Food prices soaring thanks to global warming

Originally published in Crikey, 05 September 2012

A report released by the World Bank in late August showed that global food prices rose by 10% in July. The price hike has been largely due to the massive heatwaves and droughts that have swept across the United States and eastern Europe over the past few months, causing havoc for farmers, destroying crops across the continents.

The Food Price Watch report is released by the World Bank each month and tracks global food prices for several staple items. The July report found that maize and wheat prices rose 25% and soybeans by 17%. Only rice saw a drop in prices, by 4%.

You can read the full article at crikey.com.au 

I’m racist

I have a confession to make: I am racist.

Let me explain. Recently on the way home I pulled up on my bike at an intersection and an Aboriginal woman pulled up next to me and we started to talk. I know of this woman from around my workplace, but have never spoken to her. I see her around quite regularly on my campus. The conversation was fine. We just discussed the evening traffic. Despite this however, for some odd reason I had a strange feeling of slight uncomfortableness during the whole thing. Not enough to make me feel scared, or to not want to engage with her, but enough for me to notice that it was there.

In fact if I think about it honestly, I can definitely say that in many instances I slightly treat people of other races differently. I sometimes, without realising, think that I should walk on the other side of the street as young black people. I sometimes treat Asian people as if they are always quiet and difficult to engage with. Or I see Aboriginal people through the light of poverty. They’re only minor things, but even though I absolutely hate it, they’re sometimes there.

Now, it’s not that I think myself as a full-blown racist. I definitely don’t think that. I would genuinely think, and hope, that the people around me wouldn’t consider me as racist either.

Despite this however, I know there are many little racist parts of me. And I’m pretty sure that if we all think about it, we probably all these tendencies in one way or another. In some way or another everyone has a bit of racism built into them from when we were young. Racism is still heavily built in to almost every part of our society.

And that’s the thing that we often don’t talk about when it comes to racism. We’re happy to talk about how we think Andrew Bolt is a racist, or how Australia’s asylum seeker policy is racist, or attack Aboriginal Memes for being racist, but we treat those instances as if they are outliers. Racism is now a thing of extremists who are no longer in the mainstream of our community.

The problem is that this ignores the fact that racism is actually everywhere. We no longer have separated busses, and Aboriginal people can vote, but racism is still all around us. And most of us are part of it in some way or another. Systematic racism is about a lot more than the institutions that still have overt racist tendencies that hold people out. It is about the stereotypes that exist in our society and the simple reality that we all know that people within our community, including ourselves, treat those of different races differently. Systematic racism exists both within our institutions, and, maybe to a lesser extent, within our minds.

Now, I’m not saying that we’re all disgusting racist bigots. In fact, I know that the vast majority of people in Australia, and around the world, don’t consider themselves, and aren’t actively racist. Despite this however racism is still embedded in our society. It is systematic and we are therefore all part of it in some way or another. And whether it is treating particular people with a little bit more suspicion, or labelling stereotypes onto others just because of the colour of their skin, this racism has an impact.

But in refusing to acknowledge it, we are also refusing to deal with it. In discussing at length the racism of Aboriginal Memes, whilst at the same time laughing at a slightly racist joke, we are treating racism as if it is something we are not part of despite the fact that we are, subconsciously engaging in it.

It is hard to come out and say ‘I have racist tendencies’. But it’s about time we started to talk about racism as it actually is; an everyday thing. It is something that I, and most probably you are part of in some way.

The first part of fixing a problem, is acknowledging it. Racism is still systematic in our society. That doesn’t mean we are all awful people, who have to feel bad about ourselves. What it does mean however, is that we need to start thinking about our role in the systematic nature of racism. It’s the only way we’ll be able to move to a completely post-racist world.

Time to tackle our coal exports

Last week, Environment Minister Tony Burke, approved the controversial Alpha Coal Mine in Queensland. The approval marks a rank hypocrisy by the Government, who are at one level are championing local action on greenhouse emissions, but at another are actively fueling global climate change.

The approval of this mine gives another example of the impact Australia has on climate change beyond our own internal emissions; an impact our government refuses to take any action on.

Whilst Australia generates ‘only’ 1.5% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions (noting that that still ranks us 15 in the world), our impact extends well beyond this when we start to take into account coal mines and exports. In 2010 Australia exported approximately 300 million tonnes of coal around the world. This makes Australia the world’s leading coal exporter, with exports in black coal rising over 50% in the last 10 years alone.

