State, territory and federal energy ministers have started the process for significant reforms to Australia’s energy future.
The ministers met on Friday in Canberra where they received a briefing from energy market operators and the consumer watchdog on expected gas and electricity shortfalls in 2023 and 2024.
On top of the agenda was the establishment of a new National Energy Transformation Partnership (NETP) to better collaborate on Australia’s transition to greater reliance on renewables in the electricity grid.
Federal Climate and Energy Minister Chris Bowen announced that as part of the new NETP, emissions reduction would be included in the national energy objectives for market operators.
Stream more on politics with Flash. 25+ news channels in 1 place. New to Flash? Try 1 month free. Offer ends October 31, 2022
Mr Bowen said the decision would send a “very clear” message of certainty to investors and would ensure emissions reduction is at the forefront of every aspect of energy market operators’ functions.
“This might not sound much, this is the first change to the national energy objectives in 15 years this is important,” he said in Canberra on Friday.
“It sends a very clear direction to our energy market operators that they must include emissions reduction in the work that they do.
“And the message of certainty to investors in renewable energy and transition and storage around the world that Australia is open for business, Australia is determined to reduce emissions.
“And we welcome investment to achieve it and we will provide a stable and certain policy framework.”
The ministers also agreed to extend the powers of the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) to better manage east coast supply shortfall risks.
It will also provide AEMO with the option of direct market participation ahead of winter 2023.
In its interim gas report, the Australian consumer watchdog warned of a serious shortfall in natural gas in 2023.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commissions (ACCC) said LNG exporters needed to redirect excess supplies to the domestic market or Australia would risk its energy security heading into next year.
It comes after AEMO intervened in the Victorian gas market to redirect excess supply from Queensland producers to avoid mass shortages in the southern state – using its emergency mechanism for the second time in history.
The ministers joined the ACCC in calling for producers to redirect excess gas to the domestic consumers rather than the lucrative export market.
NSW Energy Minister Matt Kean said it was a “non-negotiable” for his state when it came to protecting households and businesses.
“What we don’t want to see is domestic gas producers prioritizing profits and exports ahead of local users, that is a non-negotiable for us in New South Wales,” he said.
“There is going to be a shortfall in gas in 2023 and 2024. That shortfall needs to be met.
“And what we need to do is prioritize Australian gas for Australian gas users ahead of companies making super profits and exporting that gas offshore.”
His Victorian counterpart Lily D’Ambrosio shared the concerns and said the country produced “more than sufficient gas” to meet domestic needs but “too much of it was sent overseas”.
“And that’s got to change and that’s really the task of all of us and we’re all up for it. And we’ve all agreed about how we can go about doing that,” she said.
On top of the gas market reforms, the ministers also discussed a future capacity mechanism to ensure firming power in the grid during the transition away from coal.
Senior federal and jurisdictional officials have now been charged to provide options for a framework which delivers “adequate capacity, ensures orderly transition, and incentivises new investment in firm renewable energy.”
“Ministers intend to take a more active role in delivering the firming capacity needed as the system transforms and consider the best means to manage the risks of a disorderly exit of coal generation,” the joint communique said.
Thirty years ago, passionate snapper fisher Damon Sherriff was lucky to catch 10 a year in Tasmania.
In the past few years, however, he’s seen his catch rate jump.
Snapper is Damon Sherriff’s favorite recreational fish.(Supplied: Damon Sherriff)
“I’ve actually caught over 200 [snapper] per season, so it just shows you how much the species has exploded in Tasmania,” he said.
Mr Sherriff has been chasing snapper since the early 1990s and mainly fishes out of the Tamar estuary in the state’s north.
And while he also loves a fresh fillet, the catch rate for his favorite eating fish, King George whiting, has skyrocketed as well.
“The whiting is another emerging species; it’s a fish that’s always been in Tasmania like the snapper, but the last few years it’s really exploded and it’s a very common fish now.”
King George whiting is also finding Damon Sherriff’s hook off north-east Tasmania.(Supplied: Damon Sherriff)
His experience hooking more warm-water fish in Tasmanian waters is backed up by new research from the Institute of Marine and Antarctic Studies (IMAS).
Scientists looking at key biological and ecological traits of snapper, yellowtail kingfish and King George whiting have found all three are settling in.
Alexia Graba-Landry is investigating the potential of new fisheries.(ABC News: Maren Preuss)
“They’ve become more and more abundant in Tasmania,” marine scientist Alexia Graba-Landry said.
“As waters become warmer over a greater proportion of the state, that leads to better habitat for these fish and they’re likely to become more abundant.”
The research found that yellowtail kingfish were present in Tasmanian waters between October and May as small immature fish, while snapper were present year-round and there were reproductively mature adults.
King George whiting were also in Tasmania year-round and with adults successfully reproducing, the research said.
