A Sustainable Future with Water Self-Sufficiency is Singapore’s Aim

Global sustainability leader and creator of the ‘triple bottom line’, John Elkington makes these Singapore observations: “One reason why the city-state is so keen on water recycling and desalination, for example, is that Malaysia has periodically threatened to cut off the critical water it supplies. As a result Singapore plans to be self-sufficient in water by 2061, when their agreement to draw water from Malaysia ends.” World Water Day, which coincides with World Storytelling Day, will be held in Singapore on 20 March, while Government and the private sector are committed to Singapore International Water Week 4 – 8 July.

For more information on World Water Day/World Storytelling Day in Singapore 20 March, go to: www.rogerjenins.com.sg and for more on Singapore International Water Week, go to : www.siww.com.sg

‘You drop it, you break it, it’s finished’, by John Elkington in The Guardian and eco-businss.com

Singapore: Sometimes today’s abnormal holds useful clues to tomorrow’s normal. Singapore is very far from normal, something that Lee Kuan Yew, the city-state’s prime minister from 1959 to 1990, is at pains to point out in his new book, Hard Truths. It’s one of the most gripping and personal accounts of the thrills and spills of politics that I have read.

Surrounded by countries that do not wish it well, and in competition with rising neighbours in Asia, Singapore’s future is far from guaranteed. One reason why the city-state is so keen on water recycling and desalination, for example, is that Malaysia has periodically threatened to cut off the critical water it supplies. As a result Singapore plans to be self-sufficient in water by 2061, when their agreement to draw water from Malaysia ends.

This propensity to think long is shot through Lee’s book. In one memorable section – and there are many – he recalls a visit to Boston in 1968, where he had an eco-epiphany. Like Sherlock Holmes and the dog that didn’t bark, he noticed that the trees and other vegetation in the city centre were a rich, verdant green. He asked why they weren’t as dusty and diseased as in Singapore? The answer: vehicle emissions were tightly controlled – something Lee promptly put into force back home.

Dismissed as “Disneyland with the death penalty” and as “an antiseptic island peopled by a passive citizenry and governed by paranoia,” Singapore demonstrates the power of triple bottom line strategy at the country level: economic competitiveness, social inclusion (up to a point) and a cleaner environment for all. It remains to be seen whether the People’s Action party (PAP), that has held power for over 50 years, survives Lee’s eventual death (he is still a cabinet member), but he aims to ensure his successors – perhaps seduced by consumerist lifestyles – do not forget how fragile the city-state’s success is.

While in the city last week, I spoke to hundreds of people in government, business and civil society, and found a growing interest in corporate social responsibility and sustainability. Although Lee is pessimistic about the likelihood of nation states getting a grip on the climate disaster he sees threatening the region, he is determined that Singapore adapts to climate change and develops new industrial clusters in areas like clean technology.

Their tiny country, Lee warns the rising generations of Singaporeans, “is like a chronometer. You drop it, you break it, it’s finished. Some countries, you get a second chance, you buy spare parts, you put it back again. I’m not sure we’ll ever get a second chance.”

And I’m not sure, if he’s right about climate change, whether by 2061 a huge number of Asians won’t find themselves more than inconvenienced in a Humpty Dumpty future. Our best hope: to win over cities, city-states and countries to the “one planet” way, before we lose our grip.

John Elkington is the executive chairman of Volans, co-founder of SustainAbility, blogs at Johnelkington.com, tweets at @volandia and is a member of The Guardian’s Sustainable Business Advisory Panel.

Source: www.eco-business.com

China Spends Big on Low Carbon Energy & Water Conservation

“China is going to leave all of us in the dust,” Christiana Figueres, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said at a panel discussion at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. “They’re committed to winning the green economy race”. Last year, China boosted spending on low-carbon energy by 30% to US$51.1 billion, ‘‘by far the largest figure for any country’’. And China’s central government spent 365.5 billion yuan (US$55.38 billion) on water conservancy during the past five years, more than double the amount spent during the 2001-2005 period.

By Alex Morales in Bloomberg (28 January 2011):

China is pushing ahead of the U.S. and Europe in developing clean- and low-carbon energy as a way to spur the nation’s economy, the diplomat leading United Nations Climate talks said.

“China is going to leave all of us in the dust,” Christiana Figueres, head of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, said at a panel discussion today at the World Economic Forum today in Davos, Switzerland. “They’re committed to winning the green economy race.

China last year boosted spending on low-carbon energy by 30 percent to $51.1 billion, ‘‘by far the largest figure for any country,’’ Bloomberg New Energy Finance said Jan. 11. Global accounting firm Ernst & Young said in September that China for the first time overtook the U.S. in its quarterly index of the most attractive countries for renewable energy projects.

‘‘You can leapfrog — you don’t have to follow the model of the north,’’ Figueres said. ‘‘China is showing this.’’

Chinese officials including lead climate negotiator Su Wei have said the country will push energy efficiency in its next five-year plan to be detailed this year.

At today’s panel, Mexican President Felipe Calderon said the world is waiting for action from the U.S. in fighting climate change, while European Union Commissioner for Climate Action Connie Hedegaard said that U.S. businesses stand to lose out by stalling in taking action.

‘‘American business should be aware that we’re up here saying this is a race,” Hedegaard said. “It’s bad economics, it’s bad business not to be among the front runners but to be hesitating. I hope that even more American business people would understand that they need to put the pressure on their politicians.”

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com

BEIJING, Jan. 31 (Xinhua) — China’s central government spent 365.5 billion yuan (55.38 billion U.S. dollars) on water conservancy during the past five years, more than double the amount spent during the 2001-2005 period, the Ministry of Finance announced Monday.

The government spent 231.5 billion yuan on water conservation projects during the 11th Five-Year Plan (2006-2010) to fund the construction of the South-North Water Diversion Project, reinforce aging reservoirs and harness inland waterways, said a statement on the ministry’s website.

The country also allocated 34.97 billion yuan during the past five years to build irrigation facilities and other farmland irrigation projects nationwide, said the statement.

The increased spending on water conservation played a significant role in managing water flows China’s major rivers and seven consecutive years of good harvests, the statement said.

The government plans to invest 4 trillion yuan in water conservation over the next 10 years as many cities face water shortages and irrigation facilities are badly in need of overhaul, the Communist Party of China Central Committee’s Leading Group on Rural Work has announced.

The government Saturday issued a document that makes water conservancy construction a priority task.

Source: http://news.xinhuanet.com

Reduce Emissions by 50% or 5%? Tale of two cities/countries

New Zealand’s Climate Change Issues Minister Dr Nick Smith believes a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2050, or in short “minus 50 by 50”, is a realistic but credible target for the country, which has already introduced an emissions trading scheme, unlike Tasman neighbour Australia with a lowly 5% – repeat 5% – emissions reduction target and no sign yet of a scheme or carbon tax. Wellington will host this year’s Climate Change and Business Conference 1-2 August.

