Climate

<html><body>
GUEST OBSERVATION
I was in Switzerland recently and discovered that they haven’t had any landfill since the early 2000s, because all of their waste is either recycled or incinerated to produce electricity. How “green” is it to incinerate waste in order to produce electricity? Is it something New Zealand should consider, so that 1) we have no more landfill, and 2) we can replace our fossil-fuel power stations with power stations that incinerate waste?
Burning rubbish to generate electricity or heat sounds great: you get rid of all your waste and also get seemingly “sustainable” energy. What could be better?
Many developed countries already have significant “waste-to-energy” incineration plants and therefore less material going to landfill (although the ash has to be landfilled). These plants often have recycling industries attached to them, so that only non-recyclables end up in the furnace. If it is this good, why the opposition?
Here are seven reasons why caution is needed when considering waste-to-energy incineration plants.
Stifling innovation and waste reduction
<ol>
<li>Waste-to-energy plants require a high-volume, <a href="http://www.seas.columbia.edu/earth/wtert/sofos/Rodriguez_thesis.pdf" target="_blank">guaranteed waste stream</a> for about 25 years to make them economically viable. If waste-to-energy companies divert large amounts of waste away from landfills, they need to somehow get more waste to maintain their expensive plants. For example, <a href="https://www.thelocal.se/20181112/sweden-imports-british-waste-to-heat-homes-but-wheres-the-post-brexit-solution" target="_blank">Sweden imports its waste from the UK</a> to feed its “beasts”.</li>
<li>The waste materials that are easiest to source and have buyers for recycling - like paper and plastic - also produce most energy when burned.</li>
<li>Waste-to-energy <a href="http://knowledgeauckland.org.nz/assets/publications/TR2019-009-CBA-on-waste-diversion-from-landfill-homes-land-community-Auckland.pdf">destroys innovation</a> in the waste sector. As a result of China not accepting our mixed plastics, people are now combining plastics with asphalt to make roads last longer and are making fence posts that could be replacing treated pine posts (which emit copper, chrome and arsenic into the ground). If a convenient waste-to-energy plant had been available, none of this would have happened.</li>
<li>Waste-to-energy <a href="http://knowledgeauckland.org.nz/assets/publications/TR2019-009-CBA-on-waste-diversion-from-landfill-homes-land-community-Auckland.pdf" target="_blank">reduces jobs</a>. Every job created in the incineration industry removes six jobs in landfill, 36 jobs in recycling and 296 jobs in the reuse industry.</li>
<li>Waste-to-energy works against a circular economy, which tries to keep goods in circulation. Instead, it perpetuates our current make-use-dispose mentality.</li>
<li>Waste-to-energy only makes marginal sense in economies that produce coal-fired electricity – and then only as a stop-gap measure until cleaner energy is available. New Zealand has a green electricity generation system, with about 86% already coming from renewable sources and a <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/nz-embracing-renewable-electricity-future" target="_blank">target of 100% renewable by 2035</a>, so waste-to-energy would make it a less renewable energy economy.</li>
<li>Lastly, burning waste and contaminated plastics creates a greater environmental impact than burning the equivalent oil they are made from. These impacts include the release of harmful substances like dioxins and vinyl chloride as well as mixtures of many other harmful substances used in making plastics, which are not present in oil.</li>
</ol>
Landfills as mines of the future
European countries were driven to waste-to-energy as a result of a <a href="https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32006L0012" target="_blank">2007 directive that imposed heavy penalties</a> for countries that did not divert waste from landfills. The easiest way for those countries to comply was to install waste-to-energy plants, which meant their landfill waste dropped dramatically.
New Zealand does not have these sorts of directives and is in a better position to work towards reducing, reusing and recycling end-of-life materials, rather than sending them to an incinerator to recover some of the energy used to make them.
Is New Zealand significantly worse than Europe in managing waste? About a decade ago, a delegation from Switzerland visited New Zealand Ministry for the Environment officials to compare progress in each of the waste streams. Both parties were surprised to learn that they had managed to divert roughly the same amount of waste from landfill through different routes.
This shows that it is important New Zealand doesn’t blindly follow the route other countries have used and hope for the same results. Such is the case for waste-to-energy.
There is also an argument to be made for current landfills. Modern, sanitary landfills seal hazardous materials and waste stored over the last 50 years presents future possibilities of landfill mining.
Many <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-environment-waste/tracking-europes-waste-theres-gold-in-them-landfills-idUSKBN1F61YH" target="_blank">landfills have higher concentrations of precious metals</a>, particularly gold, than mines and some are being mined for those metals. As resources become scarcer and prices increase, our landfills may become the mines of the future.<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/128630/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important; text-shadow: none !important;">
Jeff Seadon, Senior Lecturer, Auckland University of Technology.
This article is republished from <a href="http://theconversation.com" target="_blank">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-explained-seven-reasons-to-be-wary-of-waste-to-energy-proposals-128630" target="_blank">original article</a>.
Main photo: Many developed countries already have significant waste-to-energy operations and therefore less material going to landfill. <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/jeff-seadon-790599" target="_blank">Jeff Seadon</a>, <a href="http://theconversation.com/institutions/auckland-university-of-technology-1137" target="_blank">Auckland University of Technology</a>  <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/" target="_blank">CC BY-ND</a>.
</body></html>

