford Mayor Chris Holstein has conceded that Tillegra was the coast's preferred option, but this changed in May 2007 when the Federal Government also in election mode unexpectedly promised $80 million to build a pipeline from the Wyong River to the Central Coast's Mangrove Creek Dam.

The pipeline made Tillegra redundant from the coast's point of view, especially since coast users would have been paying top dollar for Tillegra water.

Having trumpeted the Central Coast benefits when it announced the dam, the State Government is now shrugging off the Central Coast's change of heart, promising the marginal seat voters that they won't have to pay a penny towards Tillegra.

Not only that, the Government's decision to exempt property developers from contributing to the dam's cost through levies means Hunter Water's budget for the project is up in the air.

The only option left to finance Tillegra is to crank up the water bills of existing Hunter Water customers who are already facing a massive increase in bills over the next four years.

This hardly seems fair. At the time the dam was announced it was clear that the Central Coast was intended to be a beneficiary. If the coast hadn't been in drought it is debatable whether the announcement would have occurred.

The Government helped make this mess and it should not leave Hunter residents to clean up on their own.

So when is the State Government and Hunter Water going to call off this expensive farce? Lower Hunter residents have been milked ever since the user pays system came in (though there's nothing wrong with the user pays system just where the money ends up) and look like being hit again. I'm just glad I'm not in Hunter Water's juristiction, that and I'm soon to move somewhere with around 50 000 litres of water storage (and only needing 100-150mm of rain to fill them).

As has been pointed out it would be cheaper to install rainwater tanks at every house in Hunter Water's area.

And now for some good news: Motorcycles save the world!

2008-12-12T16:32:00.000-08:00

Well not entirely but it does tie together a couple of my major interests.

Stolen from here.

Retrofitting for the environment

Every day at dawn, Angel Raqueno gets on his motorised tricycle with its shaky side-car and criss-crosses the narrow paved streets of Vigan, a small, picturesque tourist city 400 kilometres north of Manila, capital of the Philippines. Long ago, he had begun studying electronics, but he gave it up to take up taxi-driving to support his family. For the past 18 years, he has driven passengers through the city’s 39 barangays (districts) ten hours a day, six days a week. But, for Raqueno, worse than the long hours on the road is the blueish smoke emitted by the 3,000 other tricycles providing transport for tourists and locals around this 16th-century architectural gem: if you are stuck in traffic behind one of these vehicles, the air is almost unbreathable.

According to the 2006 Philippine Environment Monitor published by the World Bank, atmospheric pollution causes 15,000 deaths in the country every year. Related health costs represent US$19 million a year, and loss of earnings amount to $134 million. The World Health Organization reports that atmospheric pollution across Asia is responsible for 537,000 deaths a year. The transport sector contributes significantly to this: most of the 100 million tricycles, tuk-tuks, auto-rickshaws and trishaws – symbols of tourism and urban mobility – that clog up Asian cities from New Delhi to Manila are equipped with two-stroke engines – each of them causing as much pollution as 50 cars.

Tim Bauer decided that the solution could be found at the heart of the problem. Since 2006, this 31-year-old American mechanical engineer has been distributing a kit that makes it easy to transform the engines on these vehicles into direct fuel-injection mechanisms, thereby reducing the pollution they produce. Carrying out tests in a laboratory and in Filipino garages for many months, it took him and his team every ounce of ingenuity they could muster to disentangle all the technical, economic and socio-cultural intricacies. The result has earned Tim Bauer a Rolex Award.

In the Philippines, about 1.8 million tricycle drivers have to face appalling traffic conditions for long hours every day in order to transport their passengers on congested thoroughfares, roads flooded by torrential rain or riddled with deep potholes. When neither cars nor buses can get through, a tricycle will always find a way. These all-purpose vehicles provide cheap transport for tourists, but, on a far larger scale, to thousands of people who use them to earn a living, get to work, school, the market or church. “They play an essential role in the social and economic fabric,” Bauer says. “But their impact on public health is disastrous.”
In Europe and the United States, two-stroke engines are relegated to powered grass trimmers and chainsaws. But in the Philippines they are used on 94 per cent of motorcycles; in India, Pakistan and Thailand, the figure is between 50 and 90 per cent. For Tim Bauer, it is easy to see why: “A two-stroke engine is a beautiful thing. It's reliable, robust, powerful and so simple that drivers can repair it themselves, which is very important for people who earn only about $5 daily. But there's a problem: up to 40 per cent of the fuel and oil exit the engine unburned.” This leads to substantial emissions of oxides of carbon, nitrogen and sulphur, hydrocarbons and fine dust, making them one of the main sources of air pollution in the Philippines archipelago.

In 2003, the Filipino government tried to phase out these vehicles and replace them with motorcycles with four-stroke engines, which are less polluting, but cost about $1,500, the equivalent of a tricycle driver’s annual income. The authorities were forced to back down when faced with a general outcry from drivers and the vast network of mechanics and sellers of spare parts depending on them. “The challenge was to find a solution that would allow the drivers to keep their means of subsistence,” says Bauer. “The constraint was thus to keep the two-stroke and start from it.”

The direct injection kit began to take shape in 2000, in the Engines and Energy Conservation Lab – a spin-off of Colorado State University (USA) directed by Professor Bryan Willson – which Tim Bauer joined in 1997 during his mechanical engineering studies. Bauer, then aged 24, and his colleague Nathan Lorenz were leading a team of students in a research project on the application of direct injection to the snowmobiles of Yellowstone National Park. Bauer immediately saw the potential of this technology for reducing polluting emissions and, at the end of his studies in 2004, instead of applying for a more lucrative job in the aerospace industry, he and Lorenz decided to do their utmost to develop a commercially viable product and make it widely available in Asia.

But getting from North American snowmobiles to Filipino tricycles required inventiveness and global awareness. “I became aware of air pollution at an early age,” Bauer remembers. “I lived for some time in Saudi Arabia as a kid, and from there I visited Bangkok and Hong Kong with my parents. This is where I saw and felt two-stroke pollution for the first time. It made a lasting impression on me.”

The ”retrofit” consists of a simple but effective mechanical change. “In a two-stroke, when the piston goes down it uncovers both the exhaust port, where the combustion products are forced, and the fuel and oil intake port. This means that a lot of the oil and fuel mixture is directly washed out in the exhaust stream,” explains Tim Bauer. “In a direct-injection system, fuel is injected into the cylinder later in the cycle, when the exhaust port is closed by the piston, thus greatly reducing the amount of unburned fuel that is allowed to escape.”

The kit can be installed in two to four hours and reduces particulate emissions by roughly 70 per cent and emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) by 76 per cent, hydrocarbons by 89 per cent and carbon dioxide (CO2) by 35 per cent. The kit also eliminates the blueish smoke in the exhaust, and oil consumption is reduced by 50 per cent and petrol consumption by 35 per cent – the equivalent of around 450 litres of petrol a year per kit. This makes the engine cleaner than a simple carburetted four-stroke, and for the driver it means a saving of around $3 a day or over $1,000 a year, almost doubling his salary. This extra income is put to use straight away. “Drivers often give the money to their wife for her to invest – many families have a small convenience store. Or they use it to pay for their children's schooling or studies,” says Tim Bauer.