27 January

Wellington City Council is bringing the pre-eminent climate change and business conference in the Asia-Pacific region to the city in 2011.

The city will host the 7th Australia-New Zealand Climate Change and Business Conference on 1 – 2 August 2011 with the Council as Foundation Sponsor.

The 2010 conference in Sydney was the most important conference of its type, attracting delegates from throughout the region. It saw participation by key business leaders, politicians, academics and industry experts and presentations from the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC, national and state politicians, and a wide range of industry sectors including banking, farming, forestry, investment, management, technology, transport, and energy.

Announcing the decision, Wellington City Mayor Celia Wade-Brown said that after the success of the 2009 (Melbourne) and 2010 (Sydney) events, she was very pleased that the conference was being held in Wellington.

“Our city has taken a lead in preparing to adapt to likely impacts from climate change and we have been proactive in seeking to reduce Wellington’s emissions in partnership with business,” said Mayor Wade-Brown.

“We have combined infrastructure planning with natural planning. We will profile some of these actions at the conference and invite other innovators to do the same.

She said Wellington’s compact form and abundance of renewable energy-generating potential through wind, tide and sun made it a highly appropriate venue for the conference.

“The Climate Change and Business Conference is a great opportunity to share experiences across the Asia-Pacific region. We expect senior leaders from Australasian business and politics and international and local experts to contribute to an outstanding conference program,” Mayor Wade-Brown said.

The conference is a not-for-profit event. Its purpose is to provide business with the latest information and analysis to enable best-practice responses to climate change.  A key theme for this year’s conference will be business opportunities arising from the emergence of clean technologies.

Conference convenor Elizabeth Edmonds, speaking from Sydney, said that there will be plenty of new content to share at this year’s conference.

“Given the extreme weather events in Australia, we will be exploring whether these events can be linked to anthropogenic climate change and whether we can expect more of them. We will take a close look at how Australia and New Zealand will need to adapt to a changing environment during the 21st century and what that investment will mean for business.

“The primary focus will however be on emerging policy settings.

“We have an emissions trading scheme up and running in New Zealand which is being reviewed, with findings expected mid-year. Australia, after some false starts, is now well on the road to developing its own market instruments and progress there will be reported in full.

“Additional sessions will explain developments in international policy and will explore the full range of current and emerging complementary policies in both countries.

“The business sector wants to understand what these changes mean and how it should respond, both in managing new risks and in seeking new opportunities. The conference will provide that input in a high quality, packed two-day program and associated exhibition,” Ms Edmonds concluded.

The 7th Australia-New Zealand Climate Change and Business Conference is organised by the Climate Change and Business Centre (Sydney) and Point Carbon (Norway), a world-leading provider of independent news and analysis of carbon markets. 

The conference is supported by an extensive range of business groups, NGOs and governments across five countries

Source: www.wellington.govt.nz and  www.climateandbusiness.com

Hon Dr Nick Smith
Minister for Climate Change Issues

50 by 50 emissions reduction target proposed

The Government is proposing to gazette under the Climate Change Response Act 2002 a 50% reduction in New Zealand’s greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

“We acknowledge it is difficult to look 40 years forward but the nature of the climate change problem requires we think and plan for the long term,” Dr Smith said. “We believe a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 levels by 2050, or in short -50 by 50, is a realistic but credible target for New Zealand.

 “This target will require New Zealand to reduce net emissions by 31 million tonnes a year. This is a very big ask when nearly half our emissions come from agriculture and when we already produce 70% of our electricity from renewables. It will only be achievable with major technological innovations in areas like agriculture and transport, which are quite possible over this timeframe.

“This proposed New Zealand 2050 target is quite compatible with similar targets set in Australia (-50%), Canada (-50 to 65%), Japan (-55 to 80%) and the United States (-80%). It is consistent with the Government’s policy of ensuring New Zealand does its fair share in the global effort to limit the negative impacts of climate change while recognising the unique emissions profile New Zealand has with the dominance of agriculture.

“This long-term emissions reduction target cannot be set in stone and will need to be regularly reviewed taking into account the latest scientific advice on climate change, progress made by other nations, and progress made in the development of new technologies that would enable New Zealand to reduce emissions.”

Submissions on the proposed -50 by 50 target can be made to the Ministry for the Environment at 2050target@mfe.govt.nz and close on 28 February 2011.

Source: www.climatechange.govt.nz

Leading Businesses on the Line for Environment and Sustainability

Environmental Leader reports that BMW and Johnson & Johnson are among the members of a new US initiative promoting sustainable business practices. The Stewardship Action Council (SAC) aims to develop a performance-based sustainability index, and stimulate collaboration between business, government, non-profits and academia. Meanwhile, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and consultants Ernst & Young are creating a tool to help private equity (PE) firms improve the environmental performance of their portfolios. Under a pilot program called Green Ops for PE, participants will get assessments of the environmental opportunities within their portfolios, and suggestions for ways to maximize environmental and financial value.

Environmental Leader announces 31 January 2011:

Pfizer, BMW and Johnson & Johnson are among the members of a new initiative promoting sustainable business practices.

The Stewardship Action Council (SAC) aims to develop a performance-based sustainability index, and stimulate collaboration between business, government, non-profits and academia.

The SAC says that many existing corporate sustainability organizations limit those who may join, are cost-prohibitive, do not include performance standards and only focus on a particular topic, such as reporting or green building.

In contract, the SAC says, its initiative lays out a path for members to meet a specific sustainability standard and to improve their performance over time. Dues are up to $1,500 for an individual facility and up to $7,500 for a corporate membership.

Membership falls into two categories. Participating Members set improvement goals and report progress against those goals. Alliance Members, made up mainly of non-profits, government and academic institutions, do not set improvement goals.

SAC has not yet published any of the goals set by individual members.

But it does say that participating members must set goals beyond what is required by regulation. Participating membership is divided into four levels: members in Level 1 must set one goal, those in level 2 must set two goals (or one if they are a small business). At Level 2, one of the goals has to be for carbon reduction, if that is material to the business.

Members in level 3 must set four goals to improve their operational footprint (or two for small businesses). Two of the goals must be related to material aspects of operation.

Level 3 members must have an environmental management system in place and verified by a third party, with independent audits conducted every three years, and self-assessments in interim years. Level 2 members must commit to implementing environmental management systems.

Members at Level 3 must also have had no criminal violations in the past five years, no civil violations in the past three years, and no more than three notices of violation in any three-year period.

SAC has yet to determine the standards for level 4.