j.ballantyne1990-6AQqhLzZaK

Climate explained: seven reasons to be wary of waste-to-energy proposals

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVER
Australia is a land of extreme weather. Events such as the 2009 Victorian bushfires, the 2011 Queensland floods and Cyclone Yasi in 2013 are stark examples of climate-related risks faced by Australian households. Many homes are built in high-risk locations including floodplains, coastlines and bushfire-prone land.
The Climate Institute has released a report detailing the critical role Australian housing plays in the economy, and the risks housing faces with a changing climate.
It also sets out the role of banks and insurers in promoting risk reduction and climate adaptation for Australian housing.
<h2>Built on sand</h2>
Housing represents many Australians' biggest financial commitment – including those who rent rather than buy. Housing accounts for up to one-third of the economy, through direct and indirect means and across sectors such as finance, insurance and construction. With population projections forecasting continued growth and attraction to risky locations, banks and other financial institutions have a crucial role to play in minimising the economic threat posed by climate change.
But while the role of land-use planning and insurance with regard to climate risks has been well documented, the role of banks as gatekeepers to housing finance has been largely overlooked.
As the Climate Institute’s report points out, banks have a “unique ability and incentive” to steer housing purchases, because they are the main providers of residential financing. As such, they have large financial liabilities if homes are lost to fires, floods or other climate effects.
There are a range of tactics banks might use to reduce or mitigate climate risk. For instance, they could favour lending on homes that meet specific risk-reduction requirements, such as raised floor levels for homes in flood zones, or fireproof construction materials in bushfire-prone regions. This approach could also be used in setting mortgage insurance premiums as well as the mortgages themselves. Another approach is to better apportion their exposure - by lending on a reduced percentage threshold of the total property value.
Westpac has a Climate Change Position Statement and both the Commonwealth Bank and NAB have committed in reducing carbon. But more needs to be done for housing.
If banks continue under a business as usual approach, they face the risk that many properties will be devalued over time, through continued exposure to extreme weather events. This represents a significant financial liability, especially when you consider that a home loan typically takes 30 years to play out – a similar time scale to the many climate impacts expected for Australia.
Banks are already making moves to restrict lending based on location.
But the report outlines several other things banks could do, such as:
<ul>
<li>
examine climate risk exposure in their current lending practices
</li>
<li>
use their role as financiers to support good policy, by engaging policymakers and financial regulators
</li>
<li>
encourage stakeholders, including the public, private sector and civil society sectors, to develop ways to minimise climate impact risks for housing
</li>
<li>
ensure losses are addressed in an equitable way.
</li>
</ul>
<h2>A climate insurance policy</h2>
The report also details how the insurance sector assesses risk to housing, and how it might improve its approach in the future, given the intersection of urbanisation, population trends and the trend towards living in climate-threatened areas.
The insurance sector has historically been seen as the messenger of housing market signals, because of its keen focus on assessing weather-related risk. But the 2011 Queensland floods highlighted many weaknesses in relying on insurance alone.
Many properties did not have adequate flood insurance, leaving many people without a home after losing their house to the floods. The Australian and Queensland governments and the private sector struggled to co-ordinate a cost-effective response, partly because of previous bad land-use planning decisions, but also because of the lack of adequate insurance cover.
A federal government levy helped the affected regions to “build better back”. Some chose to rebuild in the same high-risk locations.
Critically, gaps identified in building codes, land use and climate resilience still require a more co-ordinated response. The current Stage 2 coastal law reforms in New South Wales offer a potential example of how competing interests might be balanced.
At face value, this issue is a no-brainer. After all, risk mitigation is bread and butter for lending institutions and insurers, and we already know that extreme weather events are forecast to increase in frequency and severity. National resilience is required.
Quantifying this risk will be easier if financial institutions utilise access to relevant data on issues like coastal risk. Some of these data are becoming more freely available. Recognising the value of climate data is a trend that should continue. For a robust and resilient future, governments and the private sector should end their tango over who should pay for the information and agree that financial climate risks are best faced with eyes wide open.
Tayanah O'Donnell is research fellow, University of Canberra and author for The Conversation. She can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/tayanah-odonnell-122914" target="_blank">here</a>.
</body></html>