To keep down the cost of manufacturing the kit – currently $350 – Tim Bauer and Nathan Lorenz used off-the-shelf components: “We have simply adapted as many components as possible from an existing direct-injection system and developed other components (i.e. custom cylinder head, wiring harness, bracketry, etc) that could be used on the most popular motorcycle models in Asia. One-third of the 30 parts of the kit are produced in the Philippines.”

In October 2003, in order to further develop, commercialize and distribute the kit, Bauer and three of his colleagues founded a non-profit organization, Envirofit, which now has over 20 employees, half of them based in the Philippines. In December 2005, Envirofit signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Vigan City Council, thereby gaining its official support. The following year, it published a troubleshooting manual, translated into Tagalog, one of the main languages of the Philippines, and Ilocano, the language spoken in Vigan. Bauer, who travels to the Philippines five times a year, has also organized about 15 training workshops and seminars in Vigan and Puerto Princesa, two seaside tourist cities with no major industry, where tricycles contribute significantly to atmospheric pollution. Twenty or more drivers and mechanics have attended each workshop so far. “We have developed the kit so it is easy to install, even by non-certified mechanics,” Bauer explains. “But we had to convince them that the common idea, according to which the more visible smoke you have, the more powerful your engine is, is wrong. As there is no smoke with the kit, they thought that we were hiding it with some kind of chemicals!”

However, purchasing the kit represents a major investment for a tricycle driver. So Bauer and his team launched a microcredit programme, in collaboration with the Nueva Segovia cooperative bank, which collects repayments on the loans. “Microcredit is essential to ensure a sustainable impact to our action. Drivers earn money daily, so it's easy for them to pay back their loan and 90 per cent of them do it in less than a year.”

By August 2008, more than 260 drivers in Vigan and Puerto Princesa have fitted their taxis with a kit and have driven a total of 5.2 million kilometres. With the funds from his Rolex Award, Bauer now wants to further develop the market in these cities and surrounding regions as a stepping stone to distributing the kit more widely in the Philippines and beyond, particularly Pakistan, India, Indonesia and Sri Lanka where millions of autorickshaws could easily be retrofitted.

Besides the kit, Vigan City Council is exploring other forms of technology to solve its pollution problem, such as tricycles powered by electricity or natural gas. For the moment, however, their price is prohibitive and, according to Bauer, if implemented incorrectly, can potentially shift the problem elsewhere: “Two-strokes can have a lifetime of up to 20 or 30 years. If they’re banished from the cities, they’ll continue to be driven in more disadvantaged, outlying areas. Our retrofit kit makes it possible to reduce the environmental impact of the millions of two-strokes currently in use, and that will still be used for many years.”

Amory Lovins, a world expert on energy resources, agrees: “Envirofit has devised a practical and affordable way…to fix two-stroke vehicles in Asia. This is the here-and-now solution to go with.”

“These drivers are at the base of the economic pyramid, and these tricycles are a testament to their ingenuity and work ethic,” says Tim Bauer. “At the end of the day, we can improve their lives with a cylinder head, a few brackets, and, of course, hard work. This is our best reward.”

Francesco Raeli

Thanks Mr Rudd!

2008-12-12T16:10:00.000-08:00

Showing his concern for the environment, greenhouse effect and all sorts of other stuff Kevin Rudd has announced a billion dollar port expansion and rial upgrade project designed to double the amount of coal exported from the Port of Newcastle. So more greenhouse gasses, more devastated landscapes, more salinity issues, more dust, more ruined aquifers, more productive farmland lost.

Yeah thanks Mr Rudd, thanks a lot.

From: The Herald
$1bn funds Newcastle port coal rush
BY IAN KIRKWOOD
13/12/2008 4:00:00 AM
A $1 BILLION federal rail-building program and a port expansion agreement brokered by the state were both revealed yesterday in a historic day for the Hunter's coal industry.
If all goes according to plan, Newcastle could double its coal exports to 200 million tonnes within seven years, with up to a third of the coal coming from 300 kilometres away in the Gunnedah Basin.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Infrastructure Minister Anthony Albanese announced the federal rail funding program as part of a $4.7 billion package designed to lift gross domestic product by as much as half a percentage point, creating about 32,000 jobs.

Mr Rudd said $1.2 billion would go to the Australian Rail Track Corporation, $711 million to roads and $1.6 billion to higher education.

Corporation chief David Marchant said the Government was providing $580 million of the $1.2 billion to help expand the Hunter Valley coal rail lines. The corporation would borrow another $420 million on the open market, taking its Hunter commitment to $1 billion.
The biggest item on the construction plan is a new route through the Liverpool Ranges to the Gunnedah Basin, costed at about $290 million, with another $508 million on projects between Ulan, Muswellbrook and Maitland.

"As far as the Hunter rail lines are concerned, this announcement is not so much about the timing of the work as it is about the certainty of funding," Mr Marchant said.
The coal industry, which was unable to maximise its profits during the three years of the coal boom because demand far outstripped the rail and port system's ability to supply the commodity, welcomed the rail track plan unveiled by Mr Rudd and the "coal terminal access agreement" struck by Ports Minister Joe Tripodi.

After announcing earlier in the week a plan to deal with coal queues by asking the ships to stay away , Mr Tripodi described yesterday's deal as a modified version of the one proposed by former premier Nick Greiner, but with added protection for small mining companies and a levy on export tonnages to help fund new export capacity.

Graham Davidson, general manager of coal loader operator Port Waratah Coal Services, said the agreement added a dose of commercial reality to the coal chain.

"It's in everyone's interests for PWCS and Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group to expand as quickly as possible to cater for incumbent and new producers, and it now looks as if the pieces are finally falling into place to make that possible," Mr Davidson said.

The agreement guides access to the two PWCS loaders and to a third terminal being built by Newcastle Coal Infrastructure Group and due to operate from early 2010.
Mr Tripodi has also pledged that PWCS will be able to build a fourth loader, known as " T4".

Damn It! News from the front...

2008-12-12T15:56:00.000-08:00

Opponents of the politically motivated, expensive and unnecessary Tillegra Dam project held a protest yesterday in Newcastle, a little more notice on the press release would have been good as it only dropped into my email after the advertised protest time.

Anyway information on the well justified objections here.

From: The Herald
Protest rally damns dam project
MATTHEW KELLY
13/12/2008 4:00:00 AM
OPPONENTS of the proposed Tillegra Dam rallied at yesterday's Independent Pricing Review Tribunal hearing and called for an independent review of the project.
Groups such as the Greens, the No Tillegra Dam Group and the Total Environment Centre were represented.
"That people's livelihoods and families can be torn asunder for no just reason, that a pristine river system, a fertile agricultural valley, a family member's final resting place and a diverse and unique environment could be sacrificed at the whim of a politician is undeserved and unbelievable," Williams River resident Carol Pasenow said.
No Tillegra Dam Group spokeswoman Sally Corbett described the Tillegra proposal as a "selective tax".
Greens MP John Kaye told the rally at Newcastle City Hall there was every chance the project could be called off.

