While the international spotlight on Cancun may not have shone as brightly as it did in Copenhagen a year ago, the problem of climate change is no less severe.

I never liked soccer anyway: Rising tides in Tuvalu.

A few weeks ago a number of small island states, along with Australia and some great powers like the US and China, met on the island of Tarawa in Kiribati to try and highlight the plight of island states and build some momentum going into Cancun.

The host of the conference, President Anote Tong of Kiribati, is no stranger to the global stage.

A year ago, along with Tuvalu, President Tong made a huge impact confronting the Copenhagen conference with the realisation that significantly rising sea levels would mean the end of his country.

The Ambo Declaration, which came out of the Tarawa Conference, made an urgent call on the parties to Cancun to take concrete steps toward a timely conclusion of a legally binding international agreement on climate change.

The Gillard Labor Government believes a well-balanced outcome was achieved at Cancun. We are committed to helping our island neighbours and our $80 million fund for ‘fast start’ climate change adaptation programs is a great example of this.

The concern being talked about really hit home to me when I visited these countries two weeks ago and saw the reality of their vulnerability.

Both Kiribati and Tuvalu are made up of a series of coral atolls. These islands are formed by coral reefs peeking their heads above the water.

As ground wins out in the battle against ocean, life on the atolls feels tenuous. At the end of the day these islands are slivers of land in the immensity of the Pacific.

On the one hand these are isolated parts of the world. The night skies are clear and there is no smog or traffic which comes with a big city.

The feeling of vast remoteness is present in Kiribati and Tuvalu. And yet at the same time, with near 50,000 people living on South Tarawa, there is an overwhelming sensation of being cramped.

Roads are narrow, backyards non-existent. Small dwellings are bunched in tight.

South Tarawa is one of the most densely populated islands in the world and with no building having more than two stories you certainly feel that on the ground.

The presence of the ocean is pervasive. While those growing up in central Australia never witness the sea, in Kiribati and Tuvalu there is barely a place where it is not in view.

There are points – many of them – where the width of the country is the width of the road. Gary Ablett could kick a footy across Kiribati with ease.

Little wonder then, that in a world of tsunamis and increasing cyclones, going to bed in Kiribati with the thought of rising sea levels makes for a restless sleep.

In Tuvalu the lack of space manifests in a surprising way.

The runway on Funafuti occupies nearly half the island making it the single biggest piece of infrastructure by a country mile. With only two flights a week, to leave it sitting unused makes no sense.

Instead it has become Funafuti’s central park.

Bordering the runway is Parliament and Government House along with the most salubrious addresses in town.

Come 5pm at the end of a working day the runway springs into life. Soccer, volleyball and games of touch rugby abound. Couples take their dogs for a walk along the length of it. Others just sit and take in the best experience of landed space that Tuvalu can provide.

There are issues, which in our lives in Australia we take for granted, that on Kiribati and Tuvalu are a real struggle.

There is an ongoing battle against rubbish. Landfill requires land and they don’t have any.

The result is rubbish dumps on either end of Fongafale Island which seem to threaten with their encroachment. To be sure, the Tuvaluans have made some progress on this in recent months but the war is far from won.

In Kiribati the mounting rubbish threatens another staple of life - namely, the country’s water supply. With ground water under the Tarawa atoll, ensuring that the mounting rubbish and waste doesn’t contaminate the country’s lifeline is a matter of national urgency.

Through Australian aid much work is being done on climate change adaptation including securing water resources.

The most important conclusion we draw from the experiences of Kiribati and Tuvalu is one we already know: arresting human-caused climate change is the challenge of our age.

But to see Kiribati and Tuvalu with your own eyes provides stark clarity that this challenge simply has to be met and, no matter last week’s result in Cancun, the world needs to arrive at an internationally binding agreement on climate change.

106 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • S.L says:

      05:29am | 15/12/10

      Going back to my high school geography lessons aren’t Kiribati, Tuvalu and South Tarawa on or near the fault line of two tectonic plates which is moving the islands physically up and down periodically?
      How are different bulbs in my light sockets or trading my six cylinder car for a four going to stop that?
      How many islands have been lost to supposed rising sea levels so far?
      I better get Al Gore on the line to set me straight!
      On the rubbish issue that is a problem with the only solution in my view is to dump it off shore. Say an Australian or NZ contractor. Might be a handy earner for an entrepreneur?