King George whiting caught in Tasmania’s north-east.(Supplied: Damon Sherriff)
“There are historical records of King George whiting since the 1920s but they’re only occasional records, so increasingly we are finding more and more reports of King George whiting in Tasmania from recreational and commercial fishers,” Dr Graba-Landry said.
“For all three species, under future warming the habitat is likely to become more suitable, therefore they are likely to extend their range and increase their abundance.”
Researcher Barrett Wolfe inspects fish frames from warm-water species found in Tasmanian waters.(Supplied: Dave Mossop)
The scientific team also ran data through modeling to work out what effect future population increases would have on local ecosystems.
“Across all scenarios there’s little evidence for any ecosystem collapse should these species extend their range and increase their abundance,” Dr Graba-Landry said.
It’s good news for fishers — King George whiting has become so comfortable it’s been flagged by IMAS as a developing fishery to keep an eye on.
“We’re presented with this unique opportunity to proactively manage these emerging fisheries,” Dr Graba-Landry said.
IMAS officers including Dave Mossop have been investigating snapper numbers.(Supplied)
A lot of the research was done with the help of recreational fishers.
Instead of throwing out their fish waste, they have been donating their fish skeletons to scientists, helping them fill critical knowledge gaps on some species.
There were 16 drop-off points at tackle shops around the state.
“There was a lot of enthusiasm; 30 recreational fishers regularly donated frames,” Dr Graba-Landry said.
Damon Sherriff and a prize snapper caught from a kayak.(Supplied: Damon Sherriff)
Mr Sherriff donated his fair share. For the avid fisher, snapper will remain his favorite.
The amateur artist and fish taxidermist loves to draw and paint them and the prettier ones go on the wall.
“I love the colors in the snapper… I’m an arty-farty person and I really enjoy looking at a snapper fresh out of the water,” he said.
“I really enjoy trying to replicate the colors in a fish.”
Damon Sherriff taxidermises snapper he catches.(Supplied)
Parts of NSW are preparing for the worst day of a rain band that is moving through the state, leading to renewed fears of flooding at inland rivers.
A cold front, associated with a low pressure system that moved through Western Australia, brought showers to western NSW from late Thursday and extended into eastern parts of the state on Friday.
The Bureau of Meteorology said Friday was forecasted to be the wettest day of the rain event for most NSW regions, with inland rivers at an increased risk of flooding due to recent deluges in the area.
“This rainfall may cause widespread minor to moderate and possibly major flooding along inland NSW rivers, many of which experienced flooding due to the rainfall last week,” it wrote.
The bureau expects renewed flooding at multiple river catchments littered across the state on Friday, including a minor to major flooding for the Macquarie River downstream of Burrendong Dam.
The other 13 warnings were either minor or moderate in nature for parts of inland NSW, with up to 25-55mm of rain possible around the northwest and central west plains.
Widespread rain and possible storms are predicted until Saturday across the coast, with Sydney and Newcastle expected to experience a deluge on Friday, while it could last until Sunday for inland regions.
Last month was the wettest July on record for much of the NSW east coast, including Sydney, with rainfall around four to eight times higher than average.
Parts of Victoria are also being impacted by the east-coast deluge, with rain bucketing down since 9am on Thursday.
Mount Buffalo copped 51.6mm of rain in the last 24 hours, while Archerton experienced a 34.6mm soaking.
Rainfall totals have generally been 5-10mm across the state, but increased to around 15-25mm over the central ranges and 20-30mm in the northeast ranges.
Minor flood warnings are in place for parts of the Murray and Kiewa rivers.
The bureau’s climate outlook forecast is that rain will likely be above median for much of Australia over the coming fortnight but below median for parts of the tropics.
Parts of NSW are preparing for the worst day of a rain band that is moving through the state, leading to renewed fears of flooding at inland rivers.
A cold front, associated with a low pressure system that moved through Western Australia, brought showers to western NSW from late Thursday and extended into eastern parts of the state on Friday.
The Bureau of Meteorology said Friday was forecasted to be the wettest day of the rain event for most NSW regions, with inland rivers at an increased risk of flooding due to recent deluges in the area.
“This rainfall may cause widespread minor to moderate and possibly major flooding along inland NSW rivers, many of which experienced flooding due to the rainfall last week,” it wrote.
The bureau expects renewed flooding at multiple river catchments littered across the state on Friday, including a minor to major flooding for the Macquarie River downstream of Burrendong Dam.
The other 13 warnings were either minor or moderate in nature for parts of inland NSW, with up to 25-55mm of rain possible around the northwest and central west plains.
Widespread rain and possible storms are predicted until Saturday across the coast, with Sydney and Newcastle expected to experience a deluge on Friday, while it could last until Sunday for inland regions.
Last month was the wettest July on record for much of the NSW east coast, including Sydney, with rainfall around four to eight times higher than average.
Parts of Victoria are also being impacted by the east-coast deluge, with rain bucketing down since 9am on Thursday.
Mount Buffalo copped 51.6mm of rain in the last 24 hours, while Archerton experienced a 34.6mm soaking.