Website of the Day

2008-12-11T18:47:00.000-08:00

Found this over on Pandas Thumb, so cute I thought I'd share it:

http://www.zooborns.com/zooborns/

Is there anybody out there?

2008-12-03T20:37:00.000-08:00

Just wondering is all, due to lack of feedback I've added a counter at the bottom of the page to count the hundreds of Quoll fans out there that like to read my rantings. I'll probably have to do some more advertising, develop a marketting plan, I might even hold a couple of focus groups or......

A Carbon Con (Part 2)

2008-11-29T14:39:00.000-08:00

In the interests of fairness Ben Keogh did reply to my last posting over at The Land, blatently copied and pasted is his reply:

Dear spotted quoll, The CMAs are paying 800/ha for revegetation for biodiversity and environmental outcomes and taking 50 to 100% of the carbon rights. Under the proposed treatments of forest sinks in the ETS, any loss or harvesting of the trees will be treated as an emission and the landholder (or the CMA) will need to pay back the losses. Unlike a crop where you get paid on harvest under this scenario you will be charged to harvest. It should be up to the landholder if they want to get into carbon trading not have the decision made for them by another body.
I am objecting to a) the price being paid; b) the carbon rights being linked to funding that was provided for environmental outcomes; c) the lack of information provided by the CMAs in regard to liabilities, incomes and other options; d) the CMAs restricting the ability of the private industry to operate by engaging in carbon trading; e) the CMAs and other government agencies undermining the private sector by using data, information and other resources to engage in carbon trading and restricting the access to this information from other users; d) the surreptitious methods of the CMAS to get at the carbon; and finally e) the linking of the carbon rights to PVPs and the way the CMAs have told me directly that if the client does not sign the carbon over under the PVP they will not get the PVP.
The taxpayers do get a return for the activity in better water quality and environmental outcomes (which is what the money was meant to be for in the first place), furthermore whether the landholder or the CMA opt the plantation into the ETS or not the Australian Taxpayer will still benefit as the increase in the national forest extent will be reflected in our national carbon accounts that will reduce our obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, thus saving the federal government (taxpayer) money. I urge you to take the argument you have made to the landholders of Australia and see if they think it is fair to get 9,000 dollars for something worth far more, so what if they get some money for revegetating their land, they take on the work and under the ETS the liability, why should the government funded and landholder funded CMA get such any return at all for something they are obliged to do anyway.
You talk of it as a crop, what happens when Agriculture is covered are the CMAs going to say OK if you plant develop your land for a new crop and it sequesters carbon we will only give you approval for said development if we get half your carbon rights for a pittance. I can give other examples where the CMA has stolen 100% of the carbon rights even though the landholder put in 25% of the project cost. The final design of the ETS is not even out yet and the CMAs have shown their greed and naivety in this matter, this was plain and simple opportunism. I have spoken to a number of the CMAs involved and the project managers of the concept and the best I could get out of them is that the reason for this action was that they see it a s a bonus for the CMA. No consideration of the landholder with whom they are meant to work to better the environment. The intricacies of the carbon sequestration market are too involved to explain in detail in this forum but I have enough experience and understanding to feel that it was necessary to speak out on this issue in the interest of landholders everywhere.
A final note is that I met with the chairs of the CMAs to present an off the shelf product from a not for profit federal government backed organisation for carbon trading and sequestration management that involved CMAs and paid them a fee for service. The CMAs informed me that they were not interested as they believed they could make more money doing it themselves. The Victorian CMAs have investigated the issue and are not pursuing the go it alone approach but are looking for other methods and concentrating on core business. There are also a number of CMAs in NSW who are not involved and have chosen a different path. Whilst I feel for the CMAs and their difficulty in getting funding, there is no need to gouge farmers an use their position of authority and regulation to force unfair deals on landholders. If you wish to discuss this in more detail please contact me outside of this forum.
Ben Keogh Managing Director Australian Carbon Traders

The "final note" does say a lot doesn't it, CMA's shouldn't be involved unless they're with the scheme I'm promoting. It would be reasonable to assume the "off the shelf" product he's promoting would be CarbonSmart a scheme which gives a case study of a landholder getting a whole $80/ha/yr.

Just to let you in on things I was involved with a fairly major NGO that was setting up it's own carbon sequestration scheme and have seen some good analyses of various schemes that have been put forward, they're probably still 'commercial in confidence" so I won't go into details (even if I could find where I've put them). Now one of the big issues (of which there are many) in the whole carbon sequestration thing is how do you actually measure your carbon? You could use the Government models which are quite conservative or you could develop your own using destructive testing which is where you rip up an area of vegetation, roots and all, after taking various measurements take them to the lab where the carbon content is measured, you then use this to calibrate your measurement system.

Your method has to be signed off and accredited by the government, it is a long and expensive process but it does give you more accurate (and higher) measurements than the government modelmeaning you can claim more carbon per hectare than those using other methods and hence get a higher return. How your carbon is measured is only one of the issues for people wanting to get into it, so I do advise anyone interested to do their background reading, do the maths, ask questions and don't rush into anything.

Mind you tree planting's going to do three parts worth of stuff all to reduce greenhouse gasses but there are many other benefits and if someone wants to give you money to grow them then why not?

Poor fellow my valley!

2008-11-29T14:25:00.000-08:00

As mentioned previously Sydney Gas has been drilling around the Paynes Crossing area, between Broke and Wollombi for coal seam gas. Of course at the time they were telling people not to worry as they were only "exploring". Now that they've announced finding enough gas to keep Sydney going for the next 150 years I'm presuming we can start worrying now? Apart from the environmental concerns yet again resources are taken from the Hunter to feed Sydney.

And of course if there is that much gas there does that mean the Queensland Hunter Gas Pipeline has just become a massive white elephant?

Valley's $10bn methane gas find
BY MATTHEW KELLY
29/11/2008 4:00:00 AM
AN estimated $10 billion worth of coal-seam methane gas or enough gas to supply Sydney for the next 150 years has been found beneath the Hunter.
The discovery of the untapped resource, which has the potential to generate hundreds of jobs, was announced at the Sydney Gas annual general meeting this week.
The find has exceeded the company's expectation and is seen as one of the most significant Australian gas discoveries in recent years.
It follows 12 months of core hole drilling in the region by Sydney Gas and its partner, AGL Energy.
The company believes 708 billion cubic metres of gas, or 25,000 petajoules, are contained in coal within an area from Paynes Crossing to Scone.
It estimates 10,000 petajoules can potentially be extracted from the area. By comparison, Western Australia's North West shelf contains an estimated 33,000 petajoules of extractable gas.
"We've broken the exploration area into 10-kilometre by 10-kilometre grids and we've looked at the geology in each of those grids," Sydney Gas chief executive Andy Lukas said.
"We've estimated how much gas we expect is in the coal, the quality of the gas and whether there are any faults nearby."
Mr Lukas said the company was aiming to supply 50 per cent of gas to the NSW market beyond 2015.
"The 30-year contract to supply Sydney is about 2000 petajoules," he said.
"On that basis we will certainly be able to supply Sydney and have some left over for power stations and export.
"Having a gas resource so close to the Sydney and Newcastle markets provides an excellent opportunity for the company."
Coded maps indicating the "sweet spots", or the areas believed to contain the richest resources, were presented at the meeting.
The company will establish production pilot plants across the region to demonstrate the viability of the resource.
"Provided the permeability is such that the gas will flow, we would normally expect to get about half out," Mr Lukas said.
"Our first aim is to get 500 petajoules of reserves then do it in 500-petajoule steps."
Gas energy is seen within the energy sector as a transition fuel between coal and renewable energy such as solar.
When burnt, gas produces half the emissions coal produces.