The impact these exports have on the global climate is huge. As former Liberal Party Adviser and Research Fellow at the Global Change Institute, Guy Pearse, explains:

“At the moment [Australian coal exports] generate around 750 million tonnes of greenhouse pollution internationally in coal fired power stations and steel mills around the world. That’s roughly 25 per cent more than we produce inside our own borders, and nearly five times as much as will be reduced by the carbon tax legislation.”

These effects go well beyond greenhouse gas emissions as well. The coal shipping trade runs directly through the Great Barrier Reef (we all remember the shipwreck of the Shen Neng 1 on the Great Barrier Reef), whilst dredging in places like the Gladstone Harbour is having big environmental impacts. Mining also creates major health problems, with research showing the people who live within the vicinity of coal mines often suffer from major health problems.

And it’s not likely the growth of this industry is going to slow at any point in the future. With approximately 120 mines or expansions expected in the next decade, coal exports are due to triple. This will mean an export increase of approximately 800 million tonnes per annum, resulting in a massive increase in global greenhouse gasses.

Despite all of this however, the Government remains extremely quiet on the issue.

For example, when leaked campaign strategy documents revealed a proposed $6 million campaign from Greenpeace to stop the expansion of coal mining, Government ministers were quick to jump to the industry’s defence. After the release of the document, Deputy Prime Minister, Wayne Swan said:

“The coal industry is a very important part of our national economy. It’s a very important of our energy supply and it’s very important to the global economy.”

Prime Minister Julia Gillard was quick to jump in as well, stating “The coal industry has a great future in this country.”

This rhetoric has been matched by policy approaches. The approval of the Alpha coal mine is just one part of an ongoing love of coal for the ALP, with the Government presenting no real evidence of ever considering not approving future mines. The party now also wants to change the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, giving more powers to states to approve such projects, effectively removing the federal ALP from such processes if it were to stay in power.

What this means is that whilst Australia is taking some action at home with our ‘own’ emissions, we are ignoring an international responsibility to stop the growth of global climate change. At home we are closing 2000MW of coal power plants over the next decade in an active recognition of the negative impact they have on our climate and community. At the same time however, by exporting so much coal, we are and will continue to be actively fueling hundreds, if not thousands, of coal power plants around the world. We are exporting greenhouse gasses by the millions of tonnes every year, and then complaining when other nations don’t take action on climate change.

The easiest way Australia could have a major impact on climate change is to leave our coal in the ground. It’s not hard to do, and state, and federal Governments currently have all the power they need to do it.

As long we continue to dig up and export coal however, the Government will not be able to ever claim that they are serious about climate change.

Antarctic melt alarm as scientists find ‘very unusual’ warming

Originally published in Crikey, 23 August 2012

Scientists have drilled 364 metres into ice to complete the first ever comprehensive temperature record of the Antarctic Peninsula — and they’ve found evidence of “very unusual” and dramatic warming over the last century.

The collapse of ice shelves in Antarctica has seen some of the most dramatic images of human-induced climate change. The collapse of the Prince Gustav and Larsen A Ice Shelves in 1995 and then the collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelve in 2002 stunned scientists, and provided vivid images of the potential future of the southern continent.

New research released today has explained the extent of warming in Antarctic Peninsula, painting a picture of a future of rapid warming and melting ice. The research showed that the Peninsula has seen a rapid warming over the past 100 years, but that this has also come on top 600 years of more gradual, natural warming in the region.

You can read the full article at crikey.com.au 

Have we lost the climate fight?

There’s been a lot of talk going around recently that climate activists have ‘lost’ the climate battle. For example, in his recent article in The Monthly, Robert Manne stated that the last few years have seen a ‘dark victory’ by climate change skeptics over climate science. Bemoaning about the failures of climate activists has become a favourite past time of many since the failure of the Copenhagen COP in 2009.

Yesterday however we saw a different perspective. The Australian Climate Commission released a new report on international climate action, which argued that whilst we are not there yet, momentum is growing on climate change action.

The release of this report opens up a really important question; have we crossed the line to the point where the path to a low-carbon economy is inevitable? In other words, is the climate movement being too pessimistic on its progress. One of the implicit things that the Climate Commission is saying is that the supposed failure of the climate movement may actually be a myth. And in many ways, I couldn’t agree more.

When we think about it, it is impossible to imagine the huge task that climate activists have assigned themselves. Climate change is the largest global problem the world has ever faced and it requires a seismic shift in the way the world operates for it to be solved. Not only that, but it is a relatively new problem; one that has only really been in the minds of the community for the past couple of decades. It requires dramatic changes and fast.

