I read Living in the Hothouse by Ian Lowe a couple of years ago. It was a depressing forecast when I read it. I already knew I was living in a rain shadow, and that Victoria had been in drought for about 10 years, but after reading it, I considered moving to Tasmania.

Well, today, on the front page of the Melbourne Age, the headline was State faces ‘worst-ever’ fire season. The article by Peter Ker was about a leaked report from the Department of Sustainability and Environment about the coming fire season in Victoria, and its predicted intensity.

Victoria’ rainfall has been its lowest on record for the first six months of 2009. Even if we get above average rainfall (which we won’t) for the rest of winter and spring, we’re still looking at extremely dry conditions in the heavily populated areas in the regions with 250km from Melbourne. The report predicts drier conditions than last fire season, which produced Black Saturday, with the fire season starting as early as November.

Although Peter Ker’s article didn’t refer to climate change, I was instantly reminded of Living in the Hothouse when I read the predictions. Ian Lowe forecasted longer dry periods, more intense heat, and horrible fire seasons, for south eastern Australia. The book was only published in 2005, and we’re already seeing the results.

I am lucky the the wind on Black Saturday was blowing slightly from the west, otherwise the fire would have roared straight into the valley in which I live. As it was, it stayed on the other side of the Tallarook ranges, and burnt into Strath Creek. But this summer, the Tallarook ranges will have to burn. It’s tinder dry and full of undergrowth and fallen trees. If a fire started in there, there’s no stopping it, and all the homes nearby will fall victim to the embers.

Do things have to be personally brought home to people … do we have to think of our own livelihoods before we realise how dire climate change really is? I was already an advocate for carbon trading, for sustainability, and for simple living. But, even if we all do the right thing, we have already raised the global temperature by about 1 degree. And it’s enough to produce Black Saturday.

What will the Black Saturdays of the future look like? Will insurance companies continue to insure people in the country? Will insurance companies survive? How high will our policies be? Do we leave or do we stay to fight, if we know the insurance companies will forsake us? How much

hotter and drier will it get in a world where the temperature is another 2 degrees higher, as our Government suggests it will get?

I wish we had a leader that would take a stand. We have to take responsibility for our emissions and our wasteful actions now.

“The most important life-forms to be affected are those that form the bedrock of the oceanic food chain: plankton. Although individually tiny, photosynthesising plankton … are perhaps the most important plant resource on Earth. They comprise at least half the biosphere’s entire primary production – that’s equivalent to all the land plants put together … [A]ll higher species from mackerel to humpbacked whales ultimately depend on them.
“Phytoplankton are also crucial to the global carbon cycle. Collectively … removing billions of tonnes of carbon from circulation … But as the oceans turn more and more acidic, this crucial component of the planetary carbon cycle could slowly grind to a halt. With fewer plankton to fix and remove it, more carbon will remain in the oceans and atmosphere, worsening the problem still further.”

It’s another exponentially worsening situation, exactly the same as the decreasing Arctic Ice – which leads me to the polar bears. Being white, ice is highly reflective; whilst the ocean absorbs the heat of the sun, the ice reflects it back into the atmosphere. However, as our oceans warm and the ice melts, there is therefore less ice to reflect the heat. More heat is absorbed, so the oceans warm quicker, and ice melts quicker. Like I said, an exponentially worsening situation.
What lives on the Arctic ice? Lots of species, in fact, including some humans. But our most iconic and lovable Arctic animal is the polar bear, who is becoming the face of climate change. There numbers are decreasing as the ice decreases. There are less baby polar bears, there are less yearling polar bears, and there are more starving polar bears who miss the retracting ice flows.
Isn’t this enough to turn off your lights when you leave a room, taking up a more sustainable lifestyle, reduce your emissions, and even buy some carbon credits. Carbon credits are produced when sustainable companies do things to help the environment. Pay someone else to plant trees to offset your lifestyle, but know that you are taking responsibility for your contribution to helping the environment. www.carbonneutralnow.com.au

We all have a way of life, and while some of us can afford to put solar panels on our houses, there are still emissions produced from everything we do every day, from the production of the clothes you wear, to the furniture you sit on, and from the food you eat, to the services you consume. Besides, we don’t all want to drive a hybrid car and become vegetarians.

Carbon trading, or carbon offsetting, is a way to balance or compensate for carbon emissions in one geographical place, with a reduction in emissions in another. Since it doesn’t matter where Greenhouse Gases (GHG) are emitted, as their effect on climate change is global, reducing emissions in Brazil or Italy is as effective as doing so locally. ‘Carbon emissions’ refers to carbon dioxide (CO²), and are a form of GHG, as is methane and nitrous oxide, but for most of us it is easier to think in terms of carbon emissions.