Rainfall totals have generally been 5-10mm across the state, but increased to around 15-25mm over the central ranges and 20-30mm in the northeast ranges.
Minor flood warnings are in place for parts of the Murray and Kiewa rivers.
The bureau’s climate outlook forecast is that rain will likely be above median for much of Australia over the coming fortnight but below median for parts of the tropics.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) announced a set of revamped water strategies on Thursday, warning that the state’s supply is expected to plunge by up to 10 percent by 2040.
In anticipation of these shortfalls, Newsom unveiled a 16-page action document that focuses on “adapting to a hotter, drier future” by adjusting state priorities “based on new data and accelerating climate change.”
Among the strategies are plans for the expansion of water storage and water recycling capacity, as well as the elimination of water waste and the deployment of new technologies.
“The science and the data leads us to now understand that we will lose 10 percent of our water supply by 2040 — if all things are equal, we will lose an additional 10 percent of our supply by 2040,” Newsom said at a press conference in the Bay Area city of Antioch on Thursday.
“As a consequence of that deeper appreciation, that deeper understanding, we have a renewed sense of urgency to address this issue head on,” the governor continued. “But we do so from a multiplicity of perspectives and ways, not just from a scarcity mindset.”
One of these ways, as outlined in the supply strategy document, involves creating a storage space for up to 4 million acre-feet of water. Doing so, according to the document, would allow the state “to capitalize on big storms when they do occur and store water for dry periods.”
Another strategy included in the document involves recycling and reusing at least 800,000 acre-feet of water per year by 2030, which could optimize the use of wastewater currently released into the ocean.
An average California household uses between one-half and one acre-foot of water each year, according to the Water Education Foundation. California has about 13.1 million households, based on US Census data.
The governor’s plans also call for freeing up 500,000 acre-feet of water for new purposes each year by permanently eradicating water waste and using water more efficiently.
Newsom characterized these strategies as “moving away from a scarcity mindset to one more of abundance.”
“How can we take the existing resources and be more resourceful, in terms of advancing policies, and direct our energies to create more water, to capture more water?” I have asked.
Karla Nemeth, director of the California Department of Water Resources, stressed that implementing these plans will require a firm partnership with local municipalities.
The new strategy, she said, “means we have to do absolutely everything.”
Joaquin Esquivel, chairman of the State Water Resources Control Board, echoed these sentiments, adding that “Mother Nature is not providing us the budgets that we all thought that we were going to depend upon.”
“But there is a path forward,” Esquivel said, stressing the importance of creating and investing “in a 21st-century way.”
One such way, according to the strategy document, requires California to “move smarter and faster” to upgrade its water systems. Such modernization effort could generate enough water for more than 8.4 million households.
Additional water could become available by capturing stormwater, diversifying supplies and optimizing high flows during storm events, as well as through desalinating ocean water and salty—or brackish—water in groundwater basins, according to the document.
Thursday’s press conference took place near the site of a forthcoming, $110 million brackish water desalination plant. That facility will be the first such site in the San Francisco Bay Delta, Antioch’s mayor, Lamar Thorpe, said at the press conference.
The plant, Thorpe said, will “provide the city with a reliable source of drinking water for generations to come.”
With the desalination construction site in the background, Newsom urged Californians to adapt to a changing reality, noting that the new strategies include “specific goals with specific timelines and dollar figures.”
And those dollars, he said, will come from last year’s $5.2 billion surplus and this year’s $2.8 billion surplus.
Californian will be using these funds “to update, not just promote” these critical water supply plans — “moving these projects and doing them with urgency,” without “waiting for the voters,” according to Newsom.
“Money’s not the issue. It’s our ability to attract those dollars, by being more aggressive to draw down those dollars because we have a plan,” the governor added.
As large parts of Europe and North America swelter and then ignite, a future of endless climate destruction seems inevitable.
In Australia, we’ve already felt the flames and know we will again.
And many other places now find themselves stuck in an ecocidal tennis match, bouncing from one extreme to another, from devastating fires to heartbreaking floods.
The Black Summer bushfires sent tons of ash and smoke into the atmosphere.(Supplied: CSIRO/Richard Matear)
There’s a growing consensus on the urgent need to bring down carbon emissions, and the global rallying cry is net zero. This isn’t just a climate target, it’s become a badge of commitment.
There’s also a realization that it won’t be easy.
“Transitioning to a net zero world is one of the greatest challenges humankind has faced,” the United Nations declares on its Climate Action website, urging a “complete transformation of how we produce, consume and move about.”
But a schism has emerged among the faithful, with major environmental groups and several leading climate experts now washing their hands of the net zero concept.
Their warning is blunt: the methods and technologies we’ve adopted to reverse global warming simply won’t work.
Worse still, they could do more harm than good.
hijacked for profit
One way that countries have sought to achieve their net zero ambitions is by setting up a carbon market to allow heavy-polluting industries to offset their emissions by buying carbon credits.