    • Joan says:

      06:42am | 15/12/10

      Climatologists don’t worry about things like geography,.  As for rubbish accumulating on the islands…. they are overpopulated… like the rest of the world.  Labor has spent another $600million to save the world….. what happened to the multi million handout Rudd gave at Copenhagen ?... Australia is an island, we are under flood waters, perhaps we will disappear along with the other islands if we don’t spend more money. Laugh hard at Labor logic.

    • iansand says:

      07:13am | 15/12/10

      Middle of the Pacific Plate.  Next bullshit please.

    • remlap says:

      08:42am | 15/12/10

      Nice one. Dump the rubbish off shore. Just another pile of crap to add to the rubbish dump that is the North Pacific Gyre so that it can swirl around all the islands and all of their neighbours for a few more millennia.

      High school geography lessons? You need more help than some poor revision, you need to go back and start from scratch.

    • SalC says:

      09:30am | 15/12/10

      This article highlights the silent effects of climate change.  What happens when these islands disappear?  These people will effectively become climate refugees.  Where are they going to go?

    • S.L says:

      09:43am | 15/12/10

      Middle of the Pacific Plate? Iansand are you sure of that before accusing me of B/S?
      As for dumping the rubbish I meant off shore not off the shore! Like landfill in some remote location.
      As for the world being overpopulated. We could all fit into the North Island of NZ with an acre of land around us!

    • iansand says:

      10:58am | 15/12/10

      Sure am.

    • Markus says:

      11:45am | 15/12/10

      iansand Tuvalu is a couple hundred kms north of Fiji, which is right on the border of the Pacific and Australian plates.
      “The islands are composed of coral reefs built on the outer arc of the ridges formed by pressure from the Central Pacific plate against the ancient Australian landmass” (Trewren, 1986)

      The closest thing to “Middle of the Pacific Plate” would be Hawaii, several thousand kms to the northeast.
      What the hell map are you looking at?

    • Scot says:

      11:51am | 15/12/10

      Please can any Scientist in the Global Warming lobby run these numbers and show me the error of my thoughts.
      Here are the figures after translating the agents causing the Greenhouse effect into degrees centigrade.
          .Greenhouse effect (GE) = ~33°c as in the natural biosphere.
          .Water vapour accounts for about 95% of GE= ~31.35°c
          .Other Greenhouse gases   GHG’s account for 5%= ~1.65°c
          .CO2 is 75% of GHG (methane and nitrous oxide included) = ~1.24°c
          .Most CO2 in the atmosphere is natural, more than 93%
          .Man made CO2 is less than 7% therefore contributes ~0.087°c
          .UK contribution to the earth is 2% = .00174°c 
          .USA contribution is 20% = .0174°c or 18 thousandths of a degree
            Australia has an unmeasurable affect and we want to impose a crippling tax on everything to fight this imaginary problem.
      Please can’t we debate the facts 

    • Scot says:

      11:54am | 15/12/10

      Fools and the Greens are synonymous,
      * That renewable energy without efficient power storage is useless - It cannot be used to replace baseline energy nor is cost efficient
      http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/the-great-wind-rush/story-fn59niix-1225961297137
       
                * That there is evidence Wind turbines are causing health problems in people living close by.
       
                * That a Royal commission on the science of CO2 and global warming should be something everyone (even Greens) would be happy to see.
       
      * That a world with supposed “green policing” on CO2 emissions will become dictatorial and oppressive 
      See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/poverty-matters/2010/nov/12/dhaka-climate-court-criminals
       
      Also since the USA, Canada and other countries have rejected a Carbon tax or similar and the climate talks at Cancun (Mexico) are not forecast to deliver any worldwide agreements then it will be far better for politicians to take a practical approach and deal with sea level rises (if any) or temperature rises (if any) when they occur.

    • S.L says:

      11:56am | 15/12/10

      iansand as your responses have been short and to the point, I had to re-check and sure with Kiribati you are correct but Tuvalu….... you’re wrong!

    • n_dude says:

      12:01pm | 15/12/10

      Talking about overcrowding. Isn’t this the place the Libs want the dump asylum seekers? Given the “waves” of boats coming to Australia, I wonder what tthe impact of this will be on their “ovecrowded” islands.

    • Steely Dan says:

      01:35pm | 15/12/10

      @ Scot

      Imaginary problem?

