Climate change killed megafauna stars

A new report fuels speculation over just who or what is to blame for the so-called megafauna extinction.

Climate change, not Indigenous people, killed off giant kangaroos and other "megafauna" that once roamed Australia, a new study suggests. Queensland University of Technology (QUT) scientists Dr Gilbert Price and Dr Gregory Webb studied the fossil-rich Darling Downs of south-east Queensland and found large wildlife that roamed the area 40,000 years ago were drought-stressed when they died.

Aborigines were thought to have arrived in Australia about 40,000 years ago, the same time as kangaroos as tall as 2.5m, car-sized wombats, massive emus and goannas seemed to have disappeared. Dr Price said the layers of fossils in the dig area were not consistent with some theories that humans had wiped out megafauna.

"Some scientists believe in the 'blitzkrieg' megafauna extinction hypothesis, which blames humans for over-hunting these giant marsupials," he said. "If that was the case, these fossils dating back thousands of years would show the animals dying out at the same point in time. But they don't...

"These layers of fossils buried at a single site under the Darling Downs show a progressive, three-stage extinction over time that relates to periods of climate change." Dr Webb said the research had found the Darling Downs was experiencing cycles of wet and dry conditions, resulting in droughts and periodic flash flooding when megafauna populations were declining.

"The research found no evidence of humans being involved in the accumulation of fossils in the catchment at the time of deposition, but is perfectly consistent with their decline being caused by increasing aridity," he said. Dr Price and Dr Webb are researchers with QUT's School of Natural Resource Sciences and QUT's Institute of Sustainable Resources.

Earlier evidence, published in May 2005 also suggests that human intervention did not cause the extinction of Australian megafauna. Dr Price's team studied a 10 metre deep section of creek bed in the Darling Downs region. The researchers found 44 species ranging from land snails, frogs, lizards and small mammals to giant wombats and kangaroos.

The new study will be published in next month's issue of the Australian Journal of Earth Sciences.

SOURCES:
Drought blamed for killing off the big Australians
Ancient drought blamed for megafauna destruction
Giant marsupials 'killed off by drought' - thewest.com.au
Wikipedia: Australian_megafauna
Sparks fly in megafauna debate - ABC May 2005

Woodside and WA Government drop opposition to Burrup heritage listing

28th November 2006: Woodside and the WA Government have reversed opposition to the national heritage listing of ancient Aboriginal rock art on the Burrup Peninsula, but wants an area excised from the proposal to accommodate plans for its multi-billion dollar Pluto gas project. Both changed their minds on Tuesday following proposed changes to federal environment laws that they say would allow Burrup's rock art to coexist with industry...

"There are alternative sites for Woodside’s gas plant, but no alternative for the rock art."

As confusing as it all sounds!

Western Australian Premier Alan Carpenter says he no longer opposes federal government moves to have Dampier Archipelago (Burrup rock art home) heritage-listed. Woodside Petroleum has also withdrawn its opposition to the listing, in return for a 6.8 square kilometre area being excised from heritage listing so the company can create a gas precinct.

The Burrup Peninsula is the largest outdoor rock engraving site in the world, and is the only Australian site on the World Monument Fund's list of 100 international sites most under threat.

Mr Carpenter says his Government will work with the Commonwealth to establish heritage boundaries. "Clearly there needs to be some concession given to the industrial area that's already designated, or otherwise we face the very real prospect of things being shut down up there and I don't think anyone wants that," he said.

The Australian Heritage Council recommends 874sqkm of the North-West, including 100sqkm of the Burrup, be heritage listed. The State Government has warned that listing would have a devastating impact on North-West industry, and Woodside had said until today that it would fight the proposal.

But Woodside director Keith Spence told corporate media that the company had changed its position after being influenced by public opinion and planned changes to heritage laws. Woodside wants 6.8sqkm excluded to create a gas precinct including the gigantic Pluto site.

Meanwhile, hundreds of thousands of rock carvings (petroglyphs), dating back to the last Ice Age, are being considered for heritage listing by Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell.

Mr Carpenter said without the proposed changes any third party could take out an injunction against activities on the peninsula in the name of protecting the rock art "and while that injunction was in place no activity could take place at all."

Senator Campbell has put forward amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act with the aim of "streamlining environmental approvals processes", including heritage listing. Under the proposal management plans and heritage boundaries would be put in place before heritage listing takes place.

Earlier, Greens leader Bob Brown called the planned EPBC Act changes 'anti-environment'. "This is a bill to put the industry fox in charge of the environment chook house," Senator Brown said in October. "It allows the minister, under the thumb of the resource extraction lobby in particular, to veto the input of Australian citizens in protecting the nation's heritage..."

"It will excuse the inexcusable," said Senator Brown, "for example, Campbell's impending decision to allow Woodside to destroy more of the world's greatest rock art site on Western Australia's Burrup peninsula in coming months."

Senator Campbell said he believed the amendments would be passed within weeks. He would not say when his decision on heritage listing would be made but said Woodside's apparent backflip would not influence the outcome.


== ALTERNATIVE SITE? ==
Woodside's Professor Iain Davidson, an archaeologist, says no! "The rock art can't go anywhere else." Dr Davidson says, "nothing can stop the plant." But Senator Brown brands that the claim false. "The Burrup, ought to be protected in its entirety. The National Heritage Council clearly stated that the Burrup is a site of outstanding national heritage values to the nation," Senator Brown said. "There is no reason to withhold protection for the ancient rock art any longer."

Senator Brown said Senator Campbell should resign as environment minister if he could not protect the Burrup. "Senator Campbell is the Minister for the Environment and Heritage, not the minister for Woodside Petroleum," he said.

"There are alternative sites for Woodside’s gas plant, but no alternative for the rock art."

===
ACTION: Friends of Pilbara Rock Art: IT'S TIME TO STAND UP FOR THE BURRUP!
Thursday 30th November at 5.45 pm
Lotteries House, 1 Delhi Street, West Perth
---

SOURCES:
WA to allow heritage listing of rock art - ABC
Dampier Rock Art - Burrup.org.au
WA drops opposition to Burrup listing
28-Nov-2006 Industry and heritage can co-exist: Premier
2006 Amendments to the EPBC Act
Grave concerns over dangerous new environment and heritage law changes - Perth Indymedia
BURRUP: Federal Govt urged to protect ancient WA rock art - Perth Indymedia

CO2 emissions rate "more than doubled since the 1990s" - Report

CO2 emissions rate "more than doubled since the 1990s" - Report
From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!

Atmospheric scientists warn that greenhouse gas emissions are increasing more rapidly, despite global efforts to curb the use of fossil fuels.

New research by Australia's CSIRO shows the rate of increase in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions has more than doubled since 1990. According to CSIRO research scientist Dr Mike Raupach, 7.9 billion tonnes of carbon were emitted into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide in 2005 and the rate of increase is accelerating.

Data from the Cape Grim air pollution monitoring station in north-west Tasmania shows carbon dioxide emissions have increased by 2.5 per cent each year for the past five years. "From 2000 to 2005, the growth rate of carbon dioxide emissions was more than 2.5 per cent per year, whereas in the 1990s it was less than one per cent per year," Dr Raupach says.

Dr Raupach, who also co-chairs the international Global Carbon Project, was surprised by his research results. "It shows recent efforts globally to reduce emissions have had little impact on emissions growth," he said. The CSIRO found that in global terms, China has the highest current growth rate in CO2 emissions although it's emissions per person are below the global average. China's accumulated contribution since the start the 1800s is only five per cent of the global total. The USA and Europe have each contributed more than 25 per cent of accumulated global emissions.

Carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere — a separate measure to carbon emissions — had also increased at an unprecedented rate. Dr Paul Fraser, also from CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research, says that atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide grew by two parts per million in 2005, the fourth year in a row of above-average growth. "To have four years in a row of above-average carbon dioxide growth is unprecedented," Dr Fraser said.

He says the trend over recent years suggests the growth rate is accelerating, "signifying that fossil fuels are having an impact on greenhouse gas concentrations in a way we haven’t seen in the past."

Sources
* "Increase in carbon dioxide emissions accelerating". CSIRO, November 27, 2006
* Deborah Smith, Science Editor "Greenhouse emission rate doubles". Sydney Morning Herald, November 28, 2006
* Rachel Kleinman "Carbon emission rises shock experts". The Age, November 28, 2006
* "Scientists find carbon dioxide emissions rapidly increasing". Radio New Zealand, November 28, 2006
* "CO2 emissions accelerating, scientists warn". Australian Broadcasting Corporation, November 28, 2006

Watching giant TVs in a corporate stadium - Unions avoid real and direct action

NOVEMBER 28, 2006: Time for General Strike?
by Direct Action General Strike Group

As Australian unions prepare to meet, march and be entertained this week they seem to be missing the most powerful tool for political change. Workers are the exploited economic backbone of Australia's current wealth boomtime. If workers withdraw their power - their only power - their labour, then their voices will be heard. Bosses will get nervous. Pressure will ultimately force change.