A Carbon Con?

2008-11-22T17:00:00.000-08:00

It seems a certain marsupial has been causing a little mischief this week on "The Land" website, have a read of this down to the comments section:

A carbon con?
MATTHEW CAWOOD
14/11/2008 4:00:00 AM
Farmers are being warned not to sign over their carbon credits before they understand the true value of the product and the liabilities they may incur by signing contracts.

Ben Keogh, of Australian Carbon Traders, is hot under the collar about a clause in the vegetation agreements put out by several Catchment Management Authorities (CMAs) in NSW and Victoria, which claims for the CMA all or half the carbon credits that arise from the contracted revegetation work.

“One landholder I know of was offered $800 a hectare to revegetate by his CMA, on a site that will return about 550 tonnes of CO2 equivalents during its lifetime,” Mr Keogh said.
“Break that down and the CMA is offering $2.90 a tonne for the carbon – and they are using government money that was put aside for biodiversity and water quality projects.

“They could sell those carbon credits on the open market for up to $30 a tonne.

“When the CMA is proposing paying a fraction of the market price, with no mention of liability if the carbon is lost, and without knowing what they will actually do with the carbon rights, some big questions hang over their intentions.”

Mr Keogh also warned farmers about signing over carbon rights without understanding the implications if agriculture is “covered” under the Federal Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) at a later date.

Farmers who commit their carbon, or land, for a low price now may find themselves obliged to buy in carbon if agriculture is later included under the CPRS, and the farm has to account for its emissions.

That could lead to farmers having to buy back carbon from those they sold it to earlier in order to balance the CPRS books.

Comments
Date: Newest first Oldest first

The Great Carbon Con!
Posted by BigD on 14/11/2008 6:22:28 AM

All on the basis of bogus "science".
Posted by Ted O'Brien. on 14/11/2008 7:36:37 AM

I'd love to know how Ben Keogh does his calculations, if farmers are getting $2.90 per tonne after the CMAs take their share then without the CMAs they'd be getting $5.80/t and if the brokers are selling it for $30/t where does the extra $24.20/t go to? A "con"? Well yes maybe, but it doesn't look like the CMA's are the ones doing it. I've looked at a number of schemes over the years and the advice I give is do you research and calculations thoroughly a lot of schemes are nowhere near as good as they market themselves.
Posted by Spottedquoll on 15/11/2008 5:00:41 PM

Dear Spottedquoll, The calcualtions are based on what the CMA is paying for revegetation in return for the carbon rights. The agreements have no mention of cosats or liabilities, access requirements or transaction costs, etc. Brokers usally get 5 to 10c per credit. The extra money would go to the sellers of the carbon or the owners of the Carbon rights, in this case the CMAs. If you read the article what I am urging landholders to do is to ensure they have done their homework and ensure they know what they are signing up for. What I object to is the CMAs tying carbon rights to PVP and reveg activities without fully recognising the input of landholders and operating by stealth. I agree entirely that there are a lot of schemes out there that are nowhere near as good as they seem and this is another one.
Posted by ben keogh on 18/11/2008 3:27:11 PM

Thanks for that Ben, So what you're saying is the CMAs are paying $2.90 per tonne for their (potential) share of the carbon up front and the landholder still has 275 tonnes to sell on the open market? So over time the landholder could still get $9000/Ha (from his sales plus the CMA "pre-purchase")? And this is only one particular case I'm aware of CMA payments for some revegetation projects going far higher than $800/Ha. The other point is is should taxpayers money be used to finance (or part finance) a crop (which essentially it will be) and taxpayers not get any return for it?
Posted by Spottedquoll on 19/11/2008 7:46:48 PM

Note that the CMA's "could" sell the carbon at $30 per tonne, no doubt that does depend on whether anyone wants to buy it at $30/tonne. Hell they "could" sell it at $50/t, $100/t etc it all depends on what the going market rate is, something Mr Keogh doesn't mention.

This $30 a tonne sounds great but honestly how much does the grower actually get? You can't just go out and sell the rights to your carbon, it's quite a long process to get it all set up and accredited you need to insure that the carbon will be in place for the next 130 or so years, you need to have a system in place to measure the carbon you have and you need to have some sort of insurance against flood, fire or anything else which will reduce the carbon you've guaranteed you've locked up. This insurance is generally in the form of putting aside a proportion of your carbon for just such a contingency, I believe that it's around 30 percent. It's a bit of a pain for the individual to do it so it's best for a company or co op to put a scheme together and pool carbon from a wide area administer the scheme split the profits (no doubt there's many more models than that but I really couldn't be bothered checking into all of them or going through the numerous documents I've gotten on the subject over the past few years - some of which may still be "commercial in confidence").

Now Ben Keogh is the manager of Australian Carbon Traders and has worked with Landcare Australia Limited to set up their CarbonSMART Scheme. According to their site CarbonSMART basically pools the carbon in their scheme, sells it and pays landholders 60% of the sale price.

So how much is this 60%? According to their case study the landholder "could" recieve $80 per hectare per year, which is, well, a pretty low return, it may just cover the cost of maintenance but I doubt it would cover the cost of establishment.

I suppose in this case I'd be more than happy to take $800 per hectare to revegetate it then split the profits rather than pay for it myself then get $80 per hectare for it. It all tends to make Ben Keoghs objections quite interesting doesn't it?

Scuttling the butt!

2008-10-18T00:24:00.000-07:00

First off apologies for not keeping this as updated as I should but you get that kind of thing.

Been hearing some interesting scuttlebutt this week, I have no reason to disbelieve it given the sources but there is a possibility they could be mistaken. (There does that count as a disclaimer?)

And now to the subject of this posting is our lovely new Scone power substation. Remember that from a few months ago? Well they're still building it, the walls are almost up. From memory it was supposed to take only a couple of months to complete, I wonder if it will be completed by Christmas?

Anyway from what I hear there's been a couple of reasons for the delay, firstly truck bogging. Apparently it's quite a common event, wow who'd have thought it, low lying area, subject to inundation, poor drainage and heavy clay soils? Funny what was it I was saying a couple of months back?