      You’ve already admitted that our actions lead to an increase in global temperature.  Are you trying to say that the increase is not sufficiently detrimental? 

      “That renewable energy without efficient power storage is useless”
      Who’s arguing that we shouldn’t have storage?

      “That there is evidence Wind turbines are causing health problems in people living close by.”
      And what are they?  Are they comparable to the air quality reduction issues caused by CO2 emissions from traditional coal-fired power stations?
      “That a Royal commission on the science of CO2 and global warming should be something everyone (even Greens) would be happy to see.”
      Didn’t Gillard get in trouble for buck-passing after proposing something very similar?
      “That a world with supposed “green policing” on CO2 emissions will become dictatorial and oppressive”
      A moot court experiment proved that, did it?
      “it will be far better for politicians to take a practical approach and deal with sea level rises (if any) or temperature rises (if any) when they occur.”
      And how much will that cost?

    • iansand says:

      02:18pm | 15/12/10

      So it is - my apologies for not being aware of the precise location of every Pacific mini-nation.

      But does this not raise a more worrying problem?  Tuvalu is on the side of the subduction zone that should be experiencing uplift.  The Australia Plate is sliding under the Pacific Plate.  Strangely, it is sinking relative to the water surface.  What is going on if the water surface is not rising relative to the land?

    • MarK says:

      03:17pm | 15/12/10

      ”  But does this not raise a more worrying problem?  Tuvalu is on the side of the subduction zone that should be experiencing uplift.  The Australia Plate is sliding under the Pacific Plate.  Strangely, it is sinking relative to the water surface.  What is going on if the water surface is not rising relative to the land?”

      I see.

      You didn’t know where they were but you now know how the movement of the plates in that particular area should affect the nation you now realise is where the op said it was.

      Interesting.

      Please continue.

      It is sinking right? You sure about that part?

    • S.L says:

      04:27pm | 15/12/10

      You were quick with the response “bullshit” iansand and you have been proven wrong. Your arguments are now irrelevant.

    • iansand says:

      07:48pm | 15/12/10

      The bullshit is that subsidence has anything to do with it.  I assume you have data about the rate of subsidence, and not just a desperate hope?

      Was that MarK?  Is he still posting?  Why?

    • Daylight robbery says:

      11:34pm | 17/12/10

      “What is going on if the water surface is not rising relative to the land? “

      The problem with atols is they start off as volcanoes and erode to the ocean level even to the point that they end up below the water surface as the tide drags water in and out.  They are all different and they are all changing.

      On top of that the ocean has been rising 2mm a year way before the industrial era.  So while people might have settled to an Island or low lying atol a century ago the water has risen 200mm in a century.

      They were always destined to be underwater unless an ice age starts and the ocean stops eroding volcano.  After all the ocean level is not static.
      If many of the Atols are old volcanoes, volcanoes sit on? Or an Island is pushed out of the ocean by plates colliding.

      As quick as they come.  I live near an Island with a salt lake within.  It hasnt changed that much and the Island has far from sunk.

    • acotrel says:

      05:39am | 15/12/10

      Believing in climate change won’t get the Liberal Party more votes.  It’s ‘a load of crap’!!!

    • MarK says:

      07:19am | 15/12/10

      Are you suggesting that Richard is a member of the Liberal party?

      I really cannot understand what you wrote.

    • Ben says:

      08:00am | 15/12/10

      Trolling are we ac?

    • Macca says:

      09:59am | 15/12/10

      @Ben, you can never argue against his commitment

    • Rosie says:

      10:10am | 15/12/10

      Yeah you are right acotrel, the author, Richard Marles Parliamentary Secretary for Pacific Affairs & Federal MP for Corio would never do anything to get the Liberal Party more votes.

      Richard wouldn’t want to advantage the Liberal Party with a “load of crap” like climate change” in which his leader is going to increase our electricity bills by introducing a carbon tax to fix climate change.

      Go figure!

    • Tony says:

      06:13am | 15/12/10

      Another ACTU/Labor Stooge talking about Climate Change.  Read Plimer… he is right about what is really happening, not theseACTU/Labor stooges.

    • undertow says:

      08:52am | 15/12/10

      Plimer is a businessman. He is also a mining geologist, the emphasis being MINING. It would be a conflict of (self) interest for him to agree with any of the science of climate change. He is also a champion of hyperbole who lacks the ability to mount an objective argument. You might as well tell people to read the bible to find the truth.