Workers are denying themselves the crucial opportunity to walk off the job en-mass across the nation and really fight for their rights - which are under perpetual erosion by John Howard's "anti-worker" regime.

As fundamental worker's rights arestripped by the Liberal government, it seems the WA union movement are meeting in a corporate stadium to watch themselves on giant TV screens...

Unions WA assure readers of their website that at the November 30 gathering, "additional to vociferous chanting, there will also be entertainment provided throughout your time at the stadium. Included will be bands and other theatrical attractions, John Howard comedian, as well as a sea of orange cards that will make this event one to remember..."

But perhaps the only thing that will beat the radical Australian IR sweep is the very thing that got us our worker's rights in the first place - DIRECT ACTION!

==Direct Action==
In France earlier this year, workers and students took real action to beat a government every bit as reactionary as Howard’s. With a concerted rolling campaign of strikes, mass rallies, factory shut-downs, school and university occupations - the French people defeated laws similar to Howard’s IR laws.

Since June last year, three mass protests have seen huge numbers mobilise on the streets of our cities and regional centres. The November 2005 demonstration was the largest workers’ demonstration ever seen in Australia. The fact that hundreds of thousands of workers have been prepared to take to the streets – and in many cases to actually go on strike – is not only clear proof of the overwhelming opposition to Howard’s industrial agenda. It proves that many Australians are willing to fight - an example of the massive power and potential of the this country's working class folk.

France shows that our rulers will only surrender if the threat from below seems really serious. The current ACTU strategy – of rallies a couple of times year - and hoping for the election of a Labor government – is pathetically inadequate. In order to win, workers must disrupt “business as usual”, hitting the bosses’ profits with strikes in the key sections of industry, and creating a political crisis for the government.

Such a direct action campaign would strengthen broad layers of workers and breathe fresh energy into the union movement, it would also inspire resistance in other areas, raise people’s confidence, build solidarity and help counter Howard’s despicable divide and rule tactics.

Mass resistance from below is both the surest and most desirable way to get rid of Howard. It would put the bosses on the back foot, while at the same time sending Labor a message that they will be under pressure to make good on their promises to tear up Howard’s IR laws.

==Towards a General Stike==
One way to prepare for a General Strike is to fully celebrate the notion as an actual possibility; to project it as a meme into the collective conciousness.

In other words if workers do not talk about a General Strike it can never happen. If people think that our only course of action is to rely on the ALP as our saviour then we cannot expect much without taking direct action ourselves. We need to expose the fact that the current Union (ACTU and Trade halls and conservative unions) strategy of sitting on their hands is doomed to failure.

The only reason we are having anbother big IR rally is because of grassroots pressure. As the grassroots we need to activate and agitate for some serious direct action to defeat these IR laws.

==The Industrial Workers of the World - the Wobblies==
The Union Movement has become a virtual auxilliary or appendage of the ALP. The ALP originally was an offshoot of the Union movement but appears to have nearly devoured it's own parent. It was out of the great Shearer and Maritime strikes in the late 19th century that the first Labour MP in the world was put into Parliament.

Unfortunately, this Parliamentary strategy hasn't really liberated the workers but proven a costly distraction at best-at worst a shocking betrayal of the original intentions behind a Labour Party. Time and time againt the ALP has shafted the workers. More recently, it was the Hawke/Keating govenments that started the Economic Rationalist Revolution.

Unions need to get back to basics. The Industrial Workers of the World work towards One Big Union. This is an alternative to the idea of competing trade unions which can be divided and conquered by the bosses. This isn't about centralisation as every workplace would be autonomously controlled by it's own workers through their own branch. It just means that workers across all industries could co-operate when they had to as in the case of a General Strike.

---

A WORKCHOICES OVERVIEW:

==Anti-Worker Laws==
As expected, the WorkChoices laws are being used punitively against workers by some businesses. Other businesses are being forced, through competitive pressures, to take what they probably consider to be unsavoury measures to cut wages and dismiss workers. In other words, we are starting the race to the bottom in Australia.

The problem with giving so much power to employers at the expense of employees is that vulnerable workers – particularly those in low-skilled occupations, women, young people and so on – are in a very poor bargaining position. When handed a contract stripping away their working conditions and wages, ‘Choices’ in this case may mean the choice between a low-paying job and no job at all.

There used to be a number of protections against employers unilaterally deleting working conditions and wages from contracts.

Most significantly, the ‘no disadvantage test’ meant that contracts were assessed by regulators to ensure that under a new agreement, workers would not be worse off when compared with relevant awards and legislation. This test has been scrapped, meaning that wages and most conditions can now be scrapped at the whim of the employer.

The results of the first month’s survey of contracts examined by the Office of the Employment Advocate are very clear and depressing. Every contract surveyed has abolished at least one award condition. One in six have abolished all award conditions apart from the mandatory five. Sixty per cent have wiped out leave loading, and 63 per cent have abolished penalty rates.

==The Minimum Wage==
For a century, Australia has had a system to provide low-paid workers with a so-called minimum wage. This was set by the Industrial Relations Commission (IRC) after taking submissions from unions, academics, employer groups and the Government. Currently, in most states of Australia the minimum wage is $467.40 per week, or $12.30 per hour.

Every year, the IRC would run the ‘National Wage Case’ to determine whether the minimum wage should rise, and by how much. In theory at least, this minimum level of payment should at least keep pace with inflation to keep low-paid workers from descending into poverty. The old Workplace Relations Act 1996 contained specific references to fairness and providing “fair minimum standards for employees in the context of living standards generally prevailing in the Australian community”*

Under WorkChoices, this system no longer exists. The new ‘Fair Pay Commission’ (FPC) now has the power to determine the minimum wage. The FPC also sets junior wages, training and disability wages, and casual loadings. The WorkChoices Act removes references to fairness and instead emphasises “employment and competitiveness across the economy”.*

While in opposition, John Howard flagged his intention to “dramatically lower minimum wages for young people*”. The Government, and employer groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and Industry traditionally argue for the lowest possible rises in the minimum wage.

The reasoning is that high minimum wages are a disincentive for employers to take on new workers. However there is little evidence of this link in reality - employment rose by 18% between 1997 and 2005 in Australia, despite increases in minimum wages awarded by the IRC.

The bottom line is that the Government has changed the rules so that fairness is no longer a factor: the intention is clearly to drive down the wages of the lowest-paid Australians. While wages will not fall immediately, it is highly likely that they will no longer keep pace with inflation, falling in real terms. When combined with rising interest rates and inflation, and rising housing and petrol prices, the consequences of the Government’s attack on the minimum wage could be severe.


==Wages and Conditions==
As expected, the WorkChoices laws are being used punitively against workers by some businesses. Other businesses are being forced, through competitive pressures, to take what they probably consider to be unsavoury measures to cut wages and dismiss workers. In other words, we are starting the race to the bottom in Australia.

The problem with giving so much power to employers at the expense of employees is that vulnerable workers – particularly those in low-skilled occupations, women, young people and so on – are in a very poor bargaining position. When handed a contract stripping away their working conditions and wages, ‘Choices’ in this case may mean the choice between a low-paying job and no job at all.

There used to be a number of protections against employers unilaterally deleting working conditions and wages from contracts. Most significantly, the ‘no disadvantage test’ meant that contracts were assessed by regulators to ensure that under a new agreement, workers would not be worse off when compared with relevant awards and legislation. This test has been scrapped, meaning that wages and most conditions can now be scrapped at the whim of the employer.

The results of the first month’s survey of contracts examined by the Office of the Employment Advocate are very clear and depressing. Every contract surveyed has abolished at least one award condition. One in six have abolished all award conditions apart from the mandatory five. Sixty per cent have wiped out leave loading, and 63 per cent have abolished penalty rates.

References:
http://workrights.org.au/

---

CONDITIONS OF ENTRY FOR MEMBERS EQUITY STADIUM

"...NO SMOKING ANYWHERE INSIDE THE STADIUM
The stadium reserves the right to refuse entry or evict:
* People under the influence of alcohol and drugs
* People displaying disorderly or inappropriate behaviour
It is prohibited to bring the following items into the stadium:
* Alcoholic beverages
* Illicit drugs
* Cans and glass bottles
* Opened water or soft drink containers (they must be sealed)
* Articles displaying offensive messages
* Any item deemed by Stadium Management to be either a danger or a nuisance
Eskies, prams, pushers, bags and other belongings must be able to fit under the seats. Umbrellas are not allowed to be opened in the stadium. All persons must comply with all reasonable requests from the Stadium Manager. SECURITY WILL BE CHECKING BAGS AND PERSONS ON ENTRY AND WILL BE ENFORCING THE CONDITIONS OF ENTRY. IF SECURITY MAKES THE DECSION TO REMOVE INDIVIDUALS UNIONSWA WILL BE UNABLE TO INTERVENE..."