The money generated is then channeled into activities that help the environment, like growing more trees, for instance.
Carbon markets are still in their infancy, but the former Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney – who’s now a UN Climate Envoy – believes they have a significant future role to play.
He estimates they could facilitate transactions of around US $1 trillion by 2050.
But Gilles Dufrasne, a policy officer at Carbon Market Watch, warns that if carbon markets are allowed to grow unchecked, they could compromise and ultimately distort net zero goals.
“The main concern is to ensure that the money is actually flowing to climate action and not to financial players or intermediaries,” he told ABC RN’s Future Tense.
He says some carbon credits get traded up to 100 times, with no added benefit to the environment.
“It’s absurd to have so little transparency around where the money is going since it’s the actual primary objective of the entire system.”
Former chief scientist, Ian Chubb, has been tasked by the new federal government with investigating Australia’s widely criticized carbon credit scheme.
Mr Dufrasne says the integrity of other schemes is also in question, including one operated by the European Union.
“The whole concept is being exploited by companies who don’t want to take any meaningful action and who see a cheap way out of their responsibility by just purchasing these carbon credits,” he says.
‘Burn now, pay later’
Last year, a former chair of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Robert Watson, broke ranks to denounce net zero as a fraud – a “dangerous trap”.
Experts say our goals should be zero emissions, rather than emissions balanced by carbon credits. (Getty: James Jordan Photography)
Writing in The Conversation, he and two other leading climate scientists declared they had abandoned the concept.
“Sometimes realization comes in a blinding flash,” they wrote.
“The premise of net zero is deceptively simple – and we admit that it deceived us.
“We have arrived at the painful realization that the idea of net zero has licensed a recklessly cavalier ‘burn now, pay later’ approach which has seen carbon emissions continue to soar.”
Earth Systems scientist James Dyke says that net zero was originally designed as a last-resort measure to allow a very small number of essential industries, like aviation and steelmaking, to offset their emissions and decarbonise over time.
But he says the term lost credibility when it began to be indiscriminately used as an excuse to delay taking action, pushing the problem onto future generations.
“So, when you hear ‘net zero by 2050’ what is being proposed is not that we just offset these hard-to-address sectors, but that we actually will be overshooting 1.5 degrees Celsius, maybe even 2 degrees Celsius,” says Dr Dyke.
Overshooting, that is, with the vague promise that by the middle of the century scientists will have invented effective ways to remove large quantities of carbon from the atmosphere.
But the flaw in that argument, Dr Dyke says, is that all attempts to build large-scale carbon reduction systems have so far failed – including the much-hyped carbon capture and storage (CCS).
“Many people are very surprised to learn that carbon removal technologies don’t really exist.
“I mean, there are ideas about how we might be able to remove large amounts of carbon dioxide from the Earth’s atmosphere, and when I say large, we are talking billions of tonnes. But whatever the proposed technology is, these are just placeholders, “he says.
“They are saying to future generations, by the time that we need these kinds of technologies, they will emerge.
“And as long as we can supply some kind of plausible idea for how we might be able to remove carbon dioxide, the net zero train keeps on running.”
Nature won’t do the work for us
Global warming has been linked to an increase in the calving of glaciers. (Unsplash: NOAA)
Another net zero skeptic is Jannes Stoppel, from Greenpeace Germany.
Like Dr Dyke, he’s skeptical of any technological fix. And while he supports efforts to plant more trees and strengthen forests, he cautions against overestimating nature’s capacity to solve what is a human-generated problem.
Our natural ecosystems are already stressed, he warns.
And their ability to absorb more carbon in future is far from guaranteed
While planting trees has benefits, experts say this is not enough.(Unsplash: @eyoel_kahssay_photographer)
“What we are doing by further talking about this net zero lingo, by further thinking that we can increase the ability (of forests and oceans) to draw down massive amounts of carbon in the future, it’s a very, very dangerous game we are playing. “
Net zero is a distraction, he says, our real emissions reduction goal should be zero. And getting there as quickly as possible.
That means, biting the bullet and phasing out all fossil fuel-using technologies now, rather than relying on elaborate trading systems and vague political promises of future cuts to save the day.
Claire Tyson of Climate Analytics, a non-profit institute that monitors the commitments of 40 governments to net zero, including the richest nations, admits the concept is struggling, but she still has faith it can work.
“I think we are facing a challenge because the world suddenly became very aware of this need for net zero and everyone sort of piled on to the concept. That does mean that there will be free riders in that, but that doesn’t mean we should give up.”
But Dr Dyke doubts the industrialized world is really serious about decarbonisation.
“At the moment there is this sort of phoney war on climate action where we continue to say that 1.5 [degrees Celsius] is still alive and that, with one great leap in ambition, we can still do it, whilst knowing that that’s just not going to happen.”
Humankind needs to stop gambling on the future, he argues, and start asking ourselves the difficult questions.