    • Mr Mustela says:

      09:47am | 15/12/10

      I’m geology scientist at a coal mine in NSW.
      I study rock rings.
      I can tell you emphatically, there is no such thing as climate change.

    • Vaunted says:

      10:21am | 15/12/10

      Tim Flannery, Al Gore and a substantial bevy of politicians, media personalities and public sector employees make their livings from climate change activism, undertow. Both Gore and Flannery have been repeatedly exposed as exaggerators at best, and blatant liars at worst. Your point is?

    • undertow says:

      01:43pm | 15/12/10

      Plimer cherry-picks much of the information for his arguments from studies that agree with climate change. I guess if you perceive if everyone else is bending the truth, it is ok for Plimer too, but it is a poor basis for an argument.

    • PaulB says:

      04:17pm | 15/12/10

      Well Undertow I suppose we should be pleased you aren’t running the “Plimer is funded by Big Oil” argument.

    • Super D says:

      06:55am | 15/12/10

      The problems you are describing on the pacific atolls are the result of overpopulation and increasing living standards (resulting in landfill).  These have nothing to do with climate change or sea level rises.

      The President of Tuvalu was asked at Cancun that given the pending inundation of their islands, how much have land prices fallen?  His answer - they haven’t.  There are only 3 possible reasons for this:

      1. Tuvaluans don’t actually believe that the sea level will rise.
      2. Tuvaluans believe effective international action will be taken to prevent sea level rise
      3. Tuvaluans believe that when they are inundated they will be compensated with more than their land is curently worth.

      I’d go with option 1.

    • Rob says:

      08:19am | 15/12/10

      “Land prices” aren’t much of a guide in places where (almost?) all land is traditionally owned, and cannot be sold (although it can be leased).

    • AdamC says:

      09:18am | 15/12/10

      Interesting point, Super D.

      Rob, I take the point, but what about coastal land prices over here in Oz? Aren’t they just as vulnerable to rising sea levels and consequential erosion, etc? We know buyers are still shelling out top dollar for beachfront pads after all.

      Could it be a wisdom of crowds phenomenon?

    • Kevin says:

      10:04am | 15/12/10

      Great news.  The opinion of the vast majority of climate experts was making me a bit worried about the prospect of climate change.  Having now heard that “Tuvaluans don’t actually believe that the sea level will rise” has alleviated all my fears.  I look forward to reading their peer reviewed paper on the subject.

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      10:13am | 15/12/10

      The stark reality of where the sea could be in 50 years hasnt really sunk in.  Not to mention there will always be the option of levees and whatever else to prevent flooding of built up areas of the coastline.

      Meanwhile they still have their gorgeous seaside views and those are what most people pay the big bucks for.

    • James1 says:

      10:27am | 15/12/10

      There is a fourth reason for stable land prices in Tuvalu Super, which you recognise above - population growth.  Seems more likely than the “only” three reasons you posit.

    • TimB says:

      07:02am | 15/12/10

      *sigh*

      This is what we’ve come down to? Richard, you’d have more luck convincing me if it wasn’t for the fact that all the big climate change evangelists (Gore et al) are snapping up all that beachside property. You know the stuff that’s supposed to be underwater in 50 years if we were to believe them.

      More to the point if these islands are really under threat why are their property prices not falling drastically?

      http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/9987

      I like this question from Eero Iloniemi:

      “Mr Prime Minister. In view of the impending deluge, how much have land prices fallen on Tuvalu?’ I stammered.

      For some reason my question completely silenced the room packed with environmental press. After what I will charitably call an inquisitive stare, the prime minister gave his longwinded answer full of long-term projections of rising ocean levels. To be fair, he concluded with a simple declaration: ‘Land prices have not been affected.’

      We are not falling for this con.

      PS. So how long until TheRealDave and his siblings-in-outrage come on and bemoan the fact that we’ve got a Labor pollie posting on the Punch? I mean he was so concerned when Liberal pollies have articles. Surely he and all his mates will be complaining about this too.

      ....I won’t hold my breath though.

    • Tom says:

      08:24am | 15/12/10

      Well said TimB.

      I loved the sentence “... the international spotlight on Cancun may not have shone as brightly” The problem is the spotlight did shine brightly and showed the world what the attendees really are, a bunch of freeloading, hard partying parasites.