jchancellor-FAypfDUnLy

How can your bank help reduce climate change risks to Australian homes?

<html><body>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.edu.au/content/57114/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1">
GUEST OBSERVERS
Australia’s snow season is notoriously fickle. Some years bring deep cover lasting for nearly six months (such as in 1964). Others barely cover the grass for a few weeks (such as in 2006).
The difference between a good season and a bad one may be a single weather event, such as the so-called Snowmageddon in 2014, which dropped around a metre of snow in less than a week.
The high variability of the snow season means the Bureau of Meteorology doesn’t currently produce a seasonal outlook for snow (as we do for temperature and rainfall). However, we know that the same climate drivers that affect Australia’s weather also influence our snowfall.
<h2>El Niño and La Niña</h2>
The best way to see how snowfall varies from year to year is to use data from Spencers Creek in the New South Wales Snowy Mountains, a pristine site 1,830 metres above sea level. Past studies show that these data tend to correlate with snow more generally across the mainland alpine regions, but they don’t always match the cover at lower elevations.
First, let’s look at El Niño. We are coming out of one of the strongest El Niño events on record. During El Niño years, rainfall is typically below average across eastern Australia during the snow season, and temperatures are warmer during the day. The maximum snow depth averages about 35cm less than the all-years average, while the period with more than 100cm is about two weeks shorter.
El Niño’s opposite, La Niña, usually brings above-average rainfall, but this doesn’t necessarily mean more snow. Temperatures can sometimes be too high and hence precipitation may fall as rain even at higher elevations, which can actually decrease snow depths.
This has happened more frequently in recent decades as a result of climate change. Seven of the past eight La Niña years have produced lower maximum snow depths than average.
Historically, neutral years have had more consistent good snow depths than either El Niño or La Niña years.
It is important to consider these drivers as tilting the odds towards a particular outcome, rather than guaranteeing it. While about half the historical El Niño years have had well-below-average snow, three El Niño years had well-above-average snow depths: 1972, 1977 and 1991. That said, no recent El Niño year has produced good snow, with these winters tending to be particularly dry.
<a href="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1341-81102p.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<img src="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1341-81102p.jpg" alt="">
<h4>
Maximum snow depths for all years 1954-2014, segregated by a) ENSO, b) IOD and c) SAM. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Author provided
</h4>
<a href="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1327-38yzqm.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1327-38yzqm.jpg" alt=""></h4>
<h4>
Average snow depths throughout the season, with 90% confidence interval shaded, segregated by a) ENSO, b) IOD and c) SAM. Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Author provided
</h4>
<h2>The other players</h2>
To make things more complicated, El Niño and La Niña don’t act alone.
The Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) may actually be a clearer indicator of snow depth. Similarly to El Niño, positive IOD years tend to be drier than average across southeastern and central Australia, leading to lower snow depths. They are particularly dry over the Australian Alps when El Niño and positive IOD events coincide.
Unsurprisingly, snow depths in late winter and spring are also lower when the IOD is positive. Snow depths are generally higher than average during years with a negative IOD.