SOURCES:

Critical Times - IR LAWS
Workrights.org.au
100 reasons why WorkChoices is a dud, with 100 examples of ripped off workers - IWW WorkersOnline
Towards A General Strike - Melbourne Indymedia
why we need a general strike - Melbourne Indymedia
General Strikers June 28th 2006
30 November 2006 - National Day of Action - Unions WA
rightsatwork.com.au - ACTU
November 30th Corporate Stadium Rally, Details for Perth - Unions WA

Perth Indymedia is independent media via Open Publishing - SCOOP

After much request! The article below was published in Scoop - the Australian Journalist Alliance Magazine: September, 2004

Enjoy!

"Whilst corporate media reflects the aims and objectives of profit-making machines, indymedia represents the voices of real people working toward social betterment. The corporate media cannot attempt to seek change, simply because it exists to protect its market and indeed broaden its circulation/ratings in order to increase its market share - so inherently reflects dominant cultural myths. Corporate media is about profit motives. Indymedia is about giving unheard voices a chance to be heard via a unique system of self-publishing. It's about creating an integrity space - where control over content is at an absolute minimum. That is, our editorial group will rarely intervene with the process of the newswire. We seek to allow these stories to be told without interference..."

Indymedia wants your stories: No textual act of freedom or criticism too small...

every insubordination must be advertised!

Welcome to the media evolution...
Indymedia is independent media via Open Publishing

Open Publishing is a participatory revolution in the dissemination of news information, current issues and new media art-hacks. Open Publishing is your voice heard in a global instant. Indymedia is a voluntarily collaborative effort to facilitate the diversity of voices of oppressed people everywhere.

A cell of the global network of Independent Media Centres (IMCs), Perth indymedia is an attempt to reclaim the media commons in Western Australia. In direct opposition to the hyper-product-driven corporate media machines of the 21st century, we are dedicated to real truth-tellings of real people - our voices, our stories, from our mouths. IMCs recognise from the outset that whilst bias and ideology are inherent in all art forms, we should strive at all times to remain as independent as possible. With a no-borders, no-rulers approach to publishing and consensus decision-making, Indymedia is often portrayed as extreme left or anarchist media - but as our goal is to represent a mosaic of anonymous and factual viewpoints we are impossible to define with absolute clarity. Indymedia is the result of many different voices seeking a better world.

So, of what are we independent?

IMCs exist to transcend the PR spun profit-centred corporations, political party machines and all oppressive forms of homogenous mental authority. We are independent of wealth accumulation and do not exist to bloat ourselves in materialistic weight. We seek to be independent of dominant cultural bias. With this independence in mind, and without the restrictions of heavy-handed editorial control we intend to invent new ways of re-distributing the disenfranchised voices of marginalised communities.

And so what is our media?

Whilst predominantly we are a website community, with all the hi-tech digital functionality, multimedia upload and internet capabilities, various crew delve into media workshops, zine production, guerilla film screenings, mutual aid documents; audio/video production - and have recently begun one-hour weekly public radio broadcasts on RTRFM. Perth Indymedia is the process of a diverse team of people with different skills and abilities.

Perhaps the fundamental difference of indymedia to corporate media is the distinct opposition to advertising for-profit products and services - whereas mainstream media exists because of advertising. We wish for no profit and accept NO paid advertising. Indymedia then, is an attempt to radicalise the media-scape.

The Indymedia [indymedia.org] phenomenon emerged in 1999 during the Seattle WTO street protests - initially devised as a vital alternative news site for immediate activist information-flow from the front lines. The first IMC documented and represented the dissenting voices of the oppression in the street -linking these activities to an instant global audience via the Internet.

Since then over 150 IMCs have sprung up across the planet. Indymedia is voluntary participatory media - where YOU are the journalist. Our slogan, borrowed from Jello Biafra is: "Don't Hate the Media - Become the Media". Indymedia's Open Publishing facility is simple: write/publish your story (or comment, pictures, audio files, movies, culture jams, events) - and your input is instantly part of the IMC Newswire - linked to the Global IMC network. The scope of such an endeavor is massive...

Online since early 2003, Perth Indymedia disseminates the unheard local and global grass-roots struggles of our time. With over a million and a half hits and assisting many community organisations, we've nearly 5500 Stories/Comments and over 100 Feature articles. The Perth Indy crew consists of a handful of dedicated eco-geeks; tech-heads; anarco-breeders; anon-artists; fair-dinkum journos; student media makers; activists and pseudo-consumers who want to help YOU contribute in a different way to the corporate-dominated global/local media-scape. And, YOU are invited to become part of this open, transparent process of media-making.

Whilst corporate media reflects the aims and objectives of profit-making machines, indymedia represents the voices of real people working toward social betterment. The corporate media cannot attempt to seek change, simply because it exists to protect its market and indeed broaden its circulation/ratings in order to increase its market share - so inherently reflects dominant cultural myths. Corporate media is about profit motives. Indymedia is about giving unheard voices a chance to be heard via a unique system of self-publishing. It's about creating an integrity space - where control over content is at an absolute minimum. That is, our editorial group will rarely intervene with the process of the newswire. We seek to allow these stories to be told without interference.

Indymedia wants your stories: No textual act of freedom or criticism too small... every insubordination must be advertised! Welcome to the media evolution...

check it out: http://perth.indymedia.org

Australia's Atomic Dawning - 20 Nuclear Power stations: Ziggy Report

November 21, 2006 - Bright future for Atomic power:

The Federal Government's review of nuclear power will be handed down on 21st November. Australia can look forward to 20 new nuclear power stations built as part of a wholesale switch to atomic power - according to the landmark report.

The nuclear power taskforce, headed by ex-Telstra boss Dr Ziggy Switkowski, has found that if Australia goes nuclear it would need a high-level waste dump. Prime Minister John Howard strongly backs nuclear power to help combat climate change.

In June 2006, Prime Minister John Howard, back from a nuclear enrichment meeting with US President George W Bush, commissioned the hand-picked nulear energy review. The Prime Minister argues that "nuclear power is clean and green", is being used overseas to generate electricity. He says China is expected to rely heavily on nuclear energy as its booming economy grows.

The report was initially expected to tackle a broader range of issues, but focuses more narrowly on the nuclear cycle. The public will have three weeks to comment on the report...

But Finance Minister, Nick Minchin, is sceptical about nuclear power. "It is simply, it is not commercially viable," he said. The Ziggy report estimates nuclear power would up to 50 per cent more expensive than coal-fired power stations. However, when the cost of carbon reduction to cut emissions is taken into account, nuclear power becomes competitive with coal energy. The report finds nuclear power "is the least cost, low-emission technology that can provide baseload power available today and can play a role in Australia's future generation mix".

Labor's Anthony Albanese says the inquiry is flawed because it will not reveal possible sites for nuclear reactors. "Where will the nuclear reactors go?" he asked. Greenpeace chief executive Steve Shallhorn fears that the report paves the way for nuclear power, which he says is not viable.

"The only way it is going to be viable in Australia is if there is massive subsidies," he said. "Nuclear power is the only technology that can light up your city and destroy your city." The report says nuclear power stations could supply 30 per cent of the nation's electricity by 2050.

Critics of nuclear power say nuclear energy is far too expensive and that the economic modelling does not factor the long-term cost of radioactive waste storage. The nuclear report taskforce found that Australia would most certainly have to build a high-level waste dump. However, it does not say where the nuclear dump should be built, nor where nuclear reactors should be placed. In 2004, South Australia won its battle to stop a national low-level nuclear waste dump being built near Woomera.

Another energy inquiry report, released recently found Australia can quadruple the value of its uranium exports by enriching uranium oxide before sending it overseas. Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley has ruled out developing a nuclear power industry. He says it is dangerous and has attacked Mr Howard for refusing to ratify the Kyoto protocol on climate change. The Labor Party is opposed to nuclear power in Australia and the creation of a uranium enrichment industry, although it is likely to debate this at the ALP national conference next year.

The US has been opposed to the idea of countries such as Australia joining restricted countries with the capacity for uranium enrichment. Once developed, the technology can be used to enrich material to the point where it can be used in a nuclear warhead - posing a weapons proliferation risk.

If Australia went down the nuclear path it would have a major impact on the coal industry which supplies most of Australia's electricity. Dr Switkowski's report also looks at labour shortages resulting from the long decline of the nation's nuclear industry.

Concerned environmentalists have intensified their opposition to nuclear power, and are planning to release a critique of Switkowki's findings. A new Energyscience Coalition of academics, environmentalists and others have joined green groups to campaign against the findings of the inquiry.

Former US vice-president Al Gore says that "nuclear energy is not the panacea for tackling global warming." Mr Gore said nuclear power was unlikely to play a role in the climate change battle.