Let’s add one more factor on top of this. Climate change also requires the tearing down of some of the biggest economic powers in our society; the coal, oil and mining industries. These interests are huge, and were never going to cede their economic power lightly.

When we look at climate change like this it is impossible not to be overwhelmed with magnitude of the task climate activists have put themselves up to. It is truly massive.

Despite this however, as the Climate Commission states, massive changes are really now starting to happen in full force. For example, at the start of this year I wrote a post in the Drum on the 2011 victories of climate change. The Climate Commission report builds on these significantly. Here are some big numbers:

–         90 countries have committed to cuts in Greenhouse Gas Emissions

–         850 million people will be living in states that have carbon prices by 2013

–         $257 billion was invested in renewable energy in 2011 alone

When we think about it, these numbers are big. They represent significant changes that have been hard fought. This is particularly true when we think about these numbers in the context of the fights climate activists have forced into to get action on climate change. All of these changes have come with strong resistance against them from some of the biggest economic powers in the world.

Now, I hear what you are saying, ‘this is still not good enough. These numbers don’t represent anything like the changes we need’. I agree, they aren’t good enough. A lot more needs to be done, and it is going to be hard. But the reality that we often forget is that these numbers represent a major international shift. They are, in my mind, a significant movement towards the significant changes we need in our society.

It’s tough sometimes to be a climate activist and be positive. We see the frightening science, and then the huge challenges we face to create a safe climate. Yet, at times I feel as though we can get too down on ourselves. We see a world where the absolute transformation we want now hasn’t happened yet and blame ourselves for a failure to the planet.

Gandhi once stated, “first they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Climate activists have been ignored, laughed at, and we’re now being fought against tooth and nail. But within all of this, the evidence is showing that in many ways we are now starting to win. No, not everything that we need has changed, and we still need to do a lot of work to make the major changes in our society that are needed to tackle climate change. Those fighting against us will not stop, and in many places are still getting stronger. But the dramatic rise from ‘non-issue’ to ‘international problem’ resulting in significant economic and environmental changes around the world represent a major success that climate activists should be proud of.

The fight continues, but if the Climate Commission report yesterday says anything, it’s that we are on the right track.

Let them all come

 Let them all come because the right to live in safety is fundamental.

Let them all come because people who are fleeing oppression don’t deserve more.

Let them all come because people who have suffered so much don’t deserve to suffer any more.

Let them all come because requesting asylum is not a crime.

Let them all come because requesting asylum is a basic right.

Let them all come because all they have done is asked for our help. And we can provide it.

Let them all come, because putting people in detention is not a way to help them.

Let them all come because even a day is too long to lock an innocent person up.

Let them all come because indefinite detention is definitely too long.

Let them all come because nobody wants people to drown at sea, but that doesn’t mean we have lock them away.

Let them all come because we can do something to save lives and be humane at the same time.

Let them all come because a detention centre is no place for an innocent child.

Let them all come because if that was your child, or your parent, or your friends, you wouldn’t want them anywhere one of those centers.

Let them all come because separating families from each other is cruel and inhumane.

Let them all come because this is about much more than ideology and playing politics, it’s about caring for those in need.

Let them all come because helping those in need is the true sign of a compassionate nation.

Let them all come because we should treat people how we want to be treated, and nobody would want to be treated like this.

Let them all come because if we don’t do the right thing, then how can we expect the rest of the world to.

Let them all come because our money is better spent helping people, not detaining them.

Let them all come because we are not harmed by their presence, but enriched by it.

Let them all come because the world is watching and they are not impressed.

Let them all come because compassion is stronger than hate.

Let them all come because we are better than this.

Thanks to First Dog on the Moon for the inspiration for this piece (http://www.crikey.com.au/2011/11/02/let-them-all-come/)

Help online

Original link, including video: http://news.anu.edu.au/2012/08/14/help-online/ 

Australia is facing a mental health crisis. Around one in five Australians suffer some form of mental disorder each year and mental disorders now account for 13 per cent of the total disease burden in Australia. Despite this, many people are still not getting the treatment they need. Dr Lou Farrer from the Centre for Mental Health Research says that this is a problem she’s determined to tackle.

“I always wanted to be a medical doctor,” Farrer says. “But I discovered from a young age that there was no way I could cut people open or work with disease. Instead, I became really fascinated by psychology. I’m interested in not only how people get ill psychologically, but also how some people stay well psychologically despite facing risk factors. It’s fascinating stuff.”