It’s completely voluntary, but in 2011 it will become compulsory for some industries. While we do need to reduce our personal carbon emissions and stop being wasteful, some emissions are currently unavoidable, so carbon offsetting is the way to compensate for those emissions we cannot stop.

Little things, when done by millions of people, can make a big difference, and carbon offsetting reduces emissions with a minimum of effort and cost. Offsetting means paying someone else to reduce CO² in the atmosphere on your behalf. In that way we pay for the damage we are causing and the money stimulates the development of green technologies that we desperately.

What is a Carbon Credit?

Carbon reduction projects throughout the world create a tradable ‘carbon credit’ for every tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO²-e) that is stopped from entering our atmosphere. When you buy a credit, it is then ‘retired’ so it can’t be sold again – the credit will be recorded against your name, meaning that you have stopped one tonne of CO²-e that otherwise would have entered the atmosphere.

There are many different kinds of carbon credits. Certified carbon credits are created by government approved abatement projects. These include projects such as harnessing landfill gas, reforestation and sequestration, and electricity consumption reduction.

Beware: because there are plenty of people claiming to produce carbon credits, but they are in fact not accredited, nor are they even measured properly. You might be paying someone for nothing.

And how much does it cost? Generally, a carbon credit is $20, though this will probably rise. The Government will be setting a cap on its carbon credits at $40. So, currently, if an average Australian household emitting 20 tonnes of CO² wants to go ‘carbon neutral’, it would cost $400 per annum. The equivalent would be to plant about 80 trees.

What is a Footprint?

A carbon footprint is a measure of the impact that our activities have on the environment, and in particular, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. It relates to the amount of greenhouse gases produced in our day-to-day activities through burning fossil fuels for electricity, heating and transportation, etc.

An alternative definition of the carbon footprint is the total amount of carbon dioxide attributable to the actions of an individual or an entity (which includes emissions through their own energy use, but also from unforeseen emissions as well) over a period of one year.

So the aim is to work out your footprint, reduce your footprint, and then offset the remaining emissions. It’s much cheaper than buying solar panels, which still won’t eliminate your emissions, though it helps.

What does Carbon Neutral mean?

Being ‘carbon neutral’ means that you have calculated your carbon footprint, and then eliminated the Greenhouse Gas you produce by purchasing carbon credits to offset your emissions.

But being ‘carbon neutral’ takes a little more responsibility than just offsetting. To become carbon neutral, especially for businesses, you need to reduce your carbon footprint first, and commit to continue reducing your emissions.

Beware of businesses claiming to be carbon neutral. Check their accreditation, where they get their carbon credits from, and whether they truly are ‘green’.

No. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Customers and other businesses are increasingly speaking in terms of sustainability from their suppliers and service providers. Being sustainable and ‘going green’ is an advantage in these times, when people are increasingly aware of climate change and the warnings of global warming. Green brands are rising, and benefiting from relations with other like minded businesses and loyal customers.

Sustainability can also lead to greater efficiency and lower costs, causing greater fiscal returns. Decreasing your carbon footprint does not have to cost money. In fact, any initial outlays will be quickly reimbursed through energy savings and lower running costs. If a business’s energy costs are $10,000 per year, and the same business could save 40% of that cost, they would then only be paying $6,000 per year. It only costs an average of $800 for a retail or office business to offset their emissions. A business can ‘go green’ AND SAVE!

Be warned, though of businesses and products claiming to be ‘green’ or sustainable – check out their credibility.

The chief executive of the Australia Climate Institute, John Connor says “Australians still want [our country] to lead, not follow, on climate change – to act, not delay action on reducing emissions”. It is no longer enough that we recycle our household goods and compost our scraps. Our action must be much more decisive and immediate.

But not everyone wants to drive a hybrid car, install expensive solar panels, and turn off their lights at 9pm. So what is the answer?

Carbon trading is an option that we should consider closely. It is a solution NOW, and not an excuse to wait until technology improves. Carbon trading involves paying green companies to plant trees for you, or develop those vital technologies that will emerge in the future. Make sure each carbon credit is accredited under the Kyoto Protocol, and this will ensure that your money goes where it’s supposed to go.

An average Australia family would need to plant 80 trees to offset their yearly carbon emissions. Who has the time or space to do that?

Carbon trading is not expensive, either. You can offset your household and cars for about the same cost as your yearly house and contents insurance.

What are we waiting for?