      When someone like this uses words like “vision” to aggrandise sucking taxpayers for their self promoting junkets, I puke.

    • StefanR says:

      10:00am | 15/12/10

      Land that you live on only needs to have value as long as you are alive.

      When are we expecitng Tuvalu to be underwater? Because if the answer is more than about 30 years from now, land prices will not be affected as the owners will get everything they need from their land before they die.

    • Steely Dan says:

      10:19am | 15/12/10

      @ TimB

      Would rising house prices in my area be a result of the area becoming more habitable?  Or could it be that there are other factors that affect land prices in the short term?

    • TheRealDave says:

      10:23am | 15/12/10

      “So how long until TheRealDave and his siblings-in-outrage come on and bemoan the fact that we’ve got a Labor pollie posting on the Punch?”

      About now, since I just read the ‘article’.

      And its about time a Labor pollie got an article on here, nice strike rate that, 24 Liberal puff pieces and 1 Labor article.

      Now, back to the article - what a load of crap. I may be a Labor voter but am definitely in the ‘Climate Change’ is a load of crap team. When one of these Islands starts to go under water I might give a crap, but since they, and by they I mean the people with vested interests in perpetrating the Climate Change scam and professional had wringers, can’t show me a single bit of evidence showing these islands are ‘sinking’ due to Climate Change…or even sinking at all, I’ll still regard it as the scam it is.

      Unlike those with side affected blinkers I don’t actively support everything that comes out of the Labor Party…unlike the sad Liberal fools wink

    • MarK says:

      11:51am | 15/12/10

      “Land that you live on only needs to have value as long as you are alive.”

      What?

      “When are we expecitng Tuvalu to be underwater? Because if the answer is more than about 30 years from now, land prices will not be affected as the owners will get everything they need from their land before they die. “

      Are you serious? Can I sell you your next house and get it back in 30 years at no cost please. You just give it back because you will no longer need it.

      Please oh please let me in on this deal. Make sure all your friends and family come to me as well please. This is awesome.

      Come on Stefan lets deal baby.

    • Kevin says:

      12:27pm | 15/12/10

      If your Tuvaluan resident wants to buy land to build a house on, where exactly are the alternatives?  It’s not like there are any hills nearby.  Using trends in real estate prices as a counter argument to climate change is completely ridiculous.

    • TimB says:

      01:00pm | 15/12/10

      @ Dave, that’s crap.  Richard Marles is a regular contributor. So are other Labor pollies. You just haven’t been paying attention.

      Good to know you haven’t been suckered in by the climate con though.

      And FYI there’s a bunch of Liberal policies I don’t agree with. It’s simply that the issues involved aren’t as high on my priority list nor anyone elses its seems, that’s why they don’t get discussed as much of the ones I’m in complete agreement with.

      @ Stefan and Steely Dan: Are you saying that these proponents of climate change, (this big important long term problem), only care about their short term intrests in property?
      Seems like a bit of a contradiction to me. Maybe theres something in this climate change thing that suits their short term intrests too…like a big pile of cash from carbon trading.

    • TimB says:

      01:19pm | 15/12/10

      @ Kevin- What about Al Gore? Does he have “no choice” but to have his property on the waterfront?

      It’s only a ridiculous argument if you ignore half of it.

    • Kevin says:

      02:32pm | 15/12/10

      @TimB - perhaps Al Gore doesn’t really believe in climate change,  perhaps he is unable to sell the property because he has suceeded in scaring off potential buyers, perhaps his situation has absolutely nothing to do with the price of real estate on Tuvalu.
      What is ridiculous is your argument that because the price of real estate in Tuvalu hasn’t fallen then climate change isn’t going to happen.  What I am pointing out is that Tuvaluan’s have no choice except to buy property on Tuvalu and if the population is increasing then ti would be expected that property values would increase because even if the island is going to be inundated in 30 years the people there still have to live somewhere in the meantime.

    • StefanR says:

      02:33pm | 15/12/10

      @TimB Um no. I’m saying that when a person buys an asset that they plan to keep until they die, their valuation of that asset does not depend on the price at their death. As the timeframe for the effects of climate change doesn’t kick in before most people’s lifetime, land prices are not a good proxy for community held beliefs.