But wait it gets worse, the substation has apparently had to be redesigned, something about the footings not being secure. Now surely an adequate and comprehensive environmental assessment would have identified these site limitations, you'd think that wouldn't you? So the Environmental Assessment they based their determination on has apparently proved inadequate, what sort of assessment/approval process has their redesign gone through? Nothing that I've heard of.

And finally, well possibly not finally but finally on what I've heard (well ok apart from the moat they are going to dig around the station to drain the water away WTF?), where's the trees? C'mon guys, you knocked down a heap of trees and as an offset were going to plant 3000 more. So where are they? I've yet to see them and over what area are they going to be planted, to me if I were planting 3000 trees (that is trees not shrubs and groundcovers) I'd be wanting an absolute minimum of five hectares and even that's getting crowded. So where are they? Even the coal mines start some of their plantings (admittedly they're screening plantings) prior to works commencing. Is it a case that the owner of the land you were to plant them on has said "no"?

I'm really hoping what I've heard has been wrong, but given what I've already seen I fear that it is right.

Latest from the Front

2008-08-09T18:21:00.000-07:00

Down in the Wollombi Valley the locals are gearing up for a fight against Sydney Gas's plans to undertake exploratory drilling in the Valley. It's only exploration right? They only want to know what's there...... Yeah right, just like the sample pit at Bickham in the Upper Hunter or the drilling out on the Liverpool Plains (home of some of Australia's best agricultural lands).

Consensus on global warming grows.

2008-08-02T19:01:00.000-07:00

While I tend not to rely on newspapers for my daily dose of science the following is quite good.

(lifted from The Land)

Despite sceptics' noise, scientific consensus is growing
BEN CUBBY
2/08/2008 10:57:00 AM
Anyone keeping up with current affairs could be forgiven for thinking scientists are riven with doubt over climate change.
Climate sceptics have enjoyed a resurgence as the federal Coalition danced around the introduction of carbon trading and heavy-polluting industries began an intensive lobbying effort to convince the Federal Government of their special needs.
The Page Research Centre, a think tank associated with the Nationals, last week hosted a forum that concluded that the science behind global warming was shaky.
Backbench MPs in both major parties have reportedly questioned the science on which the Federal Government's recent green paper is based.
The noise has been loudest on the internet, where websites give voice to people who believe scientists are suppressing evidence to protect their careers.
Unfortunately for the sceptics, and for everyone else, the evidence for human-induced climate change is stronger than ever.
Scientists the Sydney Morning Herald spoke to were candid in their assessment that there was little room for doubt that global warming is happening and that the only changes in the past few months have been political changes.
"It looks as though the population believes climate change is serious and there seems to be momentum behind the issue, and there are some people who don't like that," says Chris Mitchell, head of the CSIRO's Climate, Weather and Ocean Prediction group.
"There are still plenty of creationists around, and there are people who believe tobacco is not linked to serious health effects, and so there are still people who choose to ignore or doubt the amount of evidence for climate change."
Andy Pitman, an editor of the prestigious international Journal Of Climate, says there are good reasons why global warming sceptics cannot get a run in peer-reviewed scientific literature.
"We would kill, literally kill, for a good paper that proved the science on global warming was wrong," Pitman says.
"Then I could retire and accept my chair at Harvard. Unfortunately, that's not going to happen, and there's vast amounts of evidence why."
Pitman, who is also a lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (ABC) and director of the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW, says the reasons are simple: "In essence, the models we use to predict climate have been proven right."
In the past decade, he says, refinements in computer simulations have allowed scientists to accurately predict climate in four dimensions: time, latitude, longitude and depth of the atmosphere.
"You feed in the greenhouse gas concentrations that we've seen, and the models predict extremely well the climate variations we've seen. If you don't do that, you get nothing. The mathematical probability of it being a chance mistake, or the wrong numbers, is astronomical."
The claim, often cited by sceptics, that atmospheric temperature did not appear to match the levels predicted by climate models was revised by a reassessment of the data last year.
The research, partly carried out in Australia, ended up reinforcing the accuracy of existing climate models.
Claims that solar activity may be causing recent global warming, reinforced in State Parliament by the Treasurer, Michael Costa, have been comprehensively demolished in peer-reviewed journals.
As weak spots in climate modelling have been eliminated one by one, commentators who do not believe carbon emissions lead to global warming have been retreating to smaller and smaller islands of resistance, says Pitman.
This is also the view of the Australian Academy of Science, established in 1954 along the lines of Britain's Royal Society.
Its president, Kurt Lambda, told the Herald: "If there's been any change at all recently, it's that the observational evidence suggests we're moving away from the lower limits of the ABC projections towards more serious scenarios.
"I've certainly seen no evidence of scientists holding back on their views or suppressing findings or anything approaching that."
Concerned that debate about climate change is being muddied by slanted media reporting of the issue, the academy recently established a committee to try to present the clearest information to the public.
"I think there is healthy scepticism and then there's unhealthy scepticism," Lambda says.
"What you do see is people who will claim that simply because they have a PhD in engineering, that they are an expert on climate modelling."
But labelling people "climate dangerous isn't helpful either, Lambda says. "The other side of the coin is the danger that people who want to discuss the legitimate scientific issues in public becoming less if they are going to be called dangers. We do need to keep giving scientists the freedom to [go] back and forth on these issues and apply their scepticism."
The CSIRO's Mitchell says any remaining doubt among Australian researchers of climate change would have surfaced in peer-reviewed literature.
"The fact is that a lot of the people working at the coalface of climate change research spend more time concerned they are underestimating some of the issues rather than exaggerating them."

© SMH

A time to live, a time to die.

2008-07-28T02:35:00.000-07:00

A big thanks to Dave over at Counter Steer for putting a link up to here. Dave is trying to force a change in Victorian motorcycle politics. The Victorian Motorcycle Riders Association (MRA Vic) has been around for a couple of decades and at the moment could probably be best described as disfuntional and is in serious need of overhaul (or euthenasing). MRA Vic, to the outsider, looks riven with numerous internal squabbles and divisions, threats and violence.

This isn't something unique to motorcycle politics, having been involved with numerous Landcare and other environmental groups over the years I have seen it on many occassions, the executive gets dominated by a few people whose agendas don't always reflect the views of the grassroots membership and often fall to the lure of "playing with the big boys". I've seen it with developers, they're quite happy to have their tame community group they ocassionally throw a few scraps and proclaim "look at us, we're working with the community" while continuing to do pretty much as they please, government departments like the same thing, "community reference groups" are often formed, given tea and bickies and sent on there way happy they've been listened to. MRA Vic seems to have fallen into this as well, quiet diplomacy, we have the ministers ear, working at the coal face, they seem to have become part of the system they started up to change.

Good luck with it Dave, it won't be an easy task.

Fun with Biofuels

2008-07-18T19:27:00.000-07:00

There's two types of people in the world, those that understand maths and those that don't. Those that don't tend to think biofuels will save us and those that do, don't.

