Biosequestration - the natural limits.

Thanks to a local farmer we have the perfect piece of onground logic for this week . Grasslands are good .
My apologies to those who asked for some buffering equations within the carbon cycle here - I decided that this isn't the place, because the wannabees who are always searching but never coming to a knowledge of the whole truth will keep wandering over the the territory ,if they think they are onto something new . see also 2 paras and 2 posts down . They will only be forced to stop talking when we stop feeding them This is their problem; the disease which ruins most cutting edge conservation in Australia - naming one part of the challenge but having no complete view of the whole .

Believe me, if you have doubts about government policy and where it comes from, you are not alone .Very scary when you are isolated from all the noise .
Just have a look at grist and how Obama is having to recant all the talk about biofuels and ethanol . Most polys want quickfix when slowfix is the only way.

Its easy for me because i worked and studied with earth systems all my life and know them well enough to see the huge pile of rubbish that polys and bureaubrats shovel around each week - all in the once good name of conservation .
For you who are not more clear about this , remember, Doubt is not wrong, as the true fundamantalists on CC would have you believe. Its very much part of sound science and common sense . Words ---you can't trust them to use them properly, let alone facts !
Try being an effective environmental risk management scientist over the last few decades. Telling the truth on basic chemistry and physics can cost you your job.
YET Reconciliation with the earth is not something you play with ; it comes at a cost – the cost of doing things properly and professionally; Its Not about quick fix .So whose really kidding who here !
For me doing science and post grad geoscience at University and working effectively in providing risk management advice on the environment for 30 years was no guarantee that you will be able to speak freely. (Bracks sacked me, one of the best water conservationists in the State of Victoria , in its most drought driven year . No wonder Hon Tim Holding has nowhere to go with all his mislaid pipes.( Remember you heard it first on blogger )

Doubts and questions used to define scientists; now only skeptics are doubters and doubters are supposedly stupid .
Our political spin merchants have redefined what scientists are - good scientists are those who are certain about the things they are advocating and they support what we , the leaders , say.
If only they knew what they are really saying--- they have made a game of football out of one of the most important challenges for humans on this earth -living within the chemical limits.
Since the post 2 down , Senator Fielding has asked a simple important carbon question of Senator Wong and got no scientificly defensible answer . These are the numbers in one chemical equation , even a undergrad could answer !
I could add to the reasons why Wongs latest diversion won't work , but that would be to give them talking space when we need an end to this waste of effort.
Carbon cycles are some of the most well buffered, both now and throughout geologial history. Temperature and .......( various other things that you need to look me up for)limits the application of sequestrtaion technology in ways currently censored. Obviuosly Wongs advisors don't know them - what a surprise !

You should not support Labor or the greens in ETS for many reasons. If you can't think of a good reason, he's one . The government pay for a pathetic ad that encourages questions (askmorenow)and yet , they can't even decide whether cows should fart, belch or breath.

Careless conservation talk is highly dangerous

Us greens are in the firing line over the most disasterous fire in Australia's history. And rightly so ! We know its not easy to get those who don't care motivated. But we as a group, have let the simple talk dominate ( "trees are good , preserving the trunks and branches, even when dead, is of supreme value ")
The complex and complete eco talk required to retain our credibility is going . We are getting a bad name. We have let the simple talk take over.
The biggest disaster in Australia's history is a reminder that careless talk about trees is no good if it doesn't respect the complex interactions that drive good design with nature : diversity, distinctions, deterministic necessities and real world decisions MUST come with our management of such complex, dynamic and unique associations.Planning scheme rules don't make good decisions; proper production ecology does.

A simple preservationsist approach has crept into even goverenmnet approaches. How long can they last with trivia talk ? How long should they last?