The founding members include:

• American University
• Audubon International
• BMW
• Calvert Asset Management Company, Inc.
• Campbell Institute of the National Safety Council
• CLF Ventures
• Covanta Energy Corporation
• DM Petroleum Operations Company
• Forever Resorts
• Georgia Department of Natural Resources
• Indiana Department of Environmental Management
• Matt Potoski, Iowa State University
• Johnson & Johnson
• Lockheed Martin Manassas
• Michelin North America, Inc.
• Minnesota Pollution Control Agency
• National Pollution Prevention Roundtable (NPPR)
• North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
• Pfizer
• PRIZIM, Inc.
• Rockwell Collins
• Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation
• Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
• Washington State Department of Ecology
• West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection
• Wildlife Habitat Council
• Wisconsin Department of Natural Resource

Source: www.environmentalleader.com

January 25, 2011 Environmental Leader

The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and consultants Ernst & Young are creating a tool to help private equity (PE) firms improve the environmental performance of their portfolios.

Under a pilot program called Green Ops for PE, participants will get assessments of the environmental opportunities within their portfolios, and suggestions for ways to maximize environmental and financial value.

The pilot will build on practices developed through EDF’s Green Returns program for the PE sector. EDF has used that process with private equity investors the Carlyle Group and Kohlberg Kravis Roberts & Co (KKR).

In March 2010, EDF helped Carlyle launch EcoValuScreen, a due diligence tool to identify value creation opportunities through improved environmental management practices. Carlyle is applying the process to new transactions in the U.S. – including the recent acquisition of nutritional supplement company NBTY, Inc.

KKR’s Green Portfolio Program was developed in 2008, and now includes 16 portfolio companies. KKR and the EDF say the program has yielded $160 million in savings over two years, saving 345,000 metric tons of CO2 emissions, 8,500 tons of paper, and 1.2 million tons of waste.

The new joint initiative will involve advisers from Ernst & Young’s private equity and sustainability teams. Boutique consulting firm Quantis will also help with data and life cycle assessments.

“We have seen many companies recognize significant ROI from assessing and investing in environmentally sustainable business initiatives,” said Steve Starbuck, Ernst & Young’s Americas leader for climate change and sustainability services. “Green Ops for PE could make these business opportunities more accessible across the PE sector.”

Ernst & Young announced in September that it had achieved a 15 percent reduction in the overall carbon footprint of its member firms in the Americas from the 2008 to 2009 fiscal year

Source: www.environmentalleader.com

Abundant Fish Help Bring Coral Back to Life after Bleaching

“As oceans continue to absorb the impacts of human activities and of climate change, we’ll need more large protected areas like PIPA to help ecosystems survive. The oceans are our life-support system. There’s never been a more important time to take care of them.” Geoffrey Stone reports for National Geographic on the incredible coral recovery operation in the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA), the world’s largest marine protected area, at 157,000 square miles, in the South Pacific.

Photo by Brian Skerry

By Gregory Stone in National Geographic Magazine  January 2011

Photograph by Brian Skerry

The heavy iron anchor and chain tumbled noisily into the water. We lowered two red skiffs from our research vessel, loaded our diving gear, and sped off toward the lagoon. After a five-day sail from Fiji to Kanton island, we were anxious to see if reefs here had survived a rare ocean disaster—a lethal spike in the temperature of local seawater.

During the El Niño of 2002-03, a body of water more than 1°C (1.8°F) warmer than usual had stalled for six months around the Phoenix Islands, a tiny archipelago in the central Pacific. We’d heard that the hot spot had severely bleached the region’s corals. As I descended toward the lagoon floor, I was hoping things weren’t as bad as we’d been told.

Settling down beside the reef, I saw dead coral everywhere. What had been flourishing, overlapping, overflowing brown and auburn plates of corals were now ghostly, broken reminders of their former beauty. When I’d first visited the Phoenix Islands a decade ago, these reefs had supported numerous species of hard corals, as well as giant clams, sea anemones, nudibranchs, and great populations of fish, from blacktip reef sharks to parrotfish to bohar snappers. Because the islands have remained undisturbed for so long, they’d largely avoided overfishing, pollution, and other harmful impacts of modern civilization. But they hadn’t been able to avoid climate change, which most scientists believe amplifies El Niños.

Not ready to accept this setback, I was heartened to see lots of reef fish and vibrant corals growing up through the rubble—early signs of recovery. Was it possible that the reefs of the Phoenix Islands, like their mythical namesake, were rising from the ashes of a terrible warming?

Ten years ago, I’d flown to Tarawa, capital of the Micronesian country of Kiribati, which includes the Phoenix Islands, to meet with government officials. At the time, the airport terminal was no bigger than a house, open-air with a thatched roof. I was met at the fisheries ministry by David Obura and Sangeeta Mangubhai of CORDIO, an Indian Ocean conservation orga­nization, who had helped me carry out the first systematic underwater surveys of the Phoenix Islands. An ancient air conditioner rattled away in the meeting room as we presented a slide show to the ministers of fisheries and environment, showing them scenes of sharks, flourishing coral, and dense clouds of colorful fish. Accustomed to the degraded reefs closer to their towns and villages, the ministers and their staff were as amazed as we had been at the “like new” reefs of the Phoenix Islands.

“Do you realize, Greg, that you’re the first scientists who ever bothered to come tell us what they learned in our waters?” said Tetebo Nakara, then minister of fisheries.

During our subsequent talks with government officials, we found out that a fourth of Kiribati’s income ($17 million in 2000) came from selling access to their reef fish, sharks, tunas, and other wild marine resources to nations such as Japan, South Korea, and the United States. In return for a commercial fishing license, a foreign company paid about 5 percent of the wholesale value of anything they took out of Kiribati waters.

I asked Nakara if Kiribati might consider receiving a payment in lieu of the access fees to leave the fish in the water. That way, it would receive badly needed income, but its underwater haven would be preserved. Without living reefs, these islands could rapidly erode. He smiled and said, “This could be good for Kiribati”—as long as his nation could keep receiving income from the “reverse fishing license.” Anote Tong, Kiribati’s president, enthusiastically backed the project and has since led it to fruition.

Formally declared a reserve at the 2006 Convention on Biological Diversity in Brazil, the Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) was expanded two years later to become what was then the world’s largest marine protected area. At 157,000 square miles, it was nearly as big as California. But many questions remained: How could Kiribati put a fair price on its marine life? Where would the money come from? Who would police such a vast reserve?

To address such questions, I enlisted the help of Conservation International (CI), which in 2001 had created the Global Conservation Fund to protect rain forest and other habitats through a similar strategy. Receptive to the idea, the Kiribati Parliament created the PIPA Conservation Trust with trustees from the New England Aquarium (NEA), CI, and the government of Kiribati, and fund-raising began for a $25-million endowment.

Now I’d returned to Kanton with David Obura and Randi Rotjan, a coral expert from NEA, and other scientists to assess the impact of the El Niño event. The bleaching had killed all the coral on the lagoon floor, but almost half appeared to be growing back—the fastest recovery any of us had ever seen. The reason seemed clear: abundant fish. When coral bleaches, seaweed can grow out of control, stifling reef recovery. But fish eat the algae, keeping it from smothering the coral. Because fish populations had been protected here, the reefs remained surprisingly resilient even after suffering one of the worst bleaching events ever recorded.