"Even if you set aside the problem of long-term waste storage and the danger of operator accident and the vulnerability to terrorist attack, you still have two others that are more difficult," he said. The first problem was one of economics. "Nuclear power plants are the costliest to build and they take the longest time and at present they come in only one size — extra large. The second was nuclear weapons proliferation. "For eight years when I was in the White House, every problem of weapons proliferation was connected to a reactor program," he said.

The Prime Minister has recently talked up the uranium industry prospects of nuclear power plants being built in Australia, arguing the country cannot not afford to "sacrifice rational discussion on the altar of anti-nuclear theology and political opportunism".

International experience shows nuclear power is only possible with massive subsidies. The Australian Conservation Foundation said the report issued is cold comfort to those promoting nuclear power as the one-size-fits-all answer to climate change.

The ACF say the report does not address the full costs of nuclear power, which include "huge construction and insurance costs, de-commissioning and perpetual nuclear waste management liabilities and the reality that all nuclear facilities are potential terrorist targets," said ACF's Dave Sweeney.

Even if the report’s most ambitious reactor construction targets were realised – with 25 Australian communities living in the shadow of a new nuclear reactor – our greenhouse emissions would be reduced by less than 20 per cent – not even a third of the reduction needed by 2050 to avoid dangerous climate change, says the
ACF.

"We have the potential to be a world leader in renewable energy generation and manufacture – a clean energy future that powers not only our appliances but also employment growth – especially in regional Australia," said Mr Sweeney.

Australia is home to around 40% of the world's known uranium deposits - much of it at BHP Billiton's Olympic Dam mine South Australia. Western Australia also has many deposits - yet the WA Labor government has a no mines policy.

SOURCES:

PM warned on nuclear findings - The Age
Nuclear power review set for release - ABC
Nukes 'would cut greenhouse' - Sunday Times
Our coming nuclear dawn - The Australian
Plan to export enriched uranium - The Australian
Switch to 20 atomic power stations
Wikipedia: Ziggy_Switkowski
Ex-Telstra chief to head nuclear review - ABC
Push for action on nuclear power - The Age
The truth? 'Nuclear is not the answer'
The Energy Debate - Energyscience
Doctor’s nuclear prescription no solution to climate change - ACF

The truth? Nuclear is not the answer, says Gore

November 17, 2006: Nuclear power is not the fix for global warming, says former US vice-president Al Gore.

Mr Gore said nuclear power was unlikely to play a significantly bigger role in the climate change battle. "Even if you set aside the problem of long-term waste storage and the danger of operator accident and the vulnerability to terrorist attack, you still have two others that are more difficult," he said. The first problem was one of economics: "Nuclear power plants are the costliest to build and they take the longest time..."

The second issue was nuclear weapons proliferation: "For eight years when I was in the White House, every problem of weapons proliferation was connected to a reactor program," he said. Mr Gore played down the role on nuclear power in fighting climate change. "I have never been a reflexive opponent of it," he said. "But I am sceptical that it will play more than a minor role in most countries around the world because, let's face it, there are a lot of problems.

"Even if you wish away the long-term storage of the waste. You still have economics and the costs of these things are very high ... They only come in one size: extra large. It takes a long time. It costs a lot of money."

In terms of climate change, globally, deforestation accounts for 10-25% of man-made greenhouse gas emissions. Stopping deforestation (much of it illegal) and re-foresting key areas would result in major CO2 savings globally. Without resorting to nuclear. Nuclear power reactors take at least 10 years to build yet gas-fired plants can be built in 3 years and renewables in 1-3. Energy efficiency can be implemented as soon as an energy audit is done, with major savings.

All the key energy efficiency and renewable technologies – wind, solar, wave, tidal and appropriate biomass and hydro – have far shorter timelines for implementation than nuclear.

In a book earlier this year, Dr Helen Caldicott uncovered the facts that belie the nuclear industry propaganda: "nuclear power contributes to global warming; the true cost of nuclear power is prohibitive, with taxpayers picking up most of the tab; there's simply not enough uranium in the world to sustain nuclear power over the long term; and the potential for a catastrophic accident or a terrorist attack far outweighs any benefits."

Despite this, Prime Minister Howard has been spruiking the prospects of nuclear power plants being built in Australia.

Mr Howard takes the Uranium industry line that the world could not afford to "sacrifice rational discussion on the altar of anti-nuclear theology and political opportunism". Mr Howard urged those interested in the climate change debate to look at the report on the nuclear option from the group chaired by Ziggy Switkowski when it comes out soon.

Yet claims for the carbon-free status of nuclear power has proven to be false. John Busby reports that CO2 is released in every component of the nuclear fuel cycle except the actual fission in the reactor.

"Fossil fuels are involved in the mining, milling and enrichment of the ore, in the fuel can preparation, in the construction of the station and in its decommissioning and demolition, in the handling of the spent waste and its re-processing and in digging the hole in the rock for its deposition," he writes. "The lower the ore grade, the more energy is consumed in the fuel processing, so that the amount of the carbon dioxide released in the fuel cycle depends on the ore grade..."

Earlier this year Mr Howard said: "I think the mood has changed. I think it’s changed a lot from the early 1980s. I’ve been surprised by the number of environmentalists who have said they are prepared to look again at nuclear power as an energy source..."

However, TWS reports that only two Australian environmentalists have indicated possible support for nuclear power as a solution to global warming: Dr Tim Flannery, whose support is tentative, and Greg Bourne, CEO of WWF Australia, who has backed down from previous statements.

It seems Gia guru James Lovelock, and Patrick Moore - a co-founder of Greenpeace, and corporate PR activist - have been lone voices globally. The environment movement globally remains firmly opposed to the nuclear industry due to the unsolved problems of waste, weapons proliferation, cost and safety.

Next week an inquiry into nuclear power headed by former Telstra boss and good friend of the Prime Minister, Ziggy Switkowski, is due to deliver its findings. Alec Marr, of the Wilderness Society, said the intent of the report was to run a massive campaign for the nuclear industry.

--

The movement against global warming must see through the following myths about nuclear power...

The nuclear myths:

Myth 1: Nuclear power is "greenhouse free".

No, huge amounts of energy are needed to construct nuclear power plants and produce nuclear fuel, generating substantial greenhouse gases.

Myth 2: Nuclear power would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

To replace fossil-fuel generated electricity with nuclear power globally would require a five-fold increase in the number of nuclear reactors, but would reduce global greenhouse emissions by only 5-10%-nowhere near the 60% reduction required to stabilise their atmospheric concentration.

Meanwhile, the extra 1760 reactors required would produce 2.6 million tonnes of highlevel nuclear waste over a 50-year lifespan.

While emissions per unit of energy from nuclear power are about one-third of those from large gas-fired electricity plants, this comparative benefit declines as higher-grade uranium ores are depleted. All higher-grade ore will be depleted in 50 years at the current rate of usage.

Myth 3: Nuclear power is safe.

An expansion of nuclear power would inevitably lead to the proliferation of nuclear weapons. The "peaceful" nuclear power and research sectors have produced enough fissile material to build more than 110,000 nuclear weapons. Of the 60 countries that have built nuclear power or research reactors, around 25 are known to have used their "peaceful" nuclear facilities for covert weapons research and/or production.

With nuclear reactors comes the constant danger of catastrophic accidents, due to mechanical failures and human error. The 1986 Chernobyl accident caused an additional 200,000 deaths in Russia, the Ukraine and Belarus between 1990-2004. Since then, industry deregulation and privatisation have allowed corporations to cut corners on safety regulations and adequate staffing, increasing the chance of accidents.

Myth 4: Nuclear waste can now be safely stored.

There is still no safe storage system for nuclear waste. Not a single repository exists for the disposal of high-level radioactive waste, which is produced at an annual rate of about 10,000 tonnes worldwide. Technologies exist to encapsulate or immobilise radionuclides, but encapsulated radioactive waste remains a public health and environmental threat that will last for millennia.

Reprocessing spent reactor fuel is polluting, and most of the uranium and plutonium arising from reprocessing is simply stockpiled with no plans for its use.

The Fremantle Anti-Nuclear Group (FANG)
http://www.anawa.org.au/fang/index.html

Anti-Nuclear Alliance of Western Australia
http://www.anawa.org.au

SOURCES:
The Age
Clean, green energy is possible - SA
The Australian
SMH
The Prime Minister’s recent pThe Prime Minister’s recent position on nuclear developmentosition on nuclear development in Australia - TWS
Nuclear Power is Not the Answer to Global Warming or Anything Else
John Bushby

Download the "Leaked" Christmas Island Detention Centre documents

Below is a link to the "leaked" Christmas Island Detention Centre Complex documents.

The 1200 bed centre, is said to cost more than $300 million. In March 2002 the Howard Government announced the construction of a new Immigration detention centre on Christmas Island. The successful tenderer, Baulderstone Hornibrook, was awarded the project's main contract for $207.9 million.

The project is now near completion...