Farrer has just completed her research PhD in clinical psychology, which she undertook while completing training to become a psychologist. Farrer’s PhD studies involved analysing the effectiveness of online mental health treatment programs. She says that e-health approaches can play an important role in reaching those who are suffering from mental disorders.

“As many as 60 per cent of people with mental health problems don’t seek professional help. That can be for a number of reasons; it can be the cost of treatment, it can be difficulty accessing it, or the stigma attached to it. Our team comes from the perspective that we want to get mental health help to as many people as we can. The Internet is a way to overcome those barriers. It’s convenient and free and research shows that it works.”

Farrer trialled the use of two online depression treatment tools developed at ANU – BluePages andMoodGYM – incorporated with the established services provided by Lifeline Australia.

“We worked with Lifeline centres in Melbourne, Sydney, Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast. The Lifeline counsellors identified callers who seemed to be experiencing symptoms of depression or anxiety. We then split these callers up into groups. Some were asked to complete MoodGYM and BluePages on their own; others were given these programs as well as weekly phone calls to see how they were progressing. Another group received weekly phone calls without using the online programs and the final group received the standard Lifeline service of on-the-spot telephone counselling. What we found was that the groups who had used MoodGYM and BluePages had a significant, immediate drop in symptoms of depression. What is really exciting is that the symptoms of people who used the online programs stayed reduced for at least six months after the intervention was finished. So, the online programs not only had an effect, but the effects lasted.”

BluePages and MoodGYM also worked on issues other than depression, says Farrer.

“In addition to reducing depression symptoms, the programs were effective in reducing hazardous alcohol use, increasing people’s knowledge of depression and increasing quality of life. It was really exciting to see that these programs had an impact well beyond treating people’s depressive symptoms.”

Farrer is now hoping to use her clinical and research skills to improve the development and delivery of online programs for mental health problems.

“Now that I have finished my PhD, I’m working on a project that will involve young people in the development of online programs, which will hopefully make the programs more effective and engaging. I’m also working on evaluating other online programs developed at ANU, including a community-based online bulletin board for depression. Working in e-health, I’m continually trying to find ways to apply my clinical skills in the research we are doing. It’s a nice marriage for me,” she says.

Why the asylum debate makes me feel sick

@frankscan65 (Frank Calabrese)

@simoncopland Shorter Suimopn (sic)- I prefer to support people dying at Sea so we  can feel good while eating our Tofu at expensive fundraisers

@simoncopland And onshore processing encouraging people smugglers – in other words Greens support profiteering from people dying at sea

@simoncopland No you prefer people dying sdo (sic) you can be pure – Enjoy being made obsolete like the Democrats you FOOL

@simoncopland You support People Dying END STORY

It’s an odd feeling to be told that you are actively supporting the death of people; to in effect be told that you are complicit in murder. It’s even more disconcerting when this comes from someone who is an ALP support (he has a little picture of Julia Gillard on his avatar), a party that, according to their policy platform, supports onshore processing.

Whilst my original reaction to these comments (and many more that I have seen on a similar vein) has been to say ‘what happened to a calmer debate’, on further thought, I actually think they say a lot about the nature of today’s asylum seeker debate. It is the comments like these, above all else, that make me absolutely sick with how this debate is progressing.

I have always struggled with the asylum seeker debate in Australia. It’s not that I have had trouble expressing my views, but I have always found the debate extremely poisonous. Despite this however, in many ways I felt like I could deal with it. The debate fit nicely into two opposing ideas; that either we wanted to ‘protect our borders’ and stop the so-called threats posed by asylum seekers, or that we wanted to take a more humane approach, which focused on the fair treatment of those seeking asylum.

Whilst I often felt sickened by those who advocated the former position in this debate, in many ways I also felt like I could engage with them. It was hard, but there was a clear distinction to be drawn.

The last few months however have completely turned this debate on its head and it’s terrifying. Instead of a debate about border security vs. the fair treatment of asylum seekers, suddenly our debate has become solely about the safety and welfare of asylum seekers. Suddenly the lives of asylum seekers have taken centre stage, with slogans like “stop the boats” being about people’s lives rather than border protection. Great, I hear you say. What’s your problem?

Yes, to have everyone suddenly caring about the welfare of asylum seekers is great. That’s what I want. What’s happened however is that, is that this new sense of care for asylum seekers we haven’t changed our policies, we’ve just re-branded them.