As oceans continue to absorb the impacts of human activities and of climate change, we’ll need more large protected areas like PIPA to help ecosystems survive. The oceans are our life-support system. There’s never been a more important time to take care of them.

Gregory S. Stone is chief scientist for oceans at Conservation International. Brian Skerry’s photos of Japan’s ocean wilderness appeared in November.

Source: www.ngm.nationalgeographic.com/

Giving, Sailing and Coasting  are the Key Award Winning Messages

Australian of the Year Simon McKeon will devote 2011 to inspiring individuals and especially corporations to dig deeper for those doing it tough. He has played key roles with World Vision Australia, the Global Poverty Project and Red Dust Role Models and is currently chairman of the CSIRO. He is pictured with around the world sailor 2011 Young Australian of the Year Jessica Watson. Previous award winner Tim Flannery – in his capacity as Chairman of the Coastal and Climate Change Council – calls for urgent Government leadership on coastal adaptation to drive collaboration and consistent approaches across all levels of government.

Born-again banker out to make charity the bottom line

BY BREANNA TUCKER

26 Jan, 2011 01:00 AM

Australian of the Year Simon McKeon will devote 2011 to inspiring individuals and especially corporations to dig deeper for those doing it tough.

Speaking at Parliament House after last night’s awards ceremony, Mr McKeon urged all Australians to donate more of their time to charitable causes and hoped the corporate sector would go one step further than simply writing out a cheque.

Mr McKeon is the executive chairman of Macquarie Bank’s Melbourne office but now performs the role part-time. In 1994, he was in the middle of a lucrative investment banking career when he decided to devote more time to community work.

”I come from the big end of town and for many years have tried to preach, if you like, what happens when a big corporation actually does give money,” he said.

”It’s there to make a profit, I’m not going to deny that. But I think there are many ways in which corporates these days can share their expertise, their people, their facilities and, of course, a bit of money as well … of course they can give more.”

Mr McKeon has played key roles with World Vision Australia, the Global Poverty Project and Red Dust Role Models and is currently chairman of the CSIRO.

He also recently retired as founding chairman of MS Research Australia after having himself been diagnosed with the disease.

He says a brief period of blindness and paralysis from the hip down showed him the importance of contributing to the organisations that make a difference.

”It was a wonderful thing for me because I encountered what life might have been like if I had been struck with it permanently,” he said.

Last year’s ceremony drew heavy media attention after 2010 award recipient, Professor Patrick McGorry, used his new title to accuse the Federal Government’s immigration detention centres of being ”factories for producing mental illness” before later retracting the comment.

Mr McKeon steered clear of controversy last night and acknowledged that the Treasurer had ”a damn hard job of allocating scarce resources”.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard last night congratulated Mr McKeon on his award and praised his achievements as an inspiration to the Australian community.

”Simon’s example is about fund-raising but it’s also about putting in your personal time and direct support, your skills, your mentoring, into organisations that need your help,” she said.

Also revealed at last night’s ceremony was 2011 Young Australian of the Year Jessica Watson.

The 17-year-old last year achieved her dream of sailing solo, unassisted, non-stop around the world but last night she maintained she was ”no one special”. ”Heroes aren’t these people put up on pedestals … so dream big and more importantly, let’s make it happen.

Source: www.canberratimes.com.au/

14/01/2011

The Chair of the Coasts and Climate Change Council, Professor Tim Flannery, provided the Coasts and Climate Change Council’s end of term report to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, the Hon Greg Combet AM MP.

In its report, the Council suggests an urgent need for Australian Government leadership on coastal adaptation to drive collaboration and consistent approaches across all levels of government. It proposes a 10-year national coastal adaptation agenda be defined and suggests four priority areas:

• accessible and consistent information for coastal communities;
• high quality and regionally targeted data for decision-makers;

• clarification of legal liability for local governments; and  
• greater policy and regulatory consistency for local governments and professions.

Many coastal assets – critical infrastructure, beaches and public open spaces, public facilities, homes and commercial interests – are at risk from rising sea levels and other impacts of climate change. The value and distribution of assets at risk reveals the national scale of coastal adaptation.

Effective coastal adaptation will require innovation, reform and structural adjustment. Australia’s policies, institutions and investors are not well positioned to manage the scale of risk that climate change will bring to Australia’s coast. There is an urgent need now for improved cooperation and collaboration between all levels of government, with leadership from the Australian Government, to drive risk assessment, improved land use planning and design standards and to enhance decision-making capacity in coastal regions.

Continuing to engage stakeholders across both private and public sectors will be critical to the development of partnerships which can deliver demonstrable progress in reducing the climate change risks to our economy, social values and ecosystems.

Early action can help reduce the severity of long term adverse impacts in many areas. This is because the use of strategic risk-based land use planning and well designed legal and regulation reform can ensure that exposure to risk does not unnecessarily increase with further development, and reduce financial and adjustment costs to future generations.

The Coasts and Climate Change Council can assist in communicating risk and impacts to private and public sectors and communities, and continue to provide independent advice to the Minister on effective approaches to coastal adaptation.

Read the Coasts and Climate Change Council report.

Source: www.climatechange.gov.au

More than One Degree of Separation  Between Words & Action

It’s great that a big company like News Ltd should be setting an example by going out of its way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This all started when the company’s chairman, Rupert Murdoch, who a bit over three years ago, in a remarkable pep talk to his global staff, pledged “our intention to be carbon neutral, across all our businesses, by 2010″. Jonathan Holmes for the ABC’s The Drum reflects on this positive action, but wonders why the newspapers in the Murdoch stable don’t do more for the cause. “As one of the world’s great media companies, News Corporation has the power to do far more to counter the risk of catastrophic climate change than merely to reduce its own emissions.”

By Jonathan Holmes for The Drum, ABC

27 January 2011

You may have seen the full page ads in the papers on Tuesday morning:

How do you change the equivalent of 57,302 light bulbs? Start with one.

That’s how News Ltd, the Australian province of Rupert Murdoch’s global empire, proudly announced that it is now ‘a carbon neutral business’. And if you follow the invitation in the ads to visit News Ltd’s website www.1degree.com.au, you can read about all the wondrous things that the company is doing to reduce its carbon footprint, from applying infrared paint “to reduce heat absorption through the press hall roof” at its Chullora press plant in Sydney, to running ‘an incredibly popular bike discount scheme’ at the Adelaide Advertiser, “with 30 staff rushing to take up the offer”.