NOVEMBER 17, 2006:

Leaked Detention Centre Documents

You can download a (zipped) file of the plans here from the link below...
Download the "Leaked" Christmas Island Detention Centre documents
---

Christmas Island, a small dot in the Indian Ocean about 24 kilometres long and 7ks wide, is where a new 1200 person detention centre is being built to detain refugees. The Government says the high-tech enclosure is a "deterrent to smugglers and illegal entrants, and useful for contingencies."

According to "leaked" plans, one section of the centre has corner mounted cameras and intercoms in the bedrooms. Doors to some of the bedrooms, and other rooms, can be locked electronically from a central point, allowing the centre to be locked down. Televisions will be wired so they can be turned off from a central point.

The perimeter is guarded by cameras, lights and an electrified outer fence. There are isolation rooms similar to the type in which Cornelia Rau was held in the Baxter detention centre in South Australia. And there are many specialised interview rooms, with reinforced glass separating detainees from staff...

--

Read background article:
Australias Guntanamo on Xmas Island - Perth Indymedia November 16, 2006
http://perth.indymedia.org/index.php?action=newswire&parentview=36792

Why create "e-waste" mountains - Freecycle It!

NOVEMBER 17, 2006

Australians are building mountains of "E-waste" as they dispose of redundant computers and update loungeroom peripherals. A report by the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows e-waste - discarded computers and electronic goods - is growing three times faster than regular waste as Aussies rush to upgrade their beloved computers. Australians buy nearly 2.5 million new computers each year.

If you do the maths: An old hard drive is roughly .04 cubic metres. Add the non-flat screen monitor, occupying perhaps .08 cubic metres of space - which totals: .12 cubic metres of computer gear per old PC. Multiply this by the number of PCs discarded per year in Australia (1.6 million) and we have roughly, conservatively, around 185,600 cubic metres of plastic, metal, glass and stuff per year piling up somewhere.

But there are alternatives to binning the PC...

Australians are recycling nearly half their waste, but are facing a major - or "e-waste" challenge, according to the latest national snapshot of environmental issues and trends.

Australians are some of the highest users of new technology in the world. The Bureau of Statistics say E-waste is one of the fastest growing waste types and the problem of e-waste is global. Recent figures show that each year, Australians buy more than 2.4 million personal computers and more than one million televisions.

However, the non-bleeping stockpile of discarded, used, obsolete and redundant electronic products keeps growing.

Official figures now estimate Australia, a country of 20 million people, will have discarded or stockpiled a total of 8.7 million computers by the end of 2006. The problem is compounded by the large number of Australians who keep ancient PCs in cupboards and sheds.

The Bureau of Statistics said Australians buy nearly 2.5 million new computers each year. It estimates Australians will replace 9 million computers, 5 million printers and 2 million scanners within the next two years.

The Australian Information Industry Association say industry was working towards more recycling. Some businesses already recycle old computers, returning old machines back when a person buys a new one, while a small number of old but working computers are exported.

The ABS estimate that in Australia, in 2006, there will be around 1.6 million computers disposed of in landfill, another 1.8 million in storage (in addition to the 5.3 million already gathering dust in garages and other storage areas) and half a million recycled.

E-waste in Australia is estimated to be growing at more than three times the rate of domestic waste from households and other council waste.

But there are alternatives...

The burgeoning Freecycle Network, an online recycling organisation, is made up of thousands of individuals and groups across the globe. It's a grassroots and entirely nonprofit movement of people who give & gett stuff for free in their locales.

Each local Freecycle email group is moderated locally. Membership is free and simple. The Network started in May 2003 to promote waste reduction in Tucson's downtown and help save desert landscape from being taken over by landfills.

The global website and email network provides individuals and non-profits an electronic forum to "recycle" unwanted items - including computers, which from experience, go very fast.

On Freecycle, everything posted must be free, legal, and appropriate for all ages. The Freecycle Network is open to all communities and to all individuals who want to participate.

"Freecycle groups are moderated by local volunteers from across the globe who facilitate each local group - grassroots at its best!"

http://www.freecycle.org/

--

Australian Bureau of Statistics:
http://www.abs.gov.au


E-Waste A Growing Concern In Australia
Australia faces e-waste mountain
ABS: Environment snapshot: recycling up, but e-waste a looming issue - November 2006
FREECYCLE - changing the world one gift at a time
Electronic waste - Wikipedia

Australias Guantanamo on Xmas Island

Australias Guntanamo on Xmas Island

November 16, 2006

A new maximum security immigration detention complex under construction on Christmas Island, has been dubbed "Australia's Guantanamo Bay". Australia's new remote offshore detention centre will have cameras in bedrooms, electric fences and electronically controlled doors - to force centre-wide lock-downs. The level of security and surveillance, greater than at any existing detention centre, makes parts of the complex comparable to a maximum security prison.

The 1200 bed centre, is said to cost more than $300million...
In March 2002 the Howard Government announced the construction of a new Immigration detention centre on Christmas Island. The successful tenderer, Baulderstone Hornibrook, was awarded the project's main contract for $207.9 million. The project is near completion.

Christmas Island, a small dot in the Indian Ocean about 24 kilometres long and 7ks wide, is where a new 1200 person detention centre is being built to detain refugees. The Government says the high-tech enclosure is a "deterrent to smugglers and illegal entrants, and useful for contingencies."

According to "leaked" plans, one section of the centre has corner mounted cameras and intercoms in the bedrooms. Doors to some of the bedrooms, and other rooms, can be locked electronically from a central point, allowing the centre to be locked down. Televisions will be wired so they can be turned off from a central point.

The perimeter is guarded by cameras, lights and an electrified outer fence. There are isolation rooms similar to the type in which Cornelia Rau was held in the Baxter detention centre in South Australia. And there are many specialised interview rooms, with reinforced glass separating detainees from staff.

Christmas Island lies about 500 kilometres south of Jakarta, and the new prison is in an isolated area of national park near the western tip of the island, surrounded by cliffs. The centre, which is due for completion within months, has received bipartisan support from the Government and the Opposition.

Refugee groups and the Greens and Democrats have attacked the centre as inhumane. The Greens senator Kerry Nettle, who has visited the site, said it was "callous and cruel to treat people in that way. The international community has rejected Guantanamo Bay, so why should we build one here?" Senator Nettle said.

John Gibson, the president of the Refugee Council of Australia, said the camp "sounds like Alcatraz... It is very disappointing, because people who will be held there have committed no crime under Australian law. All the reports show the conditions in detention have a significant detrimental effect on people's physical and psychological health."

Serious environmental concerns with the selection of this site have also been raised, not least of which was the selection process itself, the Howard government's self-exemption from environmental scrutiny normally required under the EPBC Act, and its commitment to "best practice" environmental measures during construction of the detention centre.

Within days of the original announcement for the construction of the detention centre, then minister responsible for the development, Wilson Tuckey sent a bulldozer into the rehabilitation area to begin clearing lines of sight for the surveyors. Without any authorisation from Environment Australia (EA), the bulldozer cleared a wide track straight through the middle of a block of advanced rehabilitation forest - planted some years earlier by EA.

The Christmas Island detention centre is part of the Australian government's Pacific Solution. It has been extimated that the federal government is spending over AU$300 million to build the new 800 bed (with a capacity for 1200) detention centre on the remote island.

Australian Greens Senator Kerry Nettle called on Amanda Vanstone the Immigration Minister in April 2005, to explain the government's plans for Christmas Island detention centre - following reports that all Australia's immigration detainees will be held on the island.

There are plans to shift all detainees to the island, according to the Shire President of Christmas Island, who says that all future unauthorised boat arrivals will be detained there.

"The government should be closing detention centres, not building new ones," Senator Nettle said. "Christmas Island's new detention centre serves no purpose beyond furthering the Coalition's political ends at a cost of over $300 million dollars to the public. If there are no plans to change the role of Christmas Island's detention centre why is the government spending $300 million on an upgrade? "

Christmas Island's Shire President, Gordon Thompson, says residents are worried about the effects the controversial detention centre development will have on the island's tourism industry.

"We're not building tourism based on a prison tour," he said, also voicing fears that residents would be barred from areas on the northwest point of the island. He said locals were confused and did not know if the centre would just be used for refugees or as a Guantanamo-style prison. Another resident complained that access to popular fishing and snorkelling spots on the island would be limited.

Azmi Yon, president of the island's Malay association, has lived for 37 years on the island and wants the federal Government to leave it alone. He said locals were confused and did not know if the new centre would just be used for refugees or as a Guantanamo-style prison. "We need something from them in black and white to say what it is," he said. "Tell us something, don't keep us in the dark."

Mr Yon said the island was home to a harmonious group of Chinese, Malays and Europeans who respected each other's cultures. "Why disturb an isolated and unique environment when you can (build the centre) somewhere else?" he said.