Ok we'll run some very simple calculations just to get an idea of just how much biofuel we'd need to replace the fossil fuels we're using in our vehicle fleets. To do this we'll make a few assumptions (I probably could look it all up but ballpark "guesstimates" should give us a reasonable estimate), we'll assume an average fuel consumption of 10l/100km, 20 000km of use per vehicle per year and 10 million vehicles in Australia and we'll treat it as all fossil fuels being replaced with ethanol just for sake of convenience, we're also assuming the same fuel economy from ethanol as from the fossil fuels (which it isn't, ethanol gives less km/l). So:

Fuel used per vehicle = 10/100 x 20 000 which is 2000l/yr

Now one tonne of grain makes about 650 litres of ethanol so 2000/650 gives just over 3 tonne of grain per vehicle to run for the full year which means we'd need to convert around 30 million tonnes of grain to biofuels per year, which unfortunatelly is roughly what we grow per year. In 2006-07 grain production dropped to below 20 million tonnes meaning we'd probably have to dip into the 5 million tonnes of sugar we produce per year.

So do you want to eat or drive?

Test your powers of observation

2008-07-04T01:55:00.000-07:00

Now here's a little something for you, look at the following pictures and see what you can find, read the landscape and figure out what it's telling you.

How did you go? Bare patches of ground, low in the landscape, obviously got a few problems and if you look closely you can see little patches of white, telltale signs that there's a salt problem there. Now a couple more pics.

And as you'd expect for a low lying site half surrounded by urban development it's prone to flooding.

Ok you ask so what am I getting at? Well here's the question knowing it was a low lying saline area prone to flooding what would you do with it? If you were smart, like Scone Landcare, you'd plant the site up with salt tolerant species to suck up the excess water, drop the watertable and get some vegetation coverage happening, which they did. The rehabilitation work was very successful, not only were the trees growing and water table dropping but native grasses were starting to recolonise bare salt scalds.

You certainly wouldn't want to whack a development on there, bulldozing a few hundred established trees, putting constrictions on a floodplain that could result in backing up of water and potentially exascerbating a salinity problem.

You wouldn't would you?

Guess what?

Energy Australia in it's infinite wisdom is constructing a power substation on the site. No I shit you not! Despite advice from government agencies that the site wasn't appropriate Energy Australia, as a state government entity, decided to self assess under Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. The 300 odd page REF (well I can't remember exactly how big it was but it was big and I'd hate for it to fall on me) was quite impressive, especially for a development covering an area of a hectare. Now it's probably just my cynicism but I tend to distrust big documents for small developments, plenty of room to hide things. But as I said probably just me being cynical after all Energy Australia does have an Environmental Policy which states they will strive to:

"act prudently where environmental risks are uncertain and consequences serious;"

and

"assess, adequately manage and endeavour to minimise the impacts of activities we propose to carry out;"

I'm glad of all that!

The other big issue is that a growing town like Scone will need new areas of land opened up for residential and light industrial land. The obvious spots being on the edge of town including land above the site of the substation which without good planning and management will likely result in increased runoff and extra flooding of the substation site. Lucky there's a big REF we can use to mop up the water.

New publication from the Department of Climate Change

2008-06-30T00:42:00.000-07:00

For those of you still to be convinced on the whole climate change thing or you work in NRM and need a bit more infor the federal Department of Climate Change has just released "Managing Australian landscapes in a changing climate - a climate change primer for regional natural resource management bodies". I've only just skimmed through it but if it gets more people thinking and planning about it, it will be a good thing.

More on offsets

2008-06-29T20:09:00.000-07:00

Looks like you can offset everything these days http://www.cheatneutral.com/, probably just as effective and ethical as most of the others.

Opportunity to comment on the importation of Savanah Cats

2008-06-26T15:46:00.000-07:00

For those of you who are interested please find the following link to the DEH Draft assessment report http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/trade-use/invitecomment/savannah-cat.html

More on Hybrid Cats

2008-06-20T20:56:00.000-07:00

Carole Baskin of Big Cat Rescue (and what a great job they do) was kind enough to leave a comment on my blog this morning (wow my first!). They have a number of concerns over the hybrids (not the least are animal welfare concerns over the breeding process), their page on it is here.

Edit: Tony Peacock from the Invasive Animals CRC has a blog covering this and other feral animal issues (link fixed) and reports the good news that Environment Minister Peter Garrett has initiated a review on the import of hybrid cats.

Ecofascist? Moi?

2008-06-20T18:12:00.000-07:00

Australia has a long history of introduction of exotic plants and animals, many of them were introduced for quite legitimate reasons, food, fibre, medicine etc but many of these introductions have had adverse impacts on both our Australian ecosystems and the economy. The list is seemingly endless; rabbits, foxes, canetoads, goats, pigs, prickly pear, water hyacith, salvinia, the list goes on.

The threats posed by introducing plants and animals into ecosystems where there is no control on them is well recognised, for example the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's (IUCN) "Global Invasive Species Programme" lists numerous species which have caused ecological havoc around the world. In Australia there are numerous exotic species listed as key threatening processes under Schedule 3 of the New South Wales "Threatened Species Conservation Act" and also under the Federal "Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act".

Mind you Australian species relocated to other countries can run amock as well, possums in New Zealand, tree snakes in Guam, Eucalypts in Greece, wattles in South Africa and Israel, paperbarks and Casuarinas in the southern states of the US.

Back in the mid to late 1800's "Acclimatisation Societies" started around the world to encourage this sort of thing, thankfully they weren't as successful as they hoped and are now more or less defunct.

Given all that I really do have to shake my head over the article I came across printed in the Kyeamba Valley Landcare Newsletter written by Haikai Tane of Watershed Systems Inc in New Zealand, I'll only quote a few relevant parts but the full text is over here.

Professor Haikai Tane on (Riparian) Biodiversity and Peter Andrews
Research on riparian biota indicates there are probably greater grounds for concern about the phytotoxicity of Australian red gums than Willows!

Well yes this would probably be why Australian animals have evolved to deal with these metabolites, why 1080 has less effect on Australian native animals (particularly those from Western Australia) than it does on exotic ones and why Koalas and Possums can digest gum leaves and Monkeys can't, no doubt Australian invertebrates would have evolved similar mechanisms.

Please be aware that the international convention on biodiversity specifically embraces all biota. Since the 1968 UNESCO international conference on "Use and Conservation of the Biosphere" in France, the UN position has remained unchanged:

"there is no fundamental difference between natural, wild or modified, semi-natural or developed, domesticated or purely artifial vegetations. The laws governing these ecosystems are identical"...

This doesn't make sense, of course the laws governing them would be identical, mind you the organisms living in these ecosystems would probably notice a significant difference.

..........Biodiversity is still only a convention because biologists have been unable to demonstrate that there is a functional relationship between the Linnaen classification of species and environmental performance...........

This makes even less sense, the Linnean system is merely a system of classifying species it was developed around 100 years before Charles Darwin published "On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection" and while it is well recognised to have shortcomings has stood up quite well. As I said it is merely a classification system and although there is debate as to whether it should be replaced by a system which better takes into account evolutionary relationships, I am unaware if it has anything to say about environmental performance or ever really could.