It would be easy, and in my opinion, quite wrong, to scoff. It’s great that a big company like News Ltd should be setting an example by going out of its way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The fact that it will also be reducing its power bills shouldn’t be any reason for cynicism. Energy efficiency can be capital-intensive: the pay-off in reduced power bills can take years to achieve, and in any case often amounts to just a tiny percentage of a large business’s overall costs. That’s why many still don’t make much of an effort.

That News Ltd does so can be sheeted home to its parent company’s chairman, Rupert Murdoch, who a bit over three years ago, in a remarkable pep talk to his global staff, pledged “our intention to be carbon neutral, across all our businesses, by 2010″.

Why? Well, argued Murdoch, because it makes good business sense, and because News Corp’s staff, and more importantly, its global audienes, are interested in this climate change stuff; but principally because “in Melbourne, 2006 was the 10th consecutive year with below average rainfall. And 2005 was the hottest year on record throughout Australia… Climate change poses clear, catastrophic threats. We may not agree on the extent, but we certainly can’t afford the risk of inaction”.

Last Thursday, the UN’s World Meteorological Organisation sent out an important announcement from its Geneva headquarters. Together with 2005 and 1998, it said, the year 2010 ranked as the warmest on record. “The 2010 data confirm the Earth’s significant long-term warming trend,’ said WMO Secretary-General Michel Jarraud. “The 10 warmest years on record have all occurred since 1998″.

The findings are based on three separate datasets, two maintained in the United States and one in the UK. And they’re significant, not just because climate change sceptics have been maintaining for years that since 1998 the earth has been cooling, not warming; but because, in the words of Professor Matthew England of the UNSW’s Climate Change Research Centre, “in the absence of global warming, you would have thought 2010 should be one of the coolest on record because there’s been a very strong La Nina for about eight months of the year”.

1998 was an extraordinarily hot year globally, largely because of a very strong El Nino phenomenon. El Nino conditions prevailed in 2009 too, but in around May of 2010 there was a rapid switch to its opposite, La Nina, as abnormally cold water upwelled to the surface in the eastern Pacific. That, along with record warm ocean temperatures north of Australia, is what has caused the extraordinary amount of rainfall in eastern Australia in the past few months; and it’s also why, in central and eastern Australia, 2010 was an unusually cool year.

The fact that despite this, the global temperature was as high as in 1998, argues Professor England, “taken together with other observations, such as accelerating ice melt, increased humidity, more extreme events and rising sea levels, (indicates that) climate change is progressing at what should be seen as an alarming rate”.

Those quotations aren’t taken directly from anything Matthew England has said to me. They’re from an email he was sent by The Australian’s Debbie Guest, after she’d spent half an hour on the phone with him last Friday. She was checking that he was happy for them to be included in a piece she’d written on the WMO’s announcement for Saturday’s Weekend Australian.

The Oz had carried an AFP wire story about the WMO announcement on the Friday, discreetly placed on an inside page. Debbie Guest’s piece for the Saturday dealt with the apparent paradox that a cool year in Australia was the hottest on record globally. But her story didn’t make it into most editions of the Weekend Oz the next morning. A severely truncated version did appear in early editions, and online, but the quotes from Professor England were conspicuously absent.

When he asked her why, Ms Guest told him that her story had had to be shortened for space reasons – though why that should have affected the online story, she didn’t explain.

Professor England says he’s satisfied Debbie Guest was genuinely trying to do a good job. The shortening was done by someone above her in the hierarchy.

So what did appear in The Weekend Australian that day? Well, nothing in the newspaper (as far as I can see) about the WMO’s announcement- although this alarming story from AFP was posted on The Australian’s website that day.

But The Weekend Oz did find room on its opinion pages for this piece by the ineffable Viscount Monckton of Brenchley. If you can’t understand its tortured mathematics, don’t worry. You’re not intended to. You areintended to think, “Well, I don’t really follow it all, but this bloke seems to be impressively learned, and he says it’s not worth doing anything about climate change”.

That, of course, is precisely the opposite message to the one Rupert Murdoch was trying to send his own troops back in 2007. The evidence for climate change, since then, has only got stronger. The reasons for taking precautionary action have only become more compelling. Of course News Ltd can’t, on its own, affect the global climate by reducing its carbon footprint, and nor can Australia. But if every company, and every nation, acted – or refrained from acting – on the basis of that logic, the chances of eventually stabilising global temperatures at less than catastrophic levels would be reduced to zero.

Well, you may argue, but doesn’t Christopher Monckton have a right to be heard? Don’t news stories get shortened every day? What does all this prove?

Nothing, in itself. You have to be an alert and habitual reader to notice that week after week, year after year,The Australian and The Weekend Australian massage their news coverage and grossly unbalance their opinion pages so as to send the message that the existence of human-induced climate change is highly debatable, and that any action by Australia to reduce its emissions would be economically ruinous and politically foolish.

At least, as The Australian’s former rural reporter, Asa Wahlquist, told a conference of journalism educators last year, “The one bit of good news from this is that it shows that News Limited editors are independent (from Rupert Murdoch)”. She also said that reporting climate change for The Australian was ‘torture’.

The Australian’s circulation may be modest, but it is undoubtedly influential in business and political circles. Fox News in the US, whose presenters are almost unanimous in their virulent climate change ‘scepticism’, is hugely influential. Both, in their different ways, are failing to report fairly and accurately what is arguably the most important global issue of our times.

As one of the world’s great media companies, News Corporation has the power to do far more to counter the risk of catastrophic climate change than merely to reduce its own emissions. As Rupert Murdoch put it back in 2007:

“News Corporation, today, reaches people at home and at work… when they’re thinking… when they’re laughing… and when they are making choices that have enormous impact.

“The unique potential – and duty – of a media company are (sic) to help its audiences connect to the issues that define our time.

“We are only at the beginning of this mission, and we have a long way to go.”

Yes Mr Murdoch. You did then, and you still do

Source: www.abc.net.au

Last Word: Bamboo the Ultimate Sustainable Material

Regular readers of abc carbon express and “The ABC of Carbon” know there is a certain partiality shown towards bamboo and its atributes from the writer. (For further evidence see pages 26 and 29 in the book.)  We have also acclaimed the Green School in Bali made entirely of bamboo. There are even thoughts being seriously given to a major arts/environmental project with bamboo at its heart and soul. Pictured is black bamboo being used to great design effect at One Raffles Quay, Singapore. So thanks to Martin Blake for passing on this wonderful story on the merits of bamboo by Paul Miles in the UK Financial Times. Here goes:

“If I told you there’s a building material that is up to 50 times stronger than oak but lighter than steel or concrete, that is flexible, aesthetically pleasing and highly rated for its green credentials, you might say it sounds too good to be true.

“If I went on to explain that the material can be used not only to build bridges and cathedrals but also to create floors, walls, clothing, paper, vinegar, cosmetics, animal feed and as a vegetable for human consumption, you would probably dismiss it as some Utopian pipe dream.

“But the product exists. It’s bamboo.”

