Australia's marine ecosystems responding to climate change

More than 80 Australian marine scientists from 34 universities and research organizations have compiled the comprehensive report from which it can be seen how Australia’s marine ecosystems are responding to climate change. Among most interesting discoveries were:

1. The increasing sea temperatures have an effect on the distribution of marine plants and animals, causing many species that are currently being found in tropical and temperate waters to move south.
2. Winds and currents over the Southern Ocean are having major impact on foraging of seabirds that breed in south-east Australia and feed close to the Antarctic each summer.
3. The good news is that some tropical fish species have a greater ability to adapt to changes brought by climate change and will likely be able to acclimatize to rising water temperatures.

The Australian science community is luckily heavily involved in research, monitoring and observing climate change impact which should lead to valuable information to management on how to help marine ecosystems adapt to climate change.

This has been a very detailed report that analyzed the changes in sea temperature, sea level, the East Australian Current, the Leeuwin Current, and El Niño-Southern Oscillation, and their effects on „coral reefs, tropical, temperate and pelagic fish, marine mammals, marine reptiles, seabirds, mangroves, tidal wetlands, seagrass, macroalgae, marine microbes, phytoplankton and zooplankton.

Why new climate change deal is nowhere to be seen?

The science is almost unanimous in describing climate change as the biggest environmental threat of our time. It’s a real pity that the world leaders do not feel the same because new climate change deal is nowhere to be seen, and seems to be hugely overshadowed by the global economic meltdown.

Sure, there have been plenty of climate change talks but very little has moved forward in terms of agreeing new international deal that would significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

We have been bombarded by different  reports about big differences between developed and developing world that supposedly prevent the agreement on new climate deal.  The truth behind these talks is completely different, namely neither of the big emitters is ready to make the first step and show the rest of the world the right and only logical way to move forward.

They all fear that this will create gigantic damage to their economies, and are waiting for others to make the first move, meaning that we are stuck in this pathetic status quo situation where each major country is just making up excuses instead of doing something meaningful to decrease its carbon footprint.

The fossil fuel lobbies still hold plenty of power and renewable energy industry is still fairly young. This is the main reason why the future outlook for major reduction in emissions looks bleak to say the least. The renewable energy capacity continues to grow, that's true, but as long as fossil fuels remain dominant energy sources, world will not stand any chance in fight against climate change.

Not agreeing on new climate change deal because of the possible short-term damage to economy is one of the biggest ironies in the world today, especially given the fact that climate change is already costing global economy billions of dollars, with much worse to come in not so distant future.

The politics is determining the future of our future generations, and this is anything but good. Politics is symbolized by greed and power, and this is the legacy that is bound to create major problems for our children and grandchildren.

If we fail to win the fight against climate change what kind of world will be leaving to them? Do they really deserve to pay for our mistakes, and be severely punished because of the total negligence from our part? Where's that famous humanity we so much like to talk about?

Building highway through rainforests contributes to climate change

Rainforests absorb huge quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere which means that the clearance and destruction of these forests have extremely negative environmental impact. Climate change is growing in strength meaning we need our allies to fight with us, and rainforests are no doubt one of our most important allies in global fight against climate change.

The latest study from the Florida University has studied the environmental impact of building highways through rainforests and the effect of this on climate change. The study has concluded following:

1. Highway paving facilitates migration and population growth in communities. More people is often associated  with massive forest clearing and conflicts over natural resources.

2. Highway paving has left the Amazon rainforest more vulnerable to clearing with fire, which results in increase in carbon emissions and adds more impact to climate change.

Paving highways through rainforests can indeed lead to significant economic benefits but these economic benefits are very often accompanied with massive environmental damage so it is of vital importance to consider what is gained and what is lost by paving highways.

The massive environmental damage doesn't only refer to more greenhouse gas emissions but also in huge biodiversity loss because rainforests belong to areas with the richest biodiversity in the world. Paving highways through rainforests could therefore also lead to decline and extinction of many species.

US climate change legislation - Nothing without EPA

Despite many promises and strong support from president Obama, US still failed to pass cap-and- trade legislation, as there is still not enough political will for such action, or as some others would say fossil fuels lobbies are still too powerful. The only somewhat good news came from climate negotiator Todd Stern who recently said that despite the failure of cap-and-trade legislation US won’t change its target for 2020 to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by approximately 17 percent.