All the good intentions can be dissipated in the reality that , instead of diverting our disciples from disease, we have helped create it . A positive direction for conservation is to move to here

Its's time to take stock - we have been too busy into playing up to preservationist predjudices and not enough into acting professionally

People love trees - but not all trees should be treated the same.
Take gums vs stringybarks or western district cypresses. Some houses were protected by Western district cypress trees (WDC)during the western district fires in 1983 . This reality in the open country with one type of cypress tree helped create a bit of a false sense of security in form of complacency about "stay and defend" --a policy that is quite defensible in open country( CFA territory) - BUT just not appropriate near our native mountain forest gums ( DSE territory).
If you are green, but have never supported others to study to be properly green - NOW is the time. The country needs them .
Competent conservationists are an endangered species

Sequestration -the greens get distracted AGAIN

Bob brown believes in it : Mr Garnaut believes in it; Perhaps even the Opposition believes in it . The truth ? what is truth ? The majority believe in it so it must be right, right?

Wrong. From a practical scientists point of view this NEW fixation with ONE form of soil fixation is a dark and empty distraction when focus is needed. Clearly Mr Garnaut is not on top of the issues, to lose track of the key ones . If I was Rudd or Garrett, I would be worried that my best policy mate supporter is Mr Brown.

Sure, it sounds good, and is chemically an option ( like castration is an option ), but it won't work- that'sthe soil stuff so popular to talk about at the moment .

So why would anyone believe in the circular merry go round of ideas that is supposed to be ET at the moment?
Take sequestration of carbon in charcoal and timber .The greens are finally back at trying to open a building they knocked down only a few years before !
The revolving door of reactionary green talk in which Mr Brown is the lead agent is about to come back to one sustainable method for sequestration. . This is after his followers, in their ignorance and openess to quickfix , have closed down many timber industry areas .

If you voted for Mr Rudd , Stop Mr Rudd before his team lose the plot completely- maybe Labor should amalgamate with the Greens to fight the wave of cynicsm that awaits them next time they appear at the ballot box .
All this distraction and diversion is just another brick in the wall for those of who know how to manage soils and energy sustainably and would like to get on with doing just what we have been doing - without distractions .

Governments campaigns are way off target

I think the sheep are thinking - don't be like us : we can't help it ; we are sheep!.
Either wishy washy or overly fear driven, the government are wasting our money on ad campaigns that tell us how to suck eggs or insult our intelligence.
If I was Kevin Rudd , I would call in all these kindergarten level advisors ( the problem is clearly endemic) and ask them to consider and demonstrate their bonafides- those who can't show they work on planet earth and can touch base with sound science, engineering and economics must go.
Get some people who have real ecomia training in the field , before the wheels fall off completely from your hot airship Kevin !. The people of Australia deserve better , The bottom line is that talk is cheap -and you have been promoting it like hell itself.
Hot air talk in campaigns may win leader status, but it is no way to keep it .Talk to some real sustainability experts.

Planet Ark establishes a lead

Conservation organisations are good at identifying problems ; not always so good at getting solutions right .Full marks to Planet Ark for calling for a tap driven water solution. Not before time infact far too late - we could have bought up half of some overgrazed desert region by now with the money !
If Australians stopped wasting resources by buying bottled water, heaps more conservation jobs with cutting edge would grow . Why backward state governments have to be told where to go on water policy ,see thestockadestate.

Engineering our way out

Its true " You can do almost anything if you have enough money" .
Polys , especially before an election tend to believe this. After all, its not their money they are spending and they can do almost anything !!!??/.Mr Turnbull is happy to spend big on the environment. But His big water iniiative going a bit cold with the weather . Does he know what he is doing ?
Clearly ALL those in parliaments right across the country, when charged with the very complex questions of design with nature ,are tempted ( for quite rational reasons ), on both sides of the house,tend to leave all the questions of risk management to Engineers .The polys don't know what they are doing and its a good thing when they admit same right! yes , but who should they listen to??? . Does Turnbull know something the tasmanian parliament don't?.Does turnbull trust somebody others don't ? now we are closer to the heart of Cousins dilemma . Turnbull think engineers are the can dos, and other scientists now can " go jump" -
The big question is - who should our leaders be listening to ?

Even if the public welcome Turnbulls cando approach ( and why wouldn't they when the media meddle ) , Just getting one side of the story just won't work . The most efficient way forward is always to have designers and natural process experts working together . The best result by far ( and that's value for effort short and long term )is to use both. This clearly is not happening with engineers insisting on their own way, on our coasts, even to this day ! The whole idea of the last quarter century was to ensure the broadening of the engineering approach to everything - so that there was a tension in the debate between those could design around limitations and those who were trained to know natures limits .