The Southern Annular Mode (SAM) has the strongest relationship with snowfall. Cold fronts and low pressure systems are the main weather systems that bring our snow, and the SAM indicates whether the westerlies that bring this weather are closer to Australia or the poles.
Negative SAM brings the fronts, rain and snow further north, while during a positive SAM these fronts move further south. The average (mean) maximum snow depth in negative SAM years is a cool 240cm, almost 80cm higher than in positive years. Unfortunately, accurate forecasts for SAM are still only possible for two to three weeks ahead, which means that this measure is more of a diagnostic rather than a forecasting tool.
Of course, climate change also plays a role. Both maximum snow depth and total snow accumulation have declined over the past 25 years. The reduction in snow cover is most obvious at lower elevations and at the end of the ski season when warm spring rains can hasten the melt.
However, while it has been a few decades since the last 3-metre year (in 1992), there are still above-average seasons when the weather and climate is right, most recently in 2012.
<a href="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1355-aggnfh.jpg" target="_blank">Click to enlarge</a>
<h4><img src="/images/2016/05/13/image-20160426-1355-aggnfh.jpg" alt=""></h4>
<h4>
Annual maximum snow depth at Spencers Creek, 1954-2015, with a linear trend line shown Australian Bureau of Meteorology
</h4>
<h2>Less moisture? Never fear, snowmaking is here</h2>
El Niño, positive IOD and positive SAM periods all typically lead to less moisture in the air, which partly explains the lower snowfalls. But with less cloud to trap in the heat at night, they also have lower minimum temperatures.
Luckily for snowriders, these are also the ingredients for good snowmaking and can contribute to less snow melting. The ability to harvest snow and move it where needed can also allow ski resorts to moderate the impacts of average or below-average natural snow cover on skiers and snowboarders.
<h2>What’s ahead in 2016?</h2>
While forecasts for the Southern Annular Mode only have skill for a few weeks ahead, and it’s also too early to forecast what may happen in the Indian Ocean, we can look to the Pacific.
The 2015 El Niño is in decline and neutral conditions are expected to prevail by winter. For 2016, the most likely outcomes are either neutral or La Niña conditions, a hopeful early sign for 2016 snowfalls.
Finally, a word of caution. Don’t get too excited by early snowfalls, or indeed sell your skis if winter starts with no cover: two of the best seasons on record – 1956 and 1981 – had no snow at all at the start of June, while two of the poorest seasons – 2006 and 1965 – had 20cm and 60cm, respectively, of snow on the ground before the Queen’s Birthday weekend. Early-season cover isn’t always the guide we might think it is.
While we know the Australian snow season can certainly have large variations in its snow cover, knowing the state of Australia’s climate drivers can give a heads-up on what the season may be like. But remember, there are always exceptions to the rules.
 
This article is written for The Conversation by Catherine Ganter, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Acacia Pepler, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Andrew B. Watkins, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; Blair Trewin, Australian Bureau of Meteorology; David Jones, Australian Bureau of Meteorology. They can be contacted <a href="https://theconversation.com/au" target="_blank">here</a>.
 
</body></html>

Climate

Editor's Picks

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News

Climate

Editor's Picks

Receive the latest news stories to your inbox

Have something to contribute?

Developments

New apartments

New townhouses

News