Smoke and mirrors
I REFER to Carl Stevenson’s letter (“Science of convenience”, Lakes Mail, October 25) in which he suggested that one major bushfire would produce more emissions than a power station burning fossil fuels for a year. May I remind him of what our scientists have found?
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Philip Gibbons, a senior lecturer at the Australian National University, determined that coal-fired power stations in Australia emitted about 200 million tonnes of CO2 (carbon dioxide) per year.
“Around 30 tonnes of CO2 per forested hectare were emitted by the disastrous Black Saturday Fires in 2009. Bushfires in 2013 burned around 130,000 hectares of forest, so had emitted nearly 4 million tonnes of CO2, or around 2 per cent of Australia’s annual emissions from coal-fired power stations,” he wrote on The Conversation website.
He added that an area of forest greater than Tasmania would have to burn to generate CO2 emissions equivalent to a year of burning coal for electricity, or that an area of forest the size of NSW would have to burn to generate CO2 emissions equivalent to a decade of burning coal for electricity.
“However, the carbon emitted from bushfires is not permanent. Eucalypt forest regenerates after fire, and will quickly begin to sequester from the atmosphere the carbon that has been lost from the current bushfires,” he wrote.
“The same cannot be said of coal-fired power stations.”
- George Aungle, Morisset Park
Rate of change unnatural
CARL Stevenson gets up on his soap box yet again to denigrate climate scientists, who apparently don't know as much as he does, and will say whatever is required to have an income (“Science of convenience”, Lakes Mail, October 25).
We all know climate change has always occurred naturally. What many people don't realise is that it's the rate of change that's not natural. It is increasing dramatically and has been doing so since the industrial revolution. For just one example, ice melt in Antarctica has tripled in the last five years. This information comes from a comprehensive assessment, The Ice Sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison (IMBIE), involving 84 scientists, 44 international organisations, and 24 satellite surveys. From what reliable source do you get your information, Mr Stevenson?
Sceptics should do their homework before communicating firm opinions which have no factual basis. A good place to start might be the NASA Global Climate Change website. Another is Climate Basics for Kids, which is an excellent source of information for adults, too.
- Shirley Kleiberg, Bonnells Bay
Let’s get serious
OK, let's get serious about climate change. If science is correct we have 10 years to fix the problems, so let's start with compensation for those who rely on income from industries that affect climate. As a butcher I would be more than happy to take a substantial lump sum and undertake fully funded training to enter the new green economy. This is the only way to save the world; buyout and compensate all workers who are employed or own businesses that contribute to climate change. This is the only way to stop climate change.
- Steve Barnett, Fingal Bay
Bring them to Australia
IF the Liberal-Country party Coalition wishes to win the election next year, it must release all the refugees on Manus and Nauru and bring them to Australia.
- Ian Stewart, Elermore Vale
Waiting for cheap power
NOW that the big stick is out, it's just a matter of time before energy companies start throwing cheap power at us. Remember, we were told that privatising the power stations would give us cheaper bills.
- Mick Miller, Salamander Bay