“I think in many instances this notion of future removals, and the framing around net zero, is being used to stop those questions,” he says.
“It’s really important for us to have these discussions now because warming is going to exceed 1.5 degrees Celsius. I don’t think there’s any doubt about that whatsoever.
“We are currently still on course for around 3 degrees Celsius by the end of this century.
“So, when that does happen, we need to have an idea of what we are going to do to respond to the increase in vulnerability, the increase in damage and destruction and death that it’s going to produce — and make sure that we don’ t respond in ways that are going to make the situation much, much worse.”
RN in your inbox
Get more stories that go beyond the news cycle with our weekly newsletter.
Senate Democrats passed a $740 billion reconciliation package on Sunday that includes provisions that increase taxes on large corporations, address climate change and lower prescription drug costs.
Why it matters: The bill, though much smaller and less ambitious than what many Democrats wanted, has cleared its tallest hurdle and is expected to pass the House before heading to President Biden’s desk for his signature.
Taxes:
The bill puts a 15% minimum tax on corporations that earn more than $1 billion in annual profits, which is projected to raise at least $258 billion over the next 10 years.
It allocates $80 billion of additional funding over ten years for the IRS to in part hire additional staff members and strengthen tax collection and enforcement on corporations and high-income earners.
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the new IRS investment could raise $203 billion in new revenue over the next decade, resulting in a net gain of $124 billion.
It does not include new taxes on families making $400,000 or less and no new taxes on small businesses.
Health care:
The bill increases health care spending by $98 billion, primarily by extending enhanced Affordable Care Act subsidies create through the American Rescue Plan for an additional three years.
It allows Medicare to negotiate the prices of certain drugs and puts a $2,000 cap on out-of-pocket prescription drug costs for people.
It originally contained a provision that would have capped out-of-pocket spending on insulin for patients enrolled in private insurance to $35, though it was blocked by Senate Republicans who argued that it violated the rules of reconciliation.
Climate:
The bill invests roughly $370 billion into initiatives to promote clean energy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, likely becoming the most important climate bill in US history.
It gives tax credits to clean energy technologies, like existing nuclear power plants and advanced nuclear technologies, clean hydrogen, carbon capture and storage as well as wind and solar power.
It gives buyers who purchase North American-built electric vehicles up to $7,500 in federal tax credits to encourage the adoption of electric vehicles while jump-starting America’s electric vehicle industry.
It creates a methane fee program to fine corporations that emit the powerful greenhouse gas above federal limits.
Democrats have said the bill’s climate provisions put the US on a path to reduce its carbon emissions by up to 40% based on 2005 levels by 2030.
Some of the world’s richest men are funding a massive treasure hunt, complete with helicopters and transmitters, on the west coast of Greenland.
The climate crisis is melting Greenland down at an unprecedented rate, which – in a twist of irony – is creating an opportunity for investors and mining companies who are searching for a trove of critical minerals capable of powering the green energy transition.
A band of billionaires, including Jeff Bezos, Michael Bloomberg and Bill Gates, among others, is betting that below the surface of the hills and valleys on Greenland’s Disko Island and Nuussuaq Peninsula there areenough critical minerals to power hundreds of millions of electric vehicles.
“We are looking for a deposit that will be the first- or second-largest most significant nickel and cobalt deposit in the world,” Kurt House, CEO of Kobold Metals, told CNN.
The Arctic’s disappearing ice – on land and in the ocean – highlights a unique dichotomy: Greenland is ground zero for the impacts of climate change, but it could also become ground zero for sourcing the metals needed to power the solution to the crisis.
The billionaire club is financially backing Kobold Metals, a mineral exploration company and California-based startup, the company’s representatives told CNN. Bezos, Bloomberg and Gates did not respond to CNN’s requests for comment on this story. Kobold is partnered with Bluejay Mining to find the rare and precious metals in Greenland that are necessary to build electric vehicles and massive batteries to store renewable energy.
Thirty geologists, geophysicists, cooks, pilots and mechanics are camped at the site where Kobold and Blujay are searching for the buried treasure. CNN is the first media outlet with video of the activity happening there.
Crews are taking soil samples, flying drones and helicopters with transmitters to measure the electromagnetic field of the subsurface and map the layers of rock below. They’re using artificial intelligence to analyze the data to pinpoint exactly where to drill as early as next summer.
“It is a concern to witness the consequences and impacts from the climate changes in Greenland,” Bluejay Mining CEO Bo Møller Stensgaard told CNN. “But, generally speaking, climate changes overall have made exploration and mining in Greenland easier and more accessible.”
Stensgaard said that because climate change is making ice-free periods in the sea longer, teams are able to ship in heavy equipment and ship out metals out to the global market more easily.
Melting land ice is exposing land that has been buried under ice for centuries to millennia – but could now become a potential site for mineral exploration.
“As these trends continue well into the future, there is no question more land will become accessible and some of this land may carry the potential for mineral development,” Mike Sfraga, the chair of the United States Arctic Research Commission, told CNN.