......It may come as a surprise to some that the Australian concept of native biodiversity is inconsistent with the international biodiversity convention. It is more about personal beliefs and conservation funding programs than the ecological integrity of watersheds and their environmental performance......

Obviously it's a surprise to the IUCN as well.

Nature does nothing uselessly noted Socrates. Mother Nature is an equal opportunity employer - she does not discriminate on the basis of race, genera or species. That is a human failing. A few years ago, I was advised by the leaders of a German Parliamentary Delegation on Conservation and the Environment visiting New Zealand - while here they investigated "native biodiversity programs" - that in Germany they call native biodiversity "ecofascim" because it is based on the same nativist principles that underpinned Hitler's Fascism.

Oh dear! Reductio ad Hitlerum? Wanting to protect endangered species and preserve ecosystems is "Ecofascism"? I can understand the Germans getting a little wary which may even remotely be seen as nationalism but claiming it as "Ecofascism"? As I pointed to earlier there are numerous reputable organisations in Australia and overseas who are concerned with the spread of exotic species and their impact on ecosystems, to label them as fascists or even to equate this concern with fascism is, well, to be extremely polite "unscientific". Denigrating and labelling as "ecofascists" those with legitimate concerns does nothing for the debate and even less for the credibility of those tossing the accusation around.

..........perhaps the Natural Sequence Farming movement can take the lead and expose the "exotics are pests" mentality as a sadly misinformed ecocolonial myth doing more damage than good........

As I've pointed out there is a lot of evidence that exotics can be pests, not all of them and some can be problems in some areas and not in others I really don't want to get into the subject of weed ecology at the moment but just to reiterate foxes are pests, rabbits are pest, prickly pear and tiger pear are pests (the former less so since the release of the Cactoblastis moth), Equine Influenza is a pest. As to "ecocolonialism"? What exactly does that mean? Certainly I can understand it applying to Acclimatisation Societies and their descendents who are quite happy with the McDonaldisation of the worlds ecosystems.

...It is far, far better to teach your community to observe and enjoy the exciting dance of ecosynthesis uniting native and exotic biota in new and improved riparian ecosystems...

"Ecosynthesis"? Just another word for extinction really.

Edit: I really should have gone and had a look at the Convention on Biological Diversity it seems they're concerned about introduced species as well, among the actions listed for preserving biodiversity at a national level is:

Preventing the introduction of, controlling, and eradicating alien species that could threaten ecosystems, habitats or species.

Press Release from the Invasive Animals CRC

2008-06-19T18:56:00.001-07:00

MEDIA RELEASE
6 June 2007
Wild-domestic fashion pets sneaking past quarantine
leaves native animals at risk
Serval-cat “supercat” shouldn’t be let in without scrutiny
A loophole in Australia’s biosecurity system means hybrid African Serval-domestic cat crosses can be imported into the country with no assessment of their potential to decimate native wildlife.

Chief Executive of the Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, Professor Tony Peacock, pointed out the loophole to the Quarantine and Biosecurity Review in Canberra today. “Hybrids of wild animals and domestic animals are a stupid American trend to breed more and more exotic pets” says Professor Peacock. “No one anticipated such animals when our quarantine laws were formulated, so we apply a definition that a fifth generation wild-domestic cross is legally a “domestic” animal and so escapes proper scrutiny”.

“Fourteen of these wild-cross cats are currently in quarantine on their way to Australia and have apparently passed all Federal requirements. We hope the Queensland Government will classify them Class 1 Pest Animals under State Legislation and ban them, but this sort of thing should be a Federal responsibility. An Adelaide breeder is advertising animals available in 2009”.

“This loophole will effectively lead to fitting a nuclear warhead to our already devastating feral cat population. So-called “Savannah cats” are more than double the size of domestic cats and can jump two metres from a standing start. Haven’t our native animals got enough to contend with?”
The practice of hybridising wild and domestic animals deserves much more scrutiny itself. An American breeder describes the issue on her own website:

…it can be extremely difficult to accomplish the Serval to domestic cat breeding. Whether it be the Serval male to the domestic female (which is most often the case), or to attempt a female Serval to a domestic male ... because the Serval body type is so much longer and taller, this makes the pairing physically quite challenging. Add to that the differences in behavior between a wild cat and a domestic cat, and in some cases, too much aggression on the part of an intact adult Serval ...

“I think anyone that forced a mating of an African Serval and a domestic cat in Australia would find themselves in serious discussion with animal welfare authorities” said Professor Peacock. “It is certainly a practice we shouldn’t condone by allowing people to import this new style of fashion animal. We need to update our quarantine rules to keep up with this exotic pet trend”.

The same loophole would allow a variety of hybrid cats and potentially wolf-dog hybrids if they pass disease regulations.

“The Quarantine and Biosecurity Review provides a great opportunity to point out anomalies that need attention. This issue has arisen from the practice of breeding new animals that did not exist when laws and regulations were framed.”

“Our native animals are at risk because of a fashionable desire to own an exotic pet. The impact on these vulnerable species will remain long after the fashion dies out” said Professor Peacock.
Fashion breeds of cat bred through mating wild cats:

"Bengal Cat" hybrid with Leopard Cat Prionailurus bengalensis (SE Asia, 6.8 kg) (already in Australia)
"Savannah Cat" hybrid with Serval Leptailurus serval (Africa, 20 kg)
"Safari Cat" hybrid with Geoffroy's cat Leopardus geoffroyi (S. America, 4 kg)
"Chausie" hybrid with Jungle Cat Felis chaus (Asia, 16 kg)
"Serengeti cat" Bengal cat/ Asian Short-haired cat hybrid

See Big Cat Rescue’s concerns: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oiLAcEp5Vng

MORE INFORMATION:
Prof Tony Peacock
Invasive Animals CRC
Ph: 0402 036 110
Email: tony.peacock@invasiveanimals.com
University of Canberra, Canberra ACT 2601

Sign this!

2008-06-19T18:45:00.000-07:00

Want to have your say in keeping the Savanah Cats out of Australia, or just wanna tell Peter Garret to get a hair cut (damn long haired hippy!)? Go off and sign it, go on, do it now.

http://www.gopetition.com.au/petitions/savannah-cats.html

And that's yer bloomin lot!

2008-06-17T20:53:00.000-07:00

It's the end of an era, a hero of mine retires.

Gardening Australia's Cundall retires (stolen from the ABC new website)
Peter Cundall, host of ABC TV's Gardening Australia, is filming his final episode of the popular program before he retires. Cundall, 81, began working in television in 1969. Prior to that he hosted a gardening talk back program on a Launceston radio station, while running his own landscaping business.

He says he has always loved his job. "I've never lost the passion," he said. "Right from the very beginning, the only difficulty I ever had ... was making sure I could transmit that passion I felt.
"The passion is absolutely genuine."

Cundall's final episode air go to air on July 26. He plans to continue presenting a weekly radio talkback program in Tasmania.