SOURCES:
'Guantanamo'-style detention facility under construction on Australian Island - Wikinews, 2005
Detention camp has it all, but no people - SMH
Christmas Island Detention Centre - Earthbeat, ABC 2002
Detention Centres on Christmas Island - TWS, 2002
Christmas Island detention centre reopened - Wikinews, 2005
Australia’s Christmas Island Gift – A $300 Million Refugee Prison - Perth Indymedia, 2005

One hundred thousand protestors to riot in Melbourne!

November 15, 2006: WTF? One hundred thousand protestors to riot in Melbourne!

As the world's business and government gurus invade, pollute, collude and arrive to exploit and plunder the global poor, their coporate media shout these rhymes: "more than 100,000 protesters prepare to descend on Melbourne for this weekend's G20 summit, Peter Costello urged them not to be disruptive or violent..." reads the AAP text of more than a dozen news outlets. "Behave, protesters warned!" spits the headline.

Yet, action organisers expect under 10,000 people to converge on Melbourne's Grand Hyatt Hotel, where a meeting of finance ministers, business bigknobs and central bank bosses from across the planet will be cranking.

Another meeting on Saturday will include chief executives from the world's most important energy and resource companies - and nobody else.

The STOPG20 alternative convergence say the meeting is a great opportunity to challenge the G20's policies of "corporate-led globalisation, neoliberalism and hyper-capitalism onto the world's people and ecosystems - and to present alternatives."

While police say they have no specific information on any terrorist threats, they warn that protesters may occupy inner-city buildings, and they want big corporations to consider hiring extra security...
.

"Stop G20 is a collective of protest organisations targeting this weekend's forum..."

Marcus Greville, a spokesperson for the loosely aligned StopG20 crew, told the ABC "there are NO violent protests planned... We've heard that the police said that there is a likelihood that protesters will be going into buildings, going up the lifts and occupying CEOs' offices, he said. "This is just an outrageous attempt to scare people away from participating in the protest on Saturday. We want this to be a political action, and we don't want it marred by violence..."

Federal Treasurer Peter Costello said of demostrators: "There are some socialists, there are some anarchists, there are some people that want to disrupt world trade. What do you want the international footage to be of? People trying to disrupt world leaders or a warm, friendly, welcoming city?"

---

The G20 includes the Group of Seven industrial countries - the US, Germany, Japan, France, Italy, Britain and Canada - plus Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey and the European Union.

Corporate executives from the world's most powerful oil and mining companies are also flying into Melbourne to help Treasurer Costello persuade the G20 nations to liberalise trade and investment in the resources industry.

A new lobby organisation: the "Energy and Minerals Business Council", will also hold its first meeting at the Grand Hyatt. The chief executives may are expected to address the gathering of world financial leaders. The organisation formed by BHP Billiton and Riotinto, wants to abolish free trade barriers in energy and resource markets. The group's existence has been kept secret so it does not become a focus for protest, reports the Australian. This is the first time a business group has had access to the G20.

As Mr Costello urged protesters to refrain from violence, the corporate media report that an "underground group of activists emerged from a secret conference in Melbourne yesterday to promise a day of corporate confrontation tomorrow in which office buildings in the CBD will be targeted by small groups of guerilla-style protesters, who will aim to occupy buildings." The A Space Outside group is "being monitored by police."

Some 10,000 people may attend a major central city rally from midday Saturday, prompting the total closure of some of the streets, and major streets in central Melbourne have been declared no parking zones as authorities seek to remove the risk of a car bomb.

Mr Costello said protesters must let delegates go about their business. "It's perfectly legitimate to make your point ... but the important thing is that they're non-violent and they don't try and disrupt the meeting."

Fast food and retail workers have also been urged to join the action in Melbourne this weekend, as the world's economic leaders meet.

"UNITE," the workers' union, said the summit would have implications for workers employed in major retail and fast food chains.

"This meeting is all about big business leaders discussing corporate globalisation and how best to push their agenda of cuts, privatisation and free trade on working people," said UNITE's Anthony Main.

He says the Treasurer will "proudly tell the forum about how successful the Howard Government's IR laws have been at cutting the wages of young workers".

Mr Main said the protest would be peaceful and police should "lay off the G20 protesters". "Young people and workers have the right to peacefully protest," he said. "We expect the police to respect this right and act in a professional manner on the day."

Barricades have been set up around the Grand Hyatt hotel to keep protesters at bay during the summit. The steel fencing, erected in Collins and Russell streets, is designed to separate police from demonstrators.

"We don't want fortress Hyatt. But the barriers are there for a purpose, and clearly that purpose is to maintain order," said police Assistant Commissioner Gary Jamieson. He said police had adopted new tactics after the violence that marred the World Economic Forum in 2000.

The measures include: "NEW purpose-built, 2m-wide barriers to create space between police and protesters. TEAMS of police in bright vests marked "crowd safety officer" to patrol the protesters' side of the barricades with megaphones to warn demonstrators of vehicle movements into the summit. EARLY notice to protesters about police actions so that "passive" demonstrators can move away from specific areas. POLICE to wear standard uniforms and not riot gear unless higher levels of violence erupt. EXTENSIVE training of police in the latest crowd-control tactics. GROUPS of police have also attended training sessions in Hong Kong to learn the latest tactics."

Mr Jamieson said "if protesters breach the outer perimeter they are no longer passive protesters," he said.

A StopG20 spokes, Marcus Greville, said demonstrators believed the police had no place on the protesters' side of the barricades.

"We are absolutely opposed to having misnamed crowd safety officers working within the actual demonstration itself," Mr Greville said. Mr Greville said it was impossible to say how protesters would act. He said 10,000 protesters were expected.

Police will use extensive closed-circuit cameras and their own observers to identify trouble spots. Deputy Chief Constable Patrick Shearer, from Scotland, is also in Melbourne as a consultant after his role in the 2005 Edinburgh G-8 summit, where organisers faced 250,000 protesters.

Almost 280 delegates will attend the summit to discuss mostly global finances and oil prices.

---

Some alternative events happening:
Independent Media
Nonviolent Direct Action workshops
Media of Dissent! A convergence of independent media makers
Training Workshops
G20 Empty Show
A Space Outside conference
The Breakdown Posters LAUNCH
A Space Outside conference
Infodesk at RMIT
Melbourne university Political Science student and staff gathering
The G20 - What's In It for Workers?
Guerrilla film screening
A Space Outside conference
Make Poverty History G20 Forum
Infodesk (at RMIT) & Training Workshops (at A Space Outside)
Spokescouncils
Oaxaca and Zapatista Benefit Gig
Cabaret of Dissent
Corporate Engagement Day
Give20 Seed Distribution Project
Make Poverty History concert
Spokescouncil
Meditation/Prayer Vigil
Make Poverty History Festival
Carnival Beyond Capitalism
Solidarity focus
Innoculation day!
G20 Alternative and Creating Community forum
Celebration!
Debriefings
Buy Nothing Day...

A large range of networks and affinity groups are planning activities and events to coincide with the G20, only some of which we (or anyone) is aware of due to the decentralised nature of the organising...

Read more
http://www.stopg20.org/node/115

MELBOURNE INDYMEDIA:
http://melbourne.indymedia.org/

STOPG20.ORG:
http://www.stopg20.org/

Sources:
Union calls for summit protest
Energy chiefs sneak into G20
Behave, Costello warns protesters
G-20 protest down to wire
UNITE calls for protests against G20
Melbourne prepares for G20 Forum

Push to consider an end to all logging in WA native forests

Push to consider an end to all logging in WA native forests

November 15, 2006 - Researchers from Murdoch University are pushing for the creation of an organisation dedicated to improving the health of south-west Western Australia's tuart and wandoo forests.

The Murdoch researchers have spent the past three years working with industry and community groups to determine why once fertile forests and woodlands are shrinking. South-west environment groups are building a movement to dismantle the State Government's forest management polices of logging in all WA native forests...
The worst-affected area is in the Yalgorup region south of Mandurah, where the trees are slowly dying. The university's Dr Paul Barber says if a dedicated centre for excellence was created to focus on the problem, there is a good chance a solution could be found.

"If we were to get that funding we would expand our research not only just looking at tuart, we would be expanding our research on wandoo, the flooded gum, salmon gum because these problems are widespread," he said.

Environment Minister Mark McGowan says he is interested in the idea. "Certainly a very good idea, I'm always supportive of initiatives to save important parts of our environment, we also need work on the ground and that's what we're investigating as well," he said.

Meanwhile, conservation groups from around the south-west have united in an effort to dismantle the State Government's forest management polices.

In a media release last week the Preston Environment Group say the FPC was supposedly set up to log and manage the state's forests and to create new industries for timber products. But Mark Shean from the Northcliffe Environment Centre says the commission's work is turning many established forests into plantations.

Several peak South West conservation groups have formed an alliance, calling for an end to all logging in native forest. The groups met in Balingup on Sunday to form the Global Warming Forest Action Group.

More groups and individuals are expected to unite in support over the coming weeks. Mark Shean says conservation groups from around the region have formed the Global Warming Forest Action Group to push for the dismantling of the FPC and to promote the stronger protection for the state's forests.