Greenland could be a hot spot for coal, copper, gold, rare-earth elements and zinc, according to the Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland. The government of Greenland, according to the agency, has done several “resource assessments throughout the ice-free land” and the government “recognizes the country’s potential to diversify the national economy through mineral extraction.”
Sfraga said that pro-mining stance is not without regard for the environment, which is central to Greenland’s culture and livelihood.
“The government of Greenland supports the responsible, sustainable, and economically viable development of their natural resources to include mining of a broad range of minerals,” Sfraga said.
Stensgaard noted that these critical minerals will “provide part of the solution to meet these challenges” that the climate crisis presents.
In the meantime, Greenland’s vanishing ice – which is pushing sea level higher – is a great concern for scientists who study the Arctic.
“The big concern for Arctic sea ice is that it’s been disappearing over the last several decades its predicted to potentially disappear in 20 to 30 years,” Nathan Kurtz, a NASA scientist who studies sea ice, told CNN. “In the fall, what used to be Arctic ice cover year-round is now just going to be seasonal ice cover.”
A year after a wildfire destroyed the western Canadian village of Lytton, residents, municipal leaders and the provincial government are grappling with the slow and costly reality of future-proofing a community against climate change.
Key points:
In 2021, 90 per cent of buildings in Lytton, British Columbia, were destroyed by a wildfire
Lytton’s council wants better building emissions standards and energy efficiency to be prioritized in the town’s reconstruction
However, residents are running out of time as temporary living allowances from insurers near their end
The remote village sits at the confluence of the Fraser and Thompson rivers in the high, dry mountains of interior British Columbia, making it a bullseye for fires and landslides. In June 2021, 90 per cent of Lytton’s structures burned down, a day after the village recorded Canada’s hottest-ever temperature.
Now officials have a unique opportunity to rebuild an entire community from scratch using fire-safe materials and energy-efficient building standards.
However, long-term disaster mitigation plans and net-zero ambitions are running up against the realities of human impatience and reimbursement limits from insurers. Burnt-out residents — many still living in temporary accommodation — want to rebuild their homes and get on with their lives.
“There’s a distinct difference between what would be ideal and what’s realistic,” said Tricia Thorpe, 61, who lost her home in the fire.
Tricia Thorpe and her husband, Don Glasgow, stand outside their new home.(Reuters: Jennifer Gauthier)
“I don’t think anybody has a problem with building fire-smart, but they’re trying to build a model village. They’re talking about solar [panel] sidewalks.”
The risk of destructive weather is rising as climate change intensifies, sharpening the focus on how communities build.
Insured damage for severe weather events across Canada hit $C2.1 billion ($2.34 billion) last year, according to the Insurance Bureau of Canada, including $C102 million for the Lytton fire.
Since 1983, Canadian insurers have averaged about $C934 million a year in severe weather-related losses.
The wrangling over how to restore Lytton highlights the messy reality of climate adaptation, and what costs and delays people are willing to endure to cut carbon emissions and mitigate their fire risk.
In the 300-person village, some lofty ambitions have already been shelved in favor of a faster rebuild.
Lytton’s council wanted to adopt building by-laws that require net-zero-emissions homes, but scaled that back to lower energy-efficiency standards after residents pushed back.
The village also considered burying all its power lines to reduce fire risk, a three-year process, but is now installing temporary overhead lines to get the job done in nine months.
Tricia Thorpe’s home, north of Lytton. The village sits in the high, dry mountains of interior British Columbia, making it a bullseye for fires and landslides.(Reuters: Jennifer Gauthier)
“At times, I get frustrated with the lack of knowledge and the fact that residents think we’re trying to make it impossible for them to rebuild,” Lytton Mayor Jan Polderman said.
“We could become a first-generation model for net-zero.”
Mr Polderman said the solar panel sidewalks — reinforced solar panels in place of pavements on the town’s sidewalks — and wind energy could power street lights and municipal buildings.
breaking new ground
In the 13 months since the fire, little progress has been made on restoration, with only a quarter of properties cleared of ash and debris.
The local council is still finalizing fire-safety building by-laws it says will be the most comprehensive ever developed in Canada and make Lytton the best-protected community in the country.
Those new by-laws — based on expertise from Canada’s National Research Council on developing communities in wildfire-prone regions — cover everything from building materials to landscaping and maintenance to what can be stored on properties.
The remains of homes and businesses a year after a wildfire destroyed 90 per cent of the buildings in Lytton.(Reuters: Jennifer Gauthier)
Finalizing the by-laws and community consultation has taken months.
“I’m sure if we’d just said, ‘Let’s get people back in their homes ASAP’ it would have been faster, but then we might be in the same situation in a few years’ time,” said Kelsey Winter, the chair of the BC FireSmart Committee, a provincial organization leading community engagement in Lytton.