The organic alternative
By Paul Miles

FINANCIAL TIMES, EUROPE, 7 JANUARY 2007

If I told you there’s a building material that is up to 50 times stronger than oak but lighter than steel or concrete, that is flexible, aesthetically pleasing and highly rated for its green credentials, you might say it sounds too good to be true.

If I went on to explain that the material can be used not only to build bridges and cathedrals but also to create floors, walls, clothing, paper, vinegar, cosmetics, animal feed and as a vegetable for human consumption, you would probably dismiss it as some Utopian pipe dream.

But the product exists. It’s bamboo.

Today, there is a worldwide movement of architects, interior designers, aid workers and environmentalists championing this hollow-stemmed member of the grass family. Giant bamboos, which grow at rates of more than a metre a day, reaching heights of 30 metres or more and diameters of up to 25cm, are being cultivated and harvested for modern architect-designed structures. And interest in the projects is growing as fast as the grasses.

In Colombia, which is at the forefront of modern bamboo architecture, talents such as Oscar Hidalgo L�pez, Marcelo Villegas and Sim�n V�lez build expensive homes and public buildings from bamboo. In the US, California architect Darrel DeBoer, who specialises in building with sustainable materials, has created university buildings from bamboo and written a manual about its use. Hawaii-based Bamboo Technologies has attained government building code certification for one species of structural bamboo and built more than 50 bamboo homes in the islands and California, the most expensive one costing $250,000. The company hopes to build homes in other temperate areas of the US and Europe this year and its latest annual bamboo house design competition has attracted more than 300 entrants from 63 countries.

One happy customer is Shep Gordon, who bought a Bamboo Technologies kit last year for use as his home office in Maui. “It’s fantastic. I’ve never felt so good being inside something. It really is magical,” he says. “It’s like being in a bamboo forest. It’s really calming.”

The 1,000 sq ft office “with lots of bells and whistles” took less than three weeks to erect. Speed of assembly is a “fantastic attraction, especially [in Hawaii] where there’s a shortage in the labour market”. It cost $170 per sq ft compared with $500 per sq ft for a traditional building and “I like this much more”, Gordon says. He’s now about to have a two-storey bamboo guesthouse built.

Stephan Reeve, who lives in a bamboo house in Kipahulu, Hawaii, and built another for her mother, says: “I love the look and feel of the bamboo culms [stalks]. We recently had a substantial earthquake which damaged local bridges and closed our highway for over a month. I was very safe in my strong and flexible bamboo home. I find it tremendously satisfying that my house is contributing to new, more sustainable construction processes. [And] it is a nice house for kids as it has all natural safe materials.” 
DeBoer praises bamboo for its “strength, longevity and beauty”, characteristics that have also made it a new favourite among interior designers. In a pressed and laminated form, bamboo can be used as flooring and wall panelling and for kitchen cabinets and furniture and it comes in a range of natural colourings. US-based Smith & Fong, established in 1989, says it has seen a “phenomenal growth” in sales of its Plyboo, which is manufactured in China. “With an increasing interest in green building, people are looking for products that are sustainable. It’s also durable and very versatile,” says Sven Eberlein, director of marketing. “I recently saw a bicycle made from bamboo.”

London-based Urbane Living is one of about six UK suppliers of bamboo flooring and sells “a huge amount”, according to director Adam Robertson. “It’s fantastic value for money, being comparable in strength to oak but at a fraction of the cost,” he says. Indeed, bamboo flooring starts at �16.49 a sq metre compared with about �40 for certified sustainable timber.

Bali-based Linda Garland, dubbed “the queen of bamboo”, makes beds, sofas and other furniture from some of the 200 species of bamboo (of the 1,500 or so worldwide) on her Panchoran Estate, near Ubud. Her pieces have been installed in the homes of clients such as David Bowie and Richard Branson and she’s currently building an enormous holiday home with black bamboo walls and roofs around a lake in eastern Bali for Hollywood film director Rob Cohen.

Garland, who also runs the non-profit Environmental Bamboo Foundation, which promotes the use of the material worldwide, says she’s “enchanted by [its] aesthetics” and hopes that luxurious homes such as the one for Cohen will help address its “association with poverty”, which is still a “problem with its status”.

That said, she remains committed to encouraging the use of bamboo for rebuilding low-income housing after natural disasters, since bamboo houses fare better than many other structures in hurricanes and earthquakes (up to magnitude five on the Richter scale, according to a 2004 test by Britain’s Timber Research and Development Association). After fashion designer Donna Karan stayed at Panchoran last year, she donated funds for five bamboo houses to be built for survivors of the Javanese earthquake.

Garland also emphasises the environmentally friendly aspects of bamboo. Its yield (weight per acre per year) is up to 25 times that of timber. One hectare of bamboo can yield 22 to 44 tonnes a year and it is ready to harvest within three to five years. Because it is botanically a grass, more shoots simply appear from where it is cut, so it doesn’t need to be replanted. Bamboo prevents soil erosion, sequesters at least four times more carbon than a forest of young trees and releases 35 per cent more oxygen.

Although humans have sheltered under bamboo structures for millennia, its modern renaissance dates to 2000 when Sim�n V�lez built a 1,830 sq metre pavilion from 4,000 giant stalks of Guadua angustifolia at the Hanover Expo. The organisation that commissioned him was Zero Emissions Research and Initiatives (Zeri), a “global network” that seeks to create a society without unwanted waste. The Guadua species used for the pavilion proved strong enough to meet strict European building codes. Loads weighing 10 tonnes placed at the edge of the 7.5m cantilevered roof caused a movement of just 5cm, most of which reversed when the load was removed.

DeBoer cites V�lez’s mortar-filled bolt joinery, which he pioneered some 20 years before, as “making all the difference” to bamboo architecture. In traditional housing, such as that used in the south Pacific, bamboo culms (stalks) are joined together by lashing with vines or other natural fibres, producing a joint that weakens over time as climate and age affects the fibres. V�lez’s method fills part of the hollow stalk, between nodes, with mortar and uses bolts to join pieces together. Several stalks can be joined together to form cathedral-like vertical columns and horizontal spans of more than 50 metres are now possible. V�lez’s most recent project was a 130-room bamboo eco-lodge in China but in Colombia he has built more muscular structures: bridges across gorges, enormous factory roofs, sports stadia and market places. “Bamboo is steel from nature,” he says. “Whatever an engineer can build from steel, I can build from bamboo. Steel and bamboo have the same strength.”

It is with roofs that bamboo comes into its own. The structures of architects such as Villegas and V�lez are at their most inspiring when you look up. Architect Shoei Yoh has designed public buildings in Japan with roofs inspired by bamboo basketware. A woven bamboo frame, supported with temporary posts, is covered with a thin layer of cement. It becomes a beautiful roof with a flowing, fabric feel, as if a lily flower has landed gently on the ground. Richard Rogers’s award-winning Barajas airport in Madrid has 210,000 sq metres of laminated bamboo planking adorning its waving roof. “It gives the building a lovely ‘soft’ feel and is great at absorbing sound,” an airport spokesman says. In Leipzig, the zoo’s new multi-storey car park is clad in bamboo, changing what could be just another concrete monstrosity into a thing of Zen beauty.