"What we want to do is get any political party that's sympathetic to our view to come on side and if they won't support us then we plan to run candidates against those sitting members and try and force their hand that way," he said.

--

ARCADIA BLOCKADE: 2 weeks of actions and 11 arrests.

Roading work has begun, and is expected to continue for a few more weeks, before felling can commence. Chainsaws are being used to cut down bigger trees, bulldozers to clear smaller trees and scrub, graders being used to create roads. From our observations, roads are being made through stream reserves and areas marked out for dieback, with no sign of any monitoring being done by the Department of Environment and Conservation.

Spokesperson for the Arcadia Action Group, Brian Green said, "We are here on behalf of all Australians - who are concerned that the logging of native forest is contributing to Global Warming, including the extinction of a rare mainland quokka colony."

The blocakde of Arcadia forest continues. On Saturday the 18th of November a picnic will be held at camp with bands and banner making and tours of Arcadia.

Find out more about the Arcadia Forest action here:
http://www.radicalhack.com/arcadia/


SOURCES:
Green groups unite to challenge WA logging - Arcadia group maintain defiance
Dedicated centre sought to boost forests' health

Piggery Action: Australian animal rights groups lock-on to stop animal abuse

Tuesday November 14, 2006 Perth Indymedia

Last month, several animal rights groups formed to launch a new advertising campaign to highlight the ongoing abusive practice of factory farmed pigs. The new group 'Prisons to Paddocks' say the majority of Australia's 320,000 sows and their offspring spend their entire lives in restricted, and "cruel" environments.

"...most pork, ham and bacon produced in Australia remains something that no ethical person can possibly justify eating..." - Professor Peter Singer

On Monday 13th November, over 20 animal liberationists chained themselves into pig pens at Wasleys' piggery in South Australia to highlight dire conditions at a pig-farm part owned by Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone...
The group entered the Wasleys property, north of Adelaide, prompting an eight-hour stand-off with police. Armed with video cameras they gathered evidence of pigs held in small pens at the site. The group say the footage will be used to launch another prosecution against the business. The group then chained themselves to metal bars and called police.

Animal Liberation spokesperson Mark Pearson said the 24 people involved in the Wasleys action came from New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and South Australia. He said they agreed to leave in return for assurances their video material would not be seized. Police did not lay charges.

Mr Pearson said they discovered at least seven pigs needing treatment - including two that had to be removed and possibly destroyed.

"This a direct consequence of having to live in such extreme confinement, on concrete, unable to exercise," he said. "We found those problems and we're not pig experts."

In July this year Wasleys piggery was cleared of breaching industry guidelines after an investigation by the RSPCA prompted by claims that pigs were being kept in cramped, potentially illegal conditions. But, the RSPCA's Mark Peters said inspectors found the piggery was almost entirely compliant with a commonwealth code of practice.

"The only exception is that many of the stalls are smaller than the minimum size, but that part of the code is not enforceable – it's only a recommendation," he said.

Nevertheless, Wasleys' piggery is not alone. Animals Australia say 95% of all the breeding pigs in Australia are kept in intensive indoor systems similar to Wasleys.

Senator Vanstone, who part owns the piggery said she has nothing to do with the running of the operation and does not condone cruelty to animals. But Mark Pearson said the Senator should visit the piggery and see for herself the appalling conditions her animals were kept in.

Mr Pearson, who is executive director of Animal Liberation NSW, said the pens are smaller than regulation size. "We're staying here until either these sows get out of these stalls or are taken out of these stalls or we get a commitment from the police to undertake that formal inspection so that we can all be here lawfully looking at the situation these animals are in," he said.

RSPCA's Mark Peters said some stalls at Wasleys are smaller than suggested in the code of conduct, but because the code is not legally binding, "governments around Australia allow that method of farming and we can't take action unless there's a clear breach on the laws as they're written," he said.

The RSPCA say a pregnant sow will spend most of her life on a concrete floor in a metal crate 60cm wide. The sow can barely move or turn her head. On their Fair Go For Farm Animals campaign website, the RSPCA say a sow in a stall can develop severe physical and behavioural problems because of the conditions.

"Muscles and bones may deteriorate, causing pain and difficulty in moving. Increased aggression and a repetitive swaying of the head may also develop. These problems can be avoided by using a more humane system, such as group housing several pigs in a straw yard, where they have room to move around. Individual or electronic feeders can also be used to regulate food intake."

Animals Australia recently joined with other groups to form the 'Prisons to Paddocks' alliance. Glenys Oogjes from Animals Australia says the current practice is cruel. She says 'Prisons to Paddocks' is pushing for legislation to be changed to protect the animals.

"If the same sort of conditions were imposed upon cats and dogs then the law would be able to step-in," said Ms Oogjes. "But unfortunately at the present time this system, the factory farming of pigs, is exempt from our legislation or protection legislation."

Australian Pork Limited has rejected claims of cruelty to pigs. Chief executive Andrew Spencer says "the things that the animal extremists don't like about our industry are actually, in many cases, things that are put in place in the production systems to ensure that the animals are looked after well," he said. "This is really the motivation of the pig farmer, he has to have productive animals."

In June this year, prominent Australian philosopher and ethicist Professor Peter Singer, strongly criticized the proposed national ‘Model Code of Practice’ for the welfare of pigs.

He said the code "ensures that most pork, ham and bacon produced in Australia remains something that no ethical person can possibly justify eating." Professor Singer spoke out following recommendations of a national review of the pig welfare code of practice.

"Most Australians are completely unaware of conditions endured by pigs in factory farms. They don’t know that sows are locked for months in stalls so small that they can’t even turn around, and can barely walk a single step. Pigs live on bare concrete, with no bedding material, and can’t even lie down comfortably," he said in June.

"If you kept a dog like that, you could be prosecuted, but this code permits the existing system to continue for another ten years, and even after that, producers will be able to keep their sows in the same stalls six weeks at a time."

"These sow stalls have been banned in the UK on welfare grounds," Professor Singer said. He claimed many Australian pig producers don’t use them, and can still compete economically with those who do. "Why are they still being allowed here?"

WA Action:
Pig welfare actions are not confined to the eastern states. In October 2005, the WA Animal Rights Advocates coordinator, Jonathan Hallett faced charges after he entered the premises of a Gingin piggery in October 2004 to document animal suffering with video footage.

In a similar fashion to the Wasleys' farms, Mr Hallet says the Keene piggery in confined pregnant sows in stalls so small they are unable to turn around. Whilst the use of sow stalls is allowed by industry regulations, he said the piggery failed to comply with even these minimum standards.

Whilst at the piggery Mr Hallett came across a lame and greatly malnourished 4 day-old piglet, unable to be attended by his mother as she was confined in a tiny farrowing crate in which the only interaction she had with her young is her teats poking through bars. The piglet was taken to receive urgent veterinary attention and attention by an animal carer.

Oscar is now an excellent example of a healthy and happy pig. Johnathon said if "the legal system been sufficient to stop cruelty to farm animals I would never had needed to be there."

"Now more than ever the intensive pig industry has been exposed across the country and I have no doubt that sow stalls will ultimately be banned. The only regret that I have is that we live in a society whose legal system is insufficient to protect these animals and that it took putting myself on the line in order to show the public what is really going on behind closed doors," said Mr Hallet last year.

Mr Hallett pleaded guilty to the charge and received a recorded conviction and fine. He says WA Animal Rights Advocates will continue the campaign against sow stalls in collaboration with groups across Australia.

Leading Australian businessman Brian Sherman AM, co-founder of Voiceless said: "Few Australians who purchase ham, bacon and pork products are aware that approximately 90% of pigs in this country are raised in gruesome and cruel factory-like environments. The living conditions these animals are subjected to are simply appalling."

The ‘Prisons to Paddocks’ alliance believes that the formula to change the lives of 5 million pigs in Australia each year is a simple one. "Making compassionate and informed choices is the greatest statement we can make against animal cruelty..."

-----------------------

SOURCES:
AAP - 13 November 2006
ABC - 13 November 2006
Animal Activist Watch - Australian Pork Limited
Australian Activist Update - wilkinsonmedia
Animal Liberation NSW
ABC - October 29 2006
Pig Farming - RSPCA Australia
Animals Australia
Complaint to Police re sows suffering in undersize stalls at Wasleys piggery in South Australia
Peter Singer condemns outcome of national pig welfare review
Raid on Perth Pig Farm Uncovers Horrific Suffering - October 22, 2005

Green groups unite to challenge WA logging - Arcadia group maintain defiance

by Elliot K - Perth Indymedia 2006-11-08 11:32 AM +0800

Wednesday, November 8, 2006: The Arcadia Action Group, a forest rescue team set up in a logging coupe near Bunbury, are maintaining active vigilance this week. Meanwhile, local conservation groups unite to challenge the Forest Product Commission's (FPC) desire to turn critical Jarrah forests into plantations...