“It’s taking longer than many people wanted, but Lytton is breaking new ground.”
Other complications have dogged the recovery. Record-breaking floods in November washed out local highways, which were also intermittently closed over the winter for avalanche control.
In addition, the village sits within the Nlaka’pamux First Nation territory and residents require archaeological surveys to check for Indigenous artifacts before rebuilding. The Lytton First Nation, part of the Nlaka’pamux, also lost dozens of homes in the 2021 fire.
The limits of insurance
Around 60 per cent of Lytton residents were uninsured or under-insured, leading to delays in debris removal as residents and insurers grappled with who should pay. In March, the province said it would provide $C18.4 million to cover debris removal, archaeological surveys and soil remediation.
Meanwhile, residents are running out of time as the temporary living allowances provided by insurers, typically for 18 to 24 months after a disaster, near their end. Adding to their challenges, insurers are reluctant to pay for the upgrades to homes that are being written into new building by-laws.
“Insurance puts back the building you had, not the building you want,” said Aaron Sutherland, the Insurance Bureau of Canada’s Pacific region vice-president.
Canada’s Institute of Catastrophic Loss Reduction — which helped develop Lytton’s fire-safety by-laws — estimates implementing them would add approximately $C5,000 to each home’s rebuilding costs.
And, Mr Sutherland said, while insurers can see the benefit of fire resilience, upgrades to enhance energy efficiency and cut carbon emissions will add “tens of thousands” of dollars per home.
“When people took out insurance policies, they were based on the by-laws of the day and what insurers were expecting to pay,” he added.
Building emissions account for 13 per cent of Canada’s total greenhouse gas output, and slashing them is a key part of the Canadian government’s climate targets.
Canada’s federal government will help make up some of the shortfall, providing $C6 million in grants for home owners in Lytton with basic rebuild insurance who want to rebuild net-zero or fire-resistant homes.
Meanwhile, Lytton is facing yet another wildfire season. On July 14, a wildfire broke out across the river from Lytton, destroying at least six properties.
A firefighting helicopter flies over the nearby Nohomin Creek wildfire on July 25, 2022.(Reuters: Jennifer Gauthier)
Last year, 1,642 wildfires burned 869,279 hectares in British Columbia, higher than the 2010-2020 average of 1,352 fires and 348,917 burned hectares.
Some homeowners have had enough of delays.
Ms Thorpe, who lives just outside the village boundary, is rebuilding without building permits, and others are moving elsewhere.
“I’m not expecting I’ll be rebuilding ever, even though my intention was to do so,” said retired nurse Michele Feist, 59, whose 100-year-old bright yellow home burned down.
“The response has been inadequate at every level. I’m not a bitter person and I try to be realistic about things, but I miss my town.”
The Senate passed Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act on a party-line vote Sunday afternoon, delivering the long-awaited centerpiece to President Biden’s agenda.
Democrats rallied behind the $430 billion climate, health care and tax overhaul after Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (DN.Y.) reached a last-minute deal with Sen. Joe Manchin (DW.Va.), who had held up previous proposals.
The House is expected to approve the legislation on Friday and send it to Biden’s desk.
Here’s a summary of what’s in the Inflation Reduction Act:
ENVIRONMENT, ENERGY AND CLIMATE
Businesses would get incentives for deployment of lower-carbon and carbon-free energy sources.
Tax credits are extended for energy production and investment in technologies including wind, solar and geothermal energies. The investment tax credit also now applies to battery storage and biogas.
Tax credits would be created or extended for additional technologies and energy sources including nuclear energy, hydrogen energy coming from clean sources, biofuels and technology that captures carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
Many of the incentives also contain bonuses for companies based on how much they pay their workers and offer credits for manufacturing their steel, iron and other components in the US
Consumers and businesses get incentives to make cleaner energy choices.
Tax credits are extended for residential clean energy expenses including rooftop solar, heat pumps and small wind energy systems. Consumers can get credits for 30 percent of expenditures through 2032, and the credit phases down after that.
Tax credits of up to $7,500 are offered to consumers who buy electric vehicles — but this credit comes with stipulations that may make it difficult for vehicles to actually qualify.
A tax credit would be expanded for energy efficiency in commercial buildings.
Some fossil fuel production on public lands would be bolstered.
The future of solar and wind on public lands and wind in public waters would be tied to requirements to hold lease sales that open up new oil and gas production.
The bill reinstates the results of a recent offshore oil and gas lease sale that was struck down on environmental grounds. The Interior Department would be required to hold at least three more offshore oil and gas lease sales by next October.
New programs boost investment in climate.
A new program aims to reduce emissions of the planet-warming gas methane from oil and gas by both providing grants and loans to help companies reign in their emissions and levying fees on producers with excess methane emissions.
$27 billion would go to a green bank that would provide more incentives for clean energy technology.
Costs increase for fossil fuel production on public lands.
Minimum royalties increase for companies to pay the government for oil and gas they extract on public lands and waters. A royalty is added to the extraction of gas that is later burned off or released as waste instead of sold as fuel.