Suddenly, instead of using offshore processing as a way to protect our borders, it’s apparently there to protect the welfare of asylum seekers. Removing people’s basic human rights, sending them detention centres that we have no control over and directly contravening the UN Human Rights Convention are now all apparently moves that are now apparently good for asylum seekers. Treating people like dirt is no longer about punishing people for ‘jumping a queue’, but is instead about helping them by stopping their boats.

What’s even worse about this debate is that anyone who proposes something that doesn’t include offshore processing is suddenly accused of wanting to kill asylum seekers. Apparently having a humane approach to those coming for help and stopping people from taking risks at sea is incompatible. This is despite the evidence here, here and here (oh and here as well), that this idea is ridiculous. We can stick to our human right obligations and do the best we can to stem the flow of boats. We just don’t want to.

Policy debates take a particularly cynical turn when the real impacts of policies are hidden away in a sudden flurry of concern for the welfare of people. Very little has changed in terms of the ‘problem’ of asylum seekers, and no matter how much the ALP want to claim otherwise, offshore processing is still just as cruel as it was when Howard did it.

I’m not saying that people in the ALP or Coalition don’t genuinely care for the welfare of asylum seekers. But to turn the debate into one where we can only care about people by treating them like shit is truly deceptive.

Fuel for the 21st Century

As we face the reality of climate change and dropping stocks of oil, solutions are needed to meet the growing demand for clean and efficient fuels. Whilst there is much being done to reduce our dependence on traditional fuels, we also need to develop alternative fuels for this transition to occur. Professor Chris Easton from the Research School of Chemistry is using enzyme biotechnology to help advance this quest for new fuels.

“Enzymes are biological catalysts,” says Easton. “What that means is that they are biological elements that when applied to particular substances initiate chemical reactions. For example, termites can break down an organic compound called cellulose in a much more efficient way than we can do in a laboratory.”

Easton’s team, which has been funded along with teams around the world as part of the CSIRO’s Energy Transformed Flagship, is looking for enzymes that could be used to help create carbon neutral fuels from biomass. “Our research is focused on using enzyme biotechnology on components of plants and crops, such as cellulose and lignin. These are components that are found in the waste of crops and are typically not useful as foods. They are therefore normally just burnt after a crop has been harvested.”

Easton said that the aim is to treat biomass and produce hydrogen, which can then be transformed into formic acid, which is a safe, clean and transportable fuel option. “As a first step, our research is looking at the best way to use enzymes to break down cellulose and lignin and transform them into hydrogen.”

Dr. Hye-Kyung Kim leads the research team that is using the hydrogen produced from biomass for enzymatic formic acid production. “The current industrial process for formic acid production is energy intensive and therefore carbon costly. We are using an enzyme called Formate Dehydrogenase that uses hydrogen from crop waste and carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to produce formic acid at low temperature and neutral pH. This is a big step towards the production of carbon neutral fuels.”

Easton said that if successful this technology could be an important piece in the puzzle of sustainability. “The work we are doing is still in its early stages. At the moment we can use these enzymes on an experimental scale. We are hoping to eventually be able to commercialise our process, which would be important for future fuel technology.”

Science and arts poles apart?

Do you think science and arts degrees are poles apart? ANU Alumnus Phoebe Howe disagrees and she has the research credentials to back it up. “My Honours was a meeting between my two degrees, science and arts,” Phoebe explained. “I used social science research methods, but did so to address biophysical issues.”

Phoebe’s Honours thesis looked at the issue of climate change and tried to address the question of why is it such a difficult and contentious issue?

“The research was based around looking at communication within and between different kinds of community groups in the ACT in an aim to talk frankly about local climate policy. What was interesting was that the one thing that united people from these groups was frustration with our inability to make change. Even if people didn’t necessarily think we should take action on climate change, they were still concerned about things like the rise of adversarial politics, the growing bias and short term media focus and also short term thinking in processes in political decision makin,” says Phoebe.

“It was great because ANU has the flexibility to allow you to follow really novel ideas like this. If you want to do something different, you can do it here, but at the same time they do everything to make sure you do it to the best of your ability.”

Phoebe is now taking what she learnt from her research into the real world. “I am a climate change campaigner in the ACT with a group called Canberra Loves 40%. We began in 2010 and campaigned successfully for the ACT to commit to 40% greenhouse gas emission cuts by 2020. Now we are working to ensure that these cuts are implemented.”

In doing this work, Phoebe thinks her connection with the ANU will still be very valuable. “One of the great things about the University is that it challenged me to broaden my view and look at how I can use academia to help in my work. What I’m looking at is how I use my connection with ANU and possible future study to help effect community change.”