As timber forests continue to be over-exploited, there’s no doubt that bamboo will become an increasingly important crop. “It’s such a multi-purpose plant,” says Francesca Ambrosini, European representative for the International Network for Bamboo and Rattan (Inbar), a non-profit organisation funded by the United Nations and the European Union. The group promotes products such as paper, fabric (including super-soft, fast-wicking, anti-bacterial fibre) and cosmetics all made from bamboo using new technologies developed in the past few years. Construction – an area where, Barajas notwithstanding, Europe still lags – will be the next push. Moving on from demonstration buildings V�lez built for Germany’s Vitra Design Museum, Inbar is working on modular housing made from bamboo panels suitable for European climates that are expected to cost in the region of just $70 per sq metre to construct. It hopes to have built examples by the end of this year. “Use of bamboo directly contributes to the community or people of the developing or poor countries where it grows,” says Shyam Paudel of Inbar.

There are some downsides to bamboo. Certain species can get out of control, spreading rapidly across vast areas. Infestation by the “powder post beetle” is a threat (although most bamboo is pre-treated to prevent insect damage). The process of laminating to produce flooring and panels adds environmental cost, especially if the bamboo is bleached. 

More worryingly from a sustainability perspective, there are currently no commercial plantations producing structural bamboo in Europe or the mainland US (although there are some in Hawaii). Most comes from China, India, Vietnam and Latin America. According to the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, in 2005, China had 5.4m hectares of bamboo plantation, some 2.7 per cent of its forestry area, and all the houses sold by Bamboo Technologies arrive in kit-form from Vietnam. Shipping bamboo and bamboo products round the world makes it much less eco-friendly. “Transport is an issue, as it is with many materials,” says Sally Hall of the Association for Environment Conscious Building, which has about 1,400 members in the UK and is developing a “gold standard” for a “nearly zero” emissions house.

Still, enthusiasts think the benefits of bamboo easily outweigh its flaws. And they spread their message with religious zeal. Take architect Gale Goldberg, author of Bamboo Style. Her plea to readers? “Bring bamboo into your life”.

Source: www.pandabamboo.co.za

Need to Adapt to More Extreme Weather

For some who froze nearly to death in December, it might be hard to believe but it’s a fact. The year 2010 ranked as the warmest year on record, together with 2005 and 1998, according to the World Meteorological Organization. In 2010, global average temperature was 0.53°C (0.95°F) above the 1961-90 mean. The first ten years of the new millennium was the hottest decade ever, since recordings began in 1880. Consequently, we have a lot about weather and climate this issue. Floods in Australia, Sri Lanka and Brazil are linked to the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, in turn attributed to a warming world and aggravated by the La Nina effect.  With a strong climate change focus, we hear from Will Steffen, Michael Richardson, Chai Tai Soo, Mike Sketekee, Matthew Wright, Tim Hughes, Ed Blakely and George Earl. We even speculate – with the help of World Vision – on what the late Martin Luther King would think of climate change. Sustainability and green business get  a good look in with a GreenWise survey from the UK, and the Wharton School’s insight from the US, then Coca Cola shows it is facing up to corporate social responsibility, particularly through its WWF alliance. South Korea has launched a green credit card scheme and new technology will enhance electric car growth in China. From Singapore, we hear of the importance of water management in Asia and what’s in view for World Water Day (20 March), plus the city state’s first Eco Food Courts and where Envirofriendly is making its presence felt. Warm wishes for a cool change! –  Ken Hickson

Profile: Dr Martin Luther King

If the civil rights leader Dr Martin Luther King was on the scene today, would he have a view on climate change action (or inaction)? Remember, the Nobel Peace Prize winner once said this: “Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus but a moulder of consensus. On some positions cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.” World Vision brings King into the equation. We also remind readers that we presented a famous quote from King in “The ABC of Carbon” ending with the words: “Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilisations are written the pathetic words: ‘Too late’…” Read more

Here’s a quote from Martin Luther King used in the introduction in Ken Hickson’s book “The ABC of Carbon”:

“We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted with the fierce urgency of now. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history there is such a thing as being too late. Procrastination is still the thief of time. Life often leaves us standing bare, naked and dejected with a lost opportunity. The tide in the affairs of men does not remain at the flood; it ebbs. We may cry out desperately for time to pause in her passage, but time is deaf to every plea and rushes on. Over the bleached bones and jumbled residue of numerous civilizations are written the pathetic words: Too late . . .”

Reverend Dr Martin Luther King, Jr (1929–1968)

What would Martin Luther King Jr do about climate change?

By Jarrod McKenna

On ABC religion and ethics (17 January 2011):

The legacy of Martin Luther King Jr and the reality of climate change are both victims of western culture’s remarkable capacity to accommodate and neutralise that which is most critical of it.

Early in the civil rights movement, Bayard Rustin said to King, “I have a feeling that the Lord had laid his hand upon you. And that is a dangerous, dangerous thing.” Similarly, the FBI once described Martin King as the “most dangerous man in America” – and yet, as Martin Luther King Jr day rolls around again in the United States, we are often presented with a figure that seems more like a cheerleader for the status quo rather than a prophetic challenge to it. Somehow, it seems we have made this dangerous figure very safe.

For instance, in a speech at the Pentagon commemorating King’s legacy, the Defense Department’s general counsel Jeh C. Johnson remarked, “I believe that if Dr King were alive today, he would recognize that we live in a complicated world, and that our nation’s military should not and cannot lay down its arms and leave the American people vulnerable to terrorist attack.”

But to claim that Dr King would be pro-war today is as likely as him being pro-segregation. After all, this is the Dr King who said, “A nation that continues year after year to spend more money on military defence than on programs of social uplift is approaching spiritual death.” And this is the same Dr King who said in his speech on 4 April 1967 (a speech that turned three quarters of American public opinion against him), “To me the relationship of the ministry [of Jesus Christ] to the making of peace is so obvious that I sometimes marvel at those who ask me why I’m speaking against the war.” And this is the same Dr King who said, the night before he was murdered on 4 April 1968, “It is no longer a choice, my friends, between violence and nonviolence. It is either nonviolence or nonexistence.”

Princeton University professor Cornel West insists that we “domesticate, disinfect, deodorise, sanitise, and make safe” the prophetic words and witness of King – a process he refers to as the “Santa-Claus-ification of Martin Luther King Jr,” whereby we embrace a manageable, smiling, jolly fellow and abandon the man of history and his passionate call to a liberating love and a healing justice. We do to King, in other words, precisely what we have done to the radically nonviolent Christ of the New Testament.