Communities that face high pollution burdens get relief.
$3 billion would go to environmental justice block grants — community-led programs addressing harms from climate change and pollutants, including $20 million for technical assistance at the community level, through fiscal 2026.
More than $3 billion is allocated to funds for air pollution monitoring in low-income communities. Nearly half of the funds — $117 million — would specifically go to communities in close proximity to industrial pollutants.
An excise tax on imported petroleum and crude oil products to fund the cleanup of industrial disaster sites increases from 9.7 cents to 16.4 cents per barrel. The reinstatement of the tax is projected to raise $11 billion.
The bill permanently extends and increases the Black Lung Disability Trust Fund, a tax on coal production to finance claims from workers with the condition. Black lung, caused by long-term exposure to and inhalation of coal dust, is believed to affect at least 10 percent of coal miners with at least 25 years’ experience, according to a 2018 study by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
— Rachel Frazin and Zack Budryk
HEALTH CARE
Medicare can negotiate lower prices.
The bill would allow Medicare to negotiate prices for some drugs for the first time, a policy Democrats have been trying to enact for years over the fierce objections of the pharmaceutical industry. The provisions save more than $200 billion over 10 years.
It would allow Medicare to negotiate lower prices for 10 high-cost drugs beginning in 2026, ramping up to 20 drugs by 2029. There is a steep penalty if a drug company doesn’t come to the table: a tax of up to 95 percent of the sales of the drug. There is also a ceiling that the negotiated price cannot rise above.
In a deal with moderates including Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), only older drugs are subject to negotiation after a period of nine years for most drugs and 13 years for more complex “biologic” drugs. That means the negotiations are more limited than many Democrats wanted.
Drug costs can be capped but largely only for Medicare.
The bill includes other measures to cap drug costs. The provisions still largely apply only to seniors on Medicare, not the millions of people who get health insurance through their jobs, in part because complex Senate rules limited how expansive the provisions would be.
If drug companies raise prices in Medicare faster than the rate of inflation, they must pay rebates back to the government for the difference.
Democrats tried to apply this provision to the private market, but the parliamentarian ruled it violated the Senate rules used to bypass a GOP filibuster.
In one of the most tangible provisions for patients, the bill caps out-of-pocket drug costs at $2,000 a year for seniors on Medicare, starting in 2025.
The bill also caps patients’ insulin costs at $35 a month, but only for seniors on Medicare. Republicans voted against overruling the Senate parliamentarian to extend that protection to patients with private insurance.
People enrolled in ACA plans get an extension on premium assistance.
The measure also builds on the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by extending enhanced financial assistance to help people enrolled in ACA plans afford premiums for three years. The extra help would otherwise have expired at the end of this year, setting up a cliff. The provision expands eligibility to allow more middle-class people to receive premium help and increases the amount of help overall.
—Peter Sullivan
TAXES
Large corporations will pay for climate and health measures within the bill.
The bill introduces new taxes on corporations to pay for its climate and health care measures.
The centerpiece of its tax plan is a 15 percent minimum tax on the income that big corporations report to their shareholders, a tax known as the minimum book tax. Initial proposals put the amount of revenue raised by the book tax at $313 billion — more than 40 percent of the $740 billion raised by the legislation as a whole.
The tax applies to companies reporting $1 billion in annual earnings. It would impact only around 150 large firms, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation.
Sinema demanded some last-minute exclusions to the minimum tax that were favorable to the US manufacturing sector and private equity firms.
The tax will exempt companies taking advantage of accelerated depreciation, a popular deduction that helps pay for capital investments such as new equipment.
Small businesses that are subsidiaries of highly profitable private equity firms will also be exempted from the minimum tax.
The IRS gets a funding boost.
Another key measure allocates $80 billion to increase enforcement at the IRS. Democrats hope that, with more employees and better technology, the IRS can more closely examine wealthy individuals and ensure they aren’t dodging taxes. That extra revenue is expected to lower the deficit by $203 billion over the next decade.
Stock buybacks will get an additional tax.
The bill enacts a 1 percent excise tax on stock buybacks to replace the revenues lost by appeasing Sinema. Democrats expect the provision to raise $74 million over a decade.
Share repurchases by S&P 500 companies have soared in recent years and are on track to surpass $1 trillion this year. Companies buy back their stock to reward shareholders and increase their stock price by artificially limiting supply.
The tax will impact the nation’s largest companies that rely on multibillion-dollar buybacks to raise their stock price, including Apple, Nike and Exxon Mobil.
Democrats have criticized the practice, arguing that companies should invest in workers and innovation instead of repurchasing stock.
To further recover revenue lost to the private equity sector, the bill also extends a set of limitations on losses that businesses can deduct from their taxes. The limits prevent wealthy individuals from significantly bringing down or even wiping out their income tax liability. Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said that extending the caps would raise $52 billion.