      @MarK That’s not what I said at all. When I die, my assets will go to people of my choosing. My point is that I don’t and shouldn’t care what their monetary value is at that point. Therefore, when I purchase an asset now that I plan to keep until I die, the price at the time of my death (and indeed once I have bought it) does not feature in my valuation of that asset.

      However MarK, if you want to sell me a house at a discount if I have to give it back to you when my partner and I are dead, I’ll take that discount every time.

    • MarK says:

      03:27pm | 15/12/10

      Stefan it is exactly what you said.

      Even your attempt at justification is so outrageously silly I laughed so loud people asked me what was so funny.

      I am not offering to sell at a discount. Never did.

      But now you mention it I will buy a house for 400k - give it to you for 380k on the proviso I get it back free of all encumbrance when you die. You don’t care what it is worth when you go so lets do it. Seriously please. 5% up front. Better than bank interest.

      You really have no concept of what you are saying in either the case where you are possibly the only investor ever to not worry about the potential for gain in a purchase or the total stupidity of Tuvalu etc sinking into the ocean but maintaining a healthy property market.

      You really are serious aren’t you? It scares me. Talk about flailing around trying to justify. The religion has got you in deep.

    • Paul H says:

      07:17am | 15/12/10

      If you live on an atoll, then you need to be prepared for the fact that these islands rise and fall along with tectonic plate movements. This has been going on since the planet was formed. How is throwing millions of dollars at this event going to change it? Forget the ‘man made climate change’ bullshit, this is as real as a three dollar note. When are the sheeple going to wake up to the fact that all the scaremongering is just a way for the Al Gore’s of this world, to make a quick and very substantial buck. Does anyone realise that Al Gore has major shareholdings in companies who are trading in carbon credits? How good is he? Create a myth that everyone believes, then charge them for fixing a non existant problem.

    • Steely Dan says:

      10:06am | 15/12/10

      Is there a correlation between use of the term ‘sheeple’ and conspiracy theories?

      “Does anyone realise that Al Gore has major shareholdings in companies who are trading in carbon credits?”
      Does anyone realise Al Gore doesn’t speak for the 97% of climate scientists who accept that ghg emissions are changing the world’s climate?  Does anyone realise Al Gore didn’t “create” the “myth” of climate change?

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      10:10am | 15/12/10

      The islands in question are not along the fault lines and the plates are not moving to the extent that you make them out to be.

    • bleD says:

      07:24am | 15/12/10

      The situation on these small islands is compounded by overpopulation. Fewer people = smaller problems. I read somewhere that coral on the islands grows as the sealevel rises, which mitigates the problem anyway.

    • Kevin says:

      08:52am | 15/12/10

      Coral grows underwater.

    • Not a Climate Scientist says:

      09:52am | 15/12/10

      Maybe the island is sinking, not the sea rising.
      I could be that the weight of all these people is exerting it’s influence and causing the island to sink in much the same way as a car is lowered by a fat person sitting in it.
      We know these islanders have weight problems, you know what with eating all that tinned corned beef and having coconut with everything.

    • Steely Dan says:

      10:10am | 15/12/10

      @ bleD

      “I read somewhere that coral on the islands grows as the sealevel rises, which mitigates the problem anyway.”
      It does grow as sea level rises - just not fast enough to mitigate the problem.  Coral takes forever to grow, and won’t grow if it is too far below sea level.  It is also sensitive to sea temp changes.  The climate has changed in the past - usually slowly, but on occasions very rapidly.  And when it’s changed quickly that change has been accompanied by extinctions.

    • Charles says:

      07:38am | 15/12/10

      Obviously Richard has missed the report which came out this year which found that Pacific Islands in the majority are actually growing, including some of those in the Tuvalu chain.  Coral islands respond to changes in sea level and can accommodate the regular rises and falls of the sea level and sustain themselves.

      Tuvalu is just another rent-seeking, mendicant, Pacific Island state trying to overcome its governance shortcomings by bludging off more affluent nations.  The only surprise is why Mr Marles should fall for it so easily.

    • Rosie says:

      08:32am | 15/12/10

      Hi Richard, this is a very small contribution in comparison to the other stuff ups that we are seeing with our Federal Govt. eg bank reforms, Julian Assange, PM says illegal, Foreign Minister says Australia should take care of its citizens when in trouble abroad etc. I am sure you can do better than this to come to Gillard’s defence.