The Arcadia Action Group (AAG) is claiming success, after disrupting FPC logging operations for yet another day in the Arcadia forest between Collie and Bunbury - now in its second week.

Four more people were arrested on Monday, when two women locked onto various metal devices (dragons*) in the logging coupe, with two men locking themselves onto logging machinery. It took several hours for police to unlock one of the women.

The FPC and its logging contractors are using chainsaws and axes to cut down selected trees in the forest. The AAG say the operation is destroying the area and have been chaining themselves to objects in the forest to get in the way of the loggers. Access roads have been carved into the habitat - home to a small colony of northern jarrah Quokkas.

The quokka, a small, furry wallaby-like mammal, is endemic to the region where it has been declining in numbers since the white invasion of Australia

CALM and other government and independent research has shown that the Western Australian "Quokka Setonix brachyurus" is declining due to habitat-loss and feral animal predation as a direct result of continuous logging. On the mainland, quokkas are timid animals living in communal groups in dense thickets, often associated with riparian systems, although the animals forage over a wide range.

Few Western Australians know that quokkas live outside Wadjemup (Rottnest Island). But local knowledge reports that these animals were very common until the 1930s and would raid settler's gardens. Now quokkas are limited to a few isolated groups.

The quokka is listed as "vulnerable" according to World Conservation Union criteria. The northern, jarrah population of quokkas has declined to the point where extinction may be inevitable. Environmentalists say the history of CALM, Forest Products Commission (FPC), logging companies and quokkas is tragic.

Other research indicates that the CALM (now Dept Environment and Conservation - DEC) fire regime in the jarrah forest is also a contributory factor in the decline towards extinction of the mainland quokkas.

(In March 2003, members of the Northcliffe Environment Centre gathered at first light in Nairn State Forest to peacefully object to the wilful destruction of the quokka habitat. Seven were arrested and charged. NEC have reported sighting of quokkas in the area in November 2005.)

At the Arcadia blockade on Monday this week, two men and two women were arrested for locking themselves on to trees and machinery - it took police several hours to cut them free. The commission says its logging operation is on track, but the protesters have promised to continue their campaign. Over a dozen people have been arrested at the site for disrupting logging operations.

Spokesperson for the AAG, Brian Green said, "We are here on behalf of all Australians - who are concerned that the logging of native forest is contributing to Global Warming, including the extinction of a rare mainland quokka colony."

The group say further arrests are expected this week as more protesters converge on the coupe to lend support.

Meanwhile, conservation groups from around the south-west have united in an effort to dismantle the State Government's forest management polices.

In a media release this week the Preston Environment Group say the FPC was supposedly set up to log and manage the state's forests and to create new industries for timber products. But Mark Shean from the Northcliffe Environment Centre says the commission's work is turning many established forests into plantations.

Several peak South West conservation groups have formed an alliance, calling for an end to all logging in native forest. The groups met in Balingup on Sunday to form the Global Warming Forest Action Group.

More groups and individuals are expected to unite in support over the coming weeks.

Mark Shean says conservation groups from around the region have formed the Global Warming Forest Action Group to push for the dismantling of the FPC and to promote the stronger protection for the state's forests.

"What we want to do is get any political party that's sympathetic to our view to come on side and if they won't support us then we plan to run candidates against those sitting members and try and force their hand that way," he said.

The blocakde of Arcadia forest continues...

---

For more information:
Preston Environment Group: 97 321270 or 043 997 6507
Arcadia Action Group - Brian Green: 042 868 5562
Global Warming Forest Action - Mark Sheen: 042 755 8617

ABC News

Arcadia Action Website

Quokka Protest in Nairn State Forest - 2003

PDF - PRACTICAL FOREST BLOCKADE TECHNIQUES

THE WORLD CONSERVATION UNION (IUCN)

Perth Indy: Arcadia Forest Defence - Update: Seven arrested protecting the jarrah ecosystem

Wadjemup (Rottnest Island)

Adaptive fire management interim guidelines for Forest Populations aof Quokka


Unique and threatened biodiversity in SW WA

Quokka: Department of Conservation and Land Management

(THIS STORY FROM PERTH INDYMEDIA)

What is Geosequestration? (Draft)

"Clean" coal a con job to cover up dangerous greenhouse emissions
http://perth.indymedia.org/index.php?action=newswire&parentview=36760

Coal, dubbed the "dirtiest of fossil fuels," emits 80 per cent more carbon per unit of energy than gas and 29 per cent more than oil. Technologies to deal with the carbon dioxide coming from coal are unproven and, according to international scientists, unecenomical and not environmentally sustainable.

Greens MP and mining spokesperson Lee Rhiannon urges government to reject the notion of ‘clean’ coal, and ensure that the State Plan includes a transition from coal-based energy to renewables, energy efficiency and gas...

"There is no such thing as ‘clean’ coal. This term was coined by the coal industry's PR machine to divert public understanding from the fact that coal is the worst of the fossil fuels causing climate change. This spin will not get us out of climate change. Coal is the dirtiest of fossil fuels, emitting 80 per cent more carbon per unit of energy than gas and 29 per cent more than oil."

She urges the rapid development of renewable industries, particularly in traditional coal mining areas. "It is vital for the future" she said, the government should not allow future energy planning to be captured by the coal industry on the basis that coal can be ‘clean’.

Technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) to deal with the carbon dioxide coming from coal are unproven and, according to international scientists, at least 50 years away from being economically and environmentally viable at a widespread level.

CCS could triple the price of coal for electricity, making it much more expensive than renewable energy. Storage sites would have to be maintained and monitored for 100,000 years, plus unquantified liability issues of leaking C02.

She said "Coal companies should not be allowed to continue to make mega profits at the expense of jobs and the environment. For years coal companies have received direct and indirect subsidises from successive Labor and Coalition governments. Now is the time to put that support behind a plan for a transition program to clean efficient energy".

Carbon Leakage and Geosequestration

Scientists conclude that human activities are contributing to climate change by adding large amounts of greenhouse pollution to the atmosphere. Use of coal, oil and gas (fossil fuels) are the main source of this pollution. Every time we drive a car, use electricity from coal-fired power plants, or heat our homes with oil or natural gas, we release carbon dioxide and greenhouse pollutants into the air.

Atmospheric levels of the main greenhouse pollutants are currently higher than at any point in the last 420,000 and possibly 20 million years. [SOURCE]

Within this context governments in Australia and overseas have been discussing “geosequestration” – the controversial plan to capture and dispose of greenhouse pollution underground – as a technology to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Of paramount importance for geosequestration is the issue of whether greenhouse pollution disposed of underground is permanently stored. Clearly, if sequestered greenhouse pollution in the form of carbon dioxide (CO2) leaks back into the atmosphere, then geosequestration will have failed as a technology to reduce greenhouse pollution. Depending on the quantity of CO2 stored, the rate of leakage and the level of stabilisation of CO2 in the atmosphere, the implications of leakage for the global climate system could be catastrophic. In addition, if the leakage is rapid, it can asphyxiate humans and animal life in the vicinity.

The greater the reliance on geosequestration to prevent dangerous climate change, the greater the impact will be if leakage does occur.

Leakage is Likely to Occur
Studies show that some leakage is likely, because geological formations are not completely stable, or they could be disturbed by, for example, earthquakes, or because the injection points could become unstable over time.

To be effective, any underground storage of CO2 must not be able to leak out at a rate that would exceed levels that would contribute to dangerous levels of climate change. But how small is small enough? That depends on the amount that is stored and to a lesser extent, the level at which we seek to stablise greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The latter is generally defined as a certain level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere measured in parts per million volume (ppm). Environment groups consider that atmospheric levels of carbon dioxide should be stablised at 450ppm to avoid dangerous levels of climate change.

What Level of Leakage is Acceptable?
The safest rate of leakage is zero and that should be the goal for every geosequestration site. Researchers vary greatly in their assumptions and conclusions regarding a likely level of leakage. It seems that some leakage is likely and there will be a need to set standards and regulations for acceptable rates of leakage and the monitoring and verification regimes to ensure compliance.

Leakage must not compromise the ability of future generations to avoid dangerous climate change.

By the end of the 22nd century the entire ‘carbon budget’ of future generations
would be consumed by leakage from geosequestration sites. This would mean that future generations could not avoid dangerous climate change, even if they reduced their own greenhouse gas emissions to zero.

Conclusion
The assumption of exclusive reliance on storage may be an extreme one, however the example illustrates that emphasis on energy efficiency and increased reliance on renewable energy must be priority areas for greenhouse gas mitigation. The higher the expected leakage rate and the larger the uncertainty, the less attractive geosequestration is compared to other mitigation alternatives such as shifting to renewable energy sources, and improved efficiency in production and consumption of energy.

SOURCE: Climate Action Network Australia

LINKS: Greenpeace Article

co2crc.com.au/links.html