The very big question for The Stockade State is whether they have anybody left in their depleted ranks who can stand up for nature in the discussions that would avoid us paving the world with steel and concrete.

The very very high cost of paperwork

as a result we have? ----Greasing the wheels of the environment?
Story : The Tasmanian government has recently HAD to change env planning legislation to get things happening in the state ( Pulp Mill) .
Finally something as a big as a state gets to feel the harsh wind of environemntal studies that cost the earth and take as long to complete . How big does the problem have to get before our polys do something about it ?
If tasmanian leaders can get the carpet pulled out from under them by good intentions locked up in paperwork - so can the bigger states .

Panic stations

YESTERDAY Rudd offers to buy everyone a water tank ( cost 250 million )blissfully unaware that for urban australia the idea makes no practical water, health and economic resources provision sense. let alone cost of installation and maintenance of an effective system!!!)
Pity he,campbell bracks and brumbles aren't listening to the former PS commissioner Podger who is today reminding the leaders of our country that they are lost at sesa through their own stupidity( a wise man would still have some independant inhouse advisers who were practicioners ( rather than the theoretitions they curently employ) on the subject of conservation - but they all head off to cullen's close up the rivers single desk ; paradoxically the rivers and creeks will dry up if cullen doesn't win the war against the pincer movement but who cares the debate about the future is not about facts- its about tokens in rska avoidance therapy - kind of trees as bandages posting)

Polys and their close collegues in fanaticism claim to be interested in the long term , but appeal to the short term quick fizzes of the moment .Clearly the peoeple too seem to prefer risk avoidance tokens rathr than the hard yards . rather than whether its water, child abuse or labor arbitration.

Water and oil do not mix

Nothing better illustrates the incompetence of public debate on the environment than the unchecked advocacy of techniques that apply to one risk management scenario, but not to another .
Listening to the stupid panic that many indulge in over water even today , you would think we were running out of water. Oil, on the other hand is a diminishing resource and yet we hear the same carelessly trotted out trading, tightening and frightening arguments for both . Even the Treasurer thinks we should all store it in our own backyards ( he didn't consult the NHMC on that one and he isn't the first either) .Rainwater tanks and windmills still say more about the "don quixote" factor in politics than they do about sound imperatives of conservation and starting new/sus old ecosystems in the suburbs . Such careless politics treats true conservation (incl the critical cost manageable diversity) as a joke !

First - The storing of rainwater in most areas of suburbia is not the most desirable or effective method of water conservation.
Second - The ongoing panic about lack of runoff is in ignorance of when it is likel , Catchments don't run water early in the season as soils and surfaces are dry . Infact runooff events in most situations ( apart from high mountain areas ) are quite rare . Many areas, even in southern Victoria, do not run water reliably every year, even though most of the driest of those areas average around once a year .
If you really want to know whats happening or likley to happen you should listen to someone other than the TV or radio!

Landcare - who cares ? Ho hum

Gustav Nossal is the stable figurehead for an unstable feast of change in the unhappy marriage of DPI and DSE - pity those who try to work for those in vic gvt on environmentw with such a facade of agreement and unequal partnership going on behind the scenes! : Yes , yet another destabilizing review of where Mr Thwaites and his mates have been taking us on the long and winding road to change windmills and more change .
Their current target --landcare . The ABC afternoon presenter was going for it , but gustav reckons the ship is steady and strong . .Whose being honest and realistic ?
Are those in DSE able to defend anything but change itself ? Will these change for changes sake agents drop landcare like they've dropped everything else before it - of course they will . Wouldn't put too much money on a stable future for DSE funding when DSE don't even seem to anticipate it - more eager to know what you think and what might be a NEW direction .

Maybe change is what they think real sustainable business is all about?

Would DSE know what sustainable business is, if they stumble across it in this latest quest for ideas ?!

Dredging up distractions and muddying the water!

So "40000 people signed the petition" to stop dredging the channel. Who cares ! Does the Spokeperson for the channel opposition group think numbers are more important than nature and the scientific study of resiliance?