      Totally agree Charles, these small Pacific islands, Fiji included are smarter than the affluent nations. They do very well because affluent countries like Australia are made to think that it is a moral obligation to give as much aid as we are able to.

      I believe it is a disincentive for the development of their own well-being because it is never distributed correctly or used effectively. Do what the Japanese do when aid is given to these islands, they send their troops in to make sure the aid is used effectively. Local labour is used which helps them out a great deal.

    • iansand says:

      09:56am | 15/12/10

      Coral always grows.  That’s what the little critters do.  There would be something very strange going on if thet started shrinking.

    • TheRealDave says:

      11:17am | 15/12/10

      but I thought fresh water and fertilisers running off from overflowing rivers up north were causing the bleaching and death of the great barrier reef and other coral atolls??

      wink

    • iansand says:

      12:54pm | 15/12/10

      TheRealDave - That’s called killing them.  Dead things tend not to grow or reproduce any more.

      What do they teach young people in school these days?

    • TheRealDave says:

      02:46pm | 15/12/10

      I need a sarcasm tag. I guess The wink wasn’t enough. And I don’t know what they are teaching kiddies at school nowadays, given that I not long attended my 20 year reunion….

    • MarK says:

      03:33pm | 15/12/10

      Words are hard Dave. ian struggles with them.

    • Lee from WA says:

      08:16am | 15/12/10

      If these islands are going to sink like stones to the bottom of the ocean, the question has to be asked: how much are property prices going down by? The Presdents of Tuvalu and he admitted they weren’t. Sounds more like these small nations are looking for a handout.

      http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/9987

    • Bizzaro World says:

      09:58am | 15/12/10

      Basing your opinion of the cause of rising sea levels on real estate prices is like basing your opinion on what the NBN should look like based on what Harvey Norman has in stock.

    • MarK says:

      12:09pm | 15/12/10

      No one will ever need a gig connection at home.

      What does have in stock at the gig range of router speeds anyway? Wow the person who said we should build the NBN around what HN have in stock is dumb…real dumb.

      Anyone who gets a connection speed that will be underutilised because their hardware cannot handle it is either;

      1. Moronic
      2. Underinformed

      It is an excellent point all this sea level rise stuff. The Maldives held a cabinet meeting underwater to test out the new scuba gear they would have to use in the “near” future because of rising waters flooding across the pristine sands.

      The cabinet after the test went not exactly according to plan by the scuba company (the cabinet actually survived gosh darn it) also recently decided to build a new international airport.

      Of course you build new airports all the time when the ground you are going to build it on is in imminent danger of being flooded by sea rises of 100 metres, 8 metres, 1 mm, none or somewhere in between just that no one really knows.

      Interesting stuff this. Check the scuba gear but build an airport. Hmmmmmm.

      I wonder if the messages are mixed.

      What could a house use a gig of bandwidth for…..hmmmmmmm

    • andrew says:

      08:22am | 15/12/10

      AGW has had its day. 1970’s Peak Oil. Lately Y2K, Swine flu, bird flu, AGW, next massive scare please.

    • neil says:

      02:55pm | 15/12/10

      You forgot the 1970’s global cooling scare that the UN insisted would require 2% of the first world GDP to fix or we would be in an ice age by 2000. Now we need to turn over 2% to them to save us from global warming.

      Heard it all before.

    • Aitch B says:

      08:53am | 15/12/10

      So, Richard….. taxing the crap out of us and the other ‘wealthy’ nations will suddenly stop the Pacific plate from moving and coral atolls from rising and falling like they have for the last umpteen million years?

      Wow….. you’ve won me!!

      Care to explain what the $80 million for “‘fast start’ climate change adaptation” will involve and ultimately achieve?

      I note that you haven’t included “the greatest moral challenge of our time”,  “to delay is to deny” and other catchphrases in your article. They went out the door with Rudd, did they?

    • iansand says:

      10:56am | 15/12/10

      But doesn’t this article highlight the “greatest moral challenge”?  If AGW is affecting sea levels it is our industrial output that is affecting the people of Tuvalu and Kiribati (and Bangladesh, and any number of other places).  Whether or not we do something about it looks like something that has a morality aspect to it.

      Another moral aspect to the whole thing is that the First World’s development was achieved on the back of consumption of energy dense fossil fuels.  Is it right to deal with a problem created by us by denying developing nations the opportunity to develop?  That