So how can we take the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr seriously without making him in our own image? How can we, informed by his witness, confront problems he never faced without sanitising or co-opting the voice of the Nobel Peace Prize laureate who described himself as “first and foremost a preacher of the Gospel”? How can we deconstruct the hagiographies of a super-saint or “Santa Claus figure” and truly hear from this exceptional follower of the way of the cross?

Richard Stearns, the President of World Vision United States, offers an extremely helpful model for engaging Dr King ‘s legacy. In his book The Hole in Our Gospel, Stearns bravely confesses how World Vision United States nearly abandoned the call “to defend the poor and the needy” because doing so wasn’t popular. What prevented this disastrous move and encouraged him to be faithful was Stearns’s sense of history and the witness of Martin Luther King. Stearns admits he felt chastened by what King said to the church of his day:

“The contemporary church is a weak, ineffectual voice with an uncertain sound. So often it is an arch defender of the status quo. Far from being disturbed by the presence of the church, the power structure of the average community is consoled by the church’s silent and often even vocal sanction of things as they are.”

As Stearns writes, “One of the disturbing things about Church history is the Church’s appalling track record of being on the wrong side of the great social issues of the day.” Though he could have been speaking about the issue of climate change, the issue Stearns was dealing with was the AIDS epidemic.

World Vision United States conducted research in the late 90s among evangelical Christians, asking if they would be willing to donate money to help children orphaned by AIDS. The responses they got back were horrifying, and truly damning of the church. Only 3% of evangelical Christians answered they would definitely help, while 52% of evangelical Christians surveyed said they “probably or definitely would not help.” In response Stearns writes:

“When it came to showing compassion to AIDS victims, culture blindness obscured our sins of apathy and judgement, just as it blinded Christians in previous generations to slavery and racism. We see this same exact pattern in God’s people in the Old Testament, condemned by Isaiah and other prophets, and again in the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, which Jesus denounced in the strongest terms. The message should be plain for us to see – history demonstrates that the institutional Church often fails to rise above and challenge the popular culture and values.”

Reflecting on church history, and inspired by the Apostle Paul’s prayer in the opening chapter of the letter to the Ephesians, Stearns suggests that every pastor, church leader, and para-church ministry leader should begin their daily devotions with the following confession:

“My name is __________, and I am blind to the injustices and sins of omission committed by my own church. Open the eyes of my heart, Lord, to see the world as You see it. Let my heart be broken by the things that break your heart. Give me the ability to see through our culture and to lead my people with Your vision, instead of the world’s.”

Now, as a Gen Y who loves and seeks to serve the church, I must confess that my generation has been quick to judge those in the past – racists, segregationists, imperialists, bigots – but slow to connect the dots between the Gospel and issues of water, food, health, economics, poverty and the land. Much like those admittedly sincere white Christians in the 60s for whom civil rights seemed like a “distraction from the Gospel,” Christians today often display disinterest and even fatigue from all the hysteria surrounding climate change.

Many of us find ourselves implicated in the patterns of prevailing culture described by Naomi Oreskes in her brilliant book, Merchants of Doubt. As one of World Vision Australia staff member heard from his mother recently, “Why is World Vision talking about climate change? World Vision works to get children out of poverty. Not save trees!” This reveals two important realities that must not be ignored.

First, many of us fail to see what World Vision Australia sees all too clearly: climate change is hitting the poorest of the poor the hardest. Recently Tim Costello and I were in Chennai with Jayakumar Christian, CEO of World Vision India. Dr Christian told us plainly “we are already seeing the effects of climate change.” Climate change is like a giant anti-development force unleashed on the world, aimed at the poor. This is why Tim Costello has repeatedly said, “climate change will undo sixty years of development if we don’t act now.” It is also why evangelists like Tony Campolo are saying, “You can’t be a Christian and not be an environmentalist.”

Second, this demonstrates just how small and anaemic our understanding of the Gospel has become. When the Gospel is understood as sin management, or as a kind of fire-insurance for the afterlife, or self-help with a religious flavour, then it falls shamefully short of the beauty of the Biblical witness.

What our response to the ecological crisis reveals is how ill equipped our Western imagination is to understand the Gospel as good news for all of creation. Much like in the 60s, the issue was not that the Gospel wasn’t good news for the oppressed seeking racial justice and reconciliation – it’s that too many Christians were blind to see it. They were blind to the reality that the Gospel meant not only personal transformation but social transformation, just as many of us are blind to the Gospel being more than just personal and social, but ecological and cosmological as well.

Polite talk of “creation care” or “stewardship” as a kind of appendix to the Christian faith is completely inadequate. The Gospel is not that Jesus came to redeem individuals. The Gospel is that Jesus came to redeem all of creation by grace, and we as individuals, together, can be a witness to that. Our ecological crisis calls us to rediscover the earth-affirming beauty of the kingdom of God. As Nicolas Berdyaev put it, “The kingdom of God is the transfiguration of the world, universal resurrection, a new heaven and a new earth.” Or, in the words of Karl Barth, the Christian hope is that “we wait for Easter to become a universal reality.”

Climate change, like the church’s complicity with racism, calls us to repent and rediscover the fullness of the Gospel. Guided by the Holy Spirit, we must return to Scripture and reconnect what should never be separated: the doctrine of the incarnation, the cross, the resurrection and the kingdom are always connected to the doctrine of God’s good creation. To care about the poor is to care about climate change. To care about climate change is to care about the poor. And the Gospel of Jesus Christ, when seen in all its redemptive splendour and beauty, is good news to both!

The year prior to his assassination, Martin Luther King was asked by a reporter whether he was going to hurt the budget of his organisation by the stance he had taken on the issue of war: “Aren’t you hurting the civil rights movement and people who once respected you because you are involved in this controversial issue?” As he related to audiences later, Martin Luther King said that he looked at that reporter and, with deep understanding and no bitterness in his heart, said:

“I’m sorry sir, but you don’t know me. I’m not a consensus leader. I don’t determine what is right and wrong looking at the budget of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Nor do I determine what is right and wrong by taking a Gallup poll of the majority opinion.”

King would go onto say:

“Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus but a moulder of consensus. On some positions cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.”

Dr King would write from Birmingham Jail that, regarding civil rights, “The judgement of God is upon the church as never before.” Today I believe those words are just as applicable to the church regarding climate change and how it affects the poor. To stand with the poor and take real action on climate change might not be safe, nor politic, nor popular. But the dangerous witness of Martin Luther King Jr calls us to dare to go the way of the cross, because, in the words of Dr King, conscience tells us it is right.

Jarrod McKenna the National Adviser for Youth, Faith and Activism for World Vision Australia. He is the founder of EPYC and co-founder of the Peace Tree Intentional Community in Perth.

Source: www.abc.net.au