Maybe the 100 mill spent by the govt on a new EES on the channel dredging is worth a lot more than lots of petitions with "nimby" written all over lots of them? A million dollars a summary page? Thought the age would drop some gems of wisdom for all that effort to get " what was so much needed" . But who really wanted it and who really needed it??? - I bet john thwaites and brumby don't know!
The opponents don't desreve another hearing if all they can focus on is numbers - not truth and the wasted 100 million they got our woosy leaders to give them. Why take serioulsy those persons who called for an extra expensive extra study and now don't seem to want to talk about what 100 million dollars of investigation delves into. we'll see, won't we !

" we know what its says" , "it's wrong" why? because it doesn't say STOP and we don't need to delve any further at all into the thing - its a matter of faith .I bet the 100 million doesn't tell us ( the public) anything we didn't already summize.
No, the respondents to yesterdays announcemnet do not really take " the big picture" seriuosly , or it would be all over rover .

A less woosy and more wisely advised governmnet would have said - "you've had your EES and the 100 million is needed elsewhere !" So much for taking them, the government and the environment seriously !
Why have another environment impact statement ( And all the cynical waste generated) Instead of talking to the real risk issues( and giving SOund Environmental assessment gets a bad name )

All the respondents yesterday wanted to focus on was "40000 people didn't want it" - big deal----40000 is nothing if its a bunch of nimbys (NIMBY= Not In My Backyard)who only take EIS'or EES's seriously when it suits them - much the same as the government do ! .

Lots of people don't want things in their backyard, but they don't all use the environment as their cover -creating the sort of cyniciscm amongst the powerbrokers that is plain destructive for those of us who want others to have a career in looking a little deeper than mere profit! I wonder why the people of victoria are happy to pay for all this distraction and adhoc use of EES's .
Winter rain is still coming , but another snow job is already here and costing the earth .

Crisis driven consensus on the water crisis

The murray darling management committee --what are we buying into here ? a bigger committee, a new well funded working party or maybe a policy driven technocracy ,or just a mild mannered tap turners authority with orders from the prime minister himself . who knows hope someone does before friday
I have a feeling that when all the good committee members ride home from their trip to tout at the waterproviding machine that
--The only ones to benefit from higher water prices ( the final solution?) will be the institutions , bureaucracies and the speculators:
--The only ones to feel the pinch ( as mike young so willingly admitted re how cities feel on "point of View ABCTV" ) will be the producers ( the touchers of the sacred stuff) who will get their options and security slashed and their methods of using the stuff increasingly questioned . Why? : when the economists and non practicals in that group on Mcmullans program couldn't even admit and challenge the ravishing stupidity of a monocultural market solution that will not recognise diversity; diversity of rainfed, rooffed and riverfed.

Mcmullan said they were experts . Gives a whole new sloppiness to the drips under pressure angle !

Splashing around in a drought

The end result of Mr Turnbull's big splash into a shallow pond with a very hard bottom can be expected to be a broken promise.( He's going to do the impossible with the Murray Darling ?) Good luck to him but lets first keep the outcome in perspective - a few barrages and the barham choke for 10 billion?.

Too much water and financial engineering on the brain? The Short term gain of a good idea badly implemented will become evident once it becomes obvious He and His party think that environmental problem solving is simple . The libs have already had a chance to spend well - what have they done with the telstra money ? more waste would be a vote loser - as are all big quickfiz's -when the heat goes out of them .More at http://ourland3.tripod.com/watersecurity

Who should you believe?

One thing is clear --the whole conservation movement cutting edge in Australia is at risk if politicians keep taking the running on it. doesn't matter whether its thwaites , Gor or anothe r ros kelly it -wannabe clever instead of those who really know not only the problem , but its context and therefore its proper management . After all the vics didn't check with anyone in house about giving $1000 to city people to store water for the 1 in 1000yr drought when the 999 years its not needed ---makes it really hard to justify -esp as mosquito breeding sites that deprive soils and syetems of moisture for all those years . or their failure to run the gilmore award program that might have helped many manage their futures better .
they don't check to see that closing forests will make mana gemnet of them too expensive for the next genartion of victorians .Elvis looks good so someones job will have to go after the fires to make the governmen look good !
All the time they sleep easy knowing its not them that spent big dollars on an other quick fiz . no its all due to global warming