Wartime service
Born in Manchester, north-west England, in 1927, Cundall served in the British Parachute Regiment at the tail-end of World War II and spent six months in solitary confinement after straying across the border of Yugoslavia. He later served in Austria - where he guarded former members of Hitler's elite SS - and Palestine, before volunteering for the Australian Army and serving as he machine-gunner in the Korean War. His experience of war made him a committed pacifist in later life.

He moved to Tasmania in 1955.

Idiocy, simple idiocy

2008-06-15T02:50:00.000-07:00

Now I admit I don't mind cats, provided of course they're kept under control and in areas where they're not going to hurt the native wildlife (in urban areas where they're only killing Indian Mynas and Sparrows I'm quite happy with) and I will and have deal with them if need be, but this...... this is just fucking stupid and there's no excuse for it whatsoever. I shudder to think of the damage should these get out and breed with the ferals which are already out there.

Stolen from: http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/13/2273330.htm?section=justin

Scientists rally to keep out 'supercats'

Posted Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:36am AEST Updated Fri Jun 13, 2008 6:53am AEST

Forty of the nation's leading feral animal researchers are calling for urgent changes to prevent hybrid supercats from being imported into Australia. The Federal Government has been under fire after it was revealed last week that savannah cats - twice as big as domestic species - are being imported by pet shops.

Scientists are warning that bandicoots, bettongs, potoroos and possums could soon be on the menu for the imported creatures, which were originally bred by crossing domestic cats with the African serval cat. Scientists, environmentalists and bureaucrats attending a National Feral Cat Workshop in Darwin this week have angrily condemned the quarantine loophole.
The University of Sydney's professor of ecology, Chris Dickman, is warning hybrid cats - which can jump up to two metres from a standing start - would be uncontrollable in the Australian outback.

"It's taken a lot of people who are concerned about the impacts of cats in the Australian environment off guard," he said. "I think there will be some real concern expressed at the meeting that here is an example of another species, a predator that is quite capable almost certainly of taking a wide range of native species. "It hasn't come in through the usual quarantine processes, risk assessments that would otherwise need to be done."

Professor Dickman fears savannah cats would prey on the same Australian wildlife as foxes.
He says that while foxes can be poisoned, cats have proved extremely hard to control in the outback. "It would be competing with the fox for food in the same size class. We can control the fox, we are not very good at controlling cats at the moment," he said. "Cats tend to prefer living food, live food, that they catch themselves. And as a consequence, it's much more difficult to put baits out and expect feral cats to eat them."

The Environment Department says it has been in contact with two people proposing to import savannah cats later this year, and is examining the implications.

Latest news 17th June: Opposition to Hybrid Cats Grows
.....................................................................................................................................................

No, I can't see a cat like this running amock being a problem....

P.M.T. (Pt 2)

2008-06-14T16:30:00.000-07:00

I was speaking with a friend of mine during the week about the PMT issue, he pointed out, quite reasonably that tree planting is a good "awareness raising" tool. I do have to agree, however tools are only as good as those using them and it is quite difficult to use just one tool for a complex project (just think of the tools used building a house, changing community attitudes and and actually generating change is a far more complex task).

We've been raising awareness in this manner for the past two decades, so what do we do after the awareness has been raised? Where do these people go on to? PMT because that's the message we've been giving them? Is it enough? How do we reach those who aren't receptive to the message? Do we continue to preach to the converted?

I've been involved in environmental education, Landcare, natural resources management for close to 15 years (well much longer if you count firefighting as an NRM activity) and I've long given up on the "warm & fuzzy" message of environmental education. The "warm & fuzzy" (& PMT) is great with schoolkids and very effective and while their parents will listen and will go along and plant a couple of trees will rarely make a change to their lives or a commitment. If the message is something people can relate to, or have a relationship with, then they are more likely carry it through.

The two great motivators tend to be the stomach and the wallet, when talking about plants I'll talk about their uses whether they be as a food or medicine, a useful grazing species or as a good habitat for pollinating insects, insectivorous birds or parasitic wasps. In the case of primary producers the last examples are particularly useful, give them the "warm & fuzzy" talk and they'll often fence off a corner of a paddock, tell them how it's going to improve their productivity and they'll integrate it into their farming practices. The increasing popularity of native pastures and cell grazing is a great example of this with many previously uncommon grass species increasing in frequency due to a change to a more sustainable and profitable system.

Tis trickery.....

2008-06-12T01:01:00.000-07:00

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has recently announced Toyota will be building hybrid cars in Australia with a healthy incentive from the Australian government. I will be (mostly) keeping away from the issues of hundreds of millions of dollars in corporate welfare given to the car industry by both side of politics, but will look at some of the issues.

The move will be good for local suppliers particularly if locally made batteries are used, hopefully with flow on effects for other battery consumers (the solar industry for example). It will also be good for reducing inner city air pollution. Now those sort of things are great, but what about the big one, the big question? Will hybrid cars make a difference to greenhouse gas output? Will they save the planet?

We like to look at the fuel consumption, the better the fuel consumption the better it is for the planet right? We don't look at the energy that goes in to building these cars in the first place. Cars are built from steel, aluminum, copper, lead (and nickel in the case of hybrids) and petrochemical derived rubber and plastic all of which require mining, transporting and processing going through numerous steps, and consuming large amounts of energy before taking their final form. So how far do you need to drive that new fuel efficient car (or indeed how many times do you need to use that more efficient fridge/dryer/washing machine etc) to have a positive impact? To use less energy overall than just running the old one? In many cases it will probably never happen. If you really want to make an impact, keep your car well serviced, ensure the tyres are at the correct pressure and use it when you need to. Newer isn't necessarily better.

Or alternately get a motorbike, a tenth the resources to build, twice the fuel economy, no parking problems and ten times the fun.

Wired has an article over here.

P.M.T.

2008-06-10T00:55:00.000-07:00

I like trees. Really I do, I think there's little more satisfying than planting them and watching them grow. This is something I know a great deal about, but within Landcare and the broader NRM (Natural Resources Management) we have this obsession with PMT.

"Plant More Trees" is the catchcry that seems to have embedded in many peoples heads. Trees are good but the real power system of a vegetation community are those things less than a couple of metres, grasses, shrubs, herbs etc, in most circumstances, make up the vast majority of flora biodiversity and a huge amount of the biomass but trees get all the glory.

And while we're at it just how many actual trees do you need to plant? I suppose it all depends on what sort of vegetation community you're trying to recreate, forests tend to have around seventy percent canopy cover while woodland is around thirty. So just doing a few rough calculations giving a mature or semi mature tree a canopy diameter of ten metres we only need around ninety of them per hectare to get a seventy percent cover or forty of them for a thirty percent canopy (or around 230 and 100 trees at a 6 metre canopy spread respectively).

So why do we persist in planting so many? I often go past plantings with two metre spacings and am very tempted to chainsaw at least two thirds of them just to give them a chance to grow. The bigger they're allowed to grow, the more likelihood they have of forming hollows and the larger the logs will be falling to the ground again forming better habitat.