If you follow what's happening with climate change legislation in United States then you already know that The House approved a bill last year to set limits on carbon emissions linked to climate change but this bill stalled in Senate. Though cap-and-trade legislation would be more than welcome passing this bill will take some time, and in the meantime Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) needs to step in, and use existing laws to at least regulate some sources of carbon pollution.

By the current looks of it, EPA will not be afraid to use these laws, and the EPA regulation planned for next year will set the U.S.’s first nationwide limits on greenhouse-gas pollution in the effort to curb global warming. This is a clear sign that EPA will continue pushing forward towards the adequate climate change legislation.

Many political analysts believe that the adequate domestic climate change legislation is the key to success to the international climate deal. Copenhagen was yet another big failure on international stage, mainly because US failed to give positive examples to other countries. Hopefully, this situation will soon improve.

Climate law this year - Likely or unlikely?

Will Congress pass this year new climate legislation? Difficult to tell, and based on previous experiences it is perhaps wise not to expect miracles. In any case, changes are coming too slow, and legislators still look to be kind of afraid with the fact that this new climate bill could hurt domestic industry.

I do not look at climate change issue in that way. New climate deal will perhaps have some short-term negative consequences for domestic industry but on the long run we could actually see some economic benefits. Of course, in order to achieve this U.S. will have to fully reshape nation’s economic, environmental and legal standards.

There are many political analysts who believe that new climate bill take plenty of dramatic twists and turns, and that President Obama will have to increase its efforts by pushing Congress to come up with the adequate climate legislation.

Industry won't sit back and wait, and they will probably use their huge influence on politics to challenge every single climate change legislation that they do not like.

The role of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will also be one of the key battles. Will EPA be able to regulate the emissions under the Clean Air Act? Many expect that there'll be long legal fight, and the winner is still uncertain (though odds are in favor of EPA, especially after the Supreme Court upheld the EPA’s authority to regulate atmospheric carbon dioxide in 2007).

One thing is sure though, expect lot of political turmoil, promises, excuses, delays, you know the usual political stuff. And don't be surprised if everything once again ends up with huge disappointment. After all we are talking about climate change issue, and up to this point, climate change was only connected with huge failures, both on domestic as well as on international level.

Has Obama forgot about climate bill?

Not so long ago Obama promised that climate change legislation is one of his top goals, and that he will do everything that is in his power to make this happen. But climate bill still looks like a very distant possibility so it is really no surprise that green business leaders and environmentalists have started pressing him to fulfill his promise.

The current overall impression is that White House isn't engaged enough on this major piece of legislation, and that Obama needs to put more efforts to push climate legislation forward.

Obama recently said "I believe that we can come together around this issue and pass comprehensive energy and climate legislation that will ignite new industries, spark new jobs and make America more energy independent" . But lately Obama has been nothing but words when it comes to climate change, and this is definitely not the right attitude for such major legislation.

All of the sudden climate change issue has dropped down on Obama's political agenda, and smaller issues are the ones that get most of the attention.

To put it as simply as possible it looks like Obama currently doesn't want to play the leading role in engaging Congress on climate legislation. The reason for such behavior is uncertain, some believe it is because of the pressure from fossil fuel lobbies while other even believe that Obama has, for the time being, lost interest in climate change legislation.

Whatever the reason is, if things do not change very soon, climate change legislation could be in serious jeopardy.

New global warming laws needed, but when?

Many people believe that with Obama in charge United States have entered into new "environmental age" with special emphasis to global warming and climate change problem. But in order to make first necessary step US needs new global warming laws that would limit emissions of greenhouse gases responsible for global warming. Of course this should be done as soon as possible, and Obama himself said many times how he will move quickly to address climate change. So when can we expect these new laws? If we are to believe the words of Sen. Jeff Bingaman this will not happen before 2010.

As Bingaman explained the economic crisis, the transition to a new administration and the complexity of setting up a nationwide market for carbon pollution will prolong new global warming act until 2010, meaning it will not happen in first year of Obama's presidency. But on the other hand Obama could do some significant things in fight against global warming even without Congress, for instance by giving California permission to regulate global warming gases from motor vehicles and by issuing regulations under the existing Clean Air Act.

So some starting steps can be done even without Congress. The whole world expects that United States now finally have the right man to lead the world into the "green revolution" and fight against global warming and climate change. Kyoto protocol failed mainly because of United States, and every major agreement on global warming deal must include US in order to have chance of succeeding. Bill to limit greenhouse gas emissions is vital, the sooner the better, but even if it takes more than one year Obama can still do much for environmental policy. Hopefully he is the man that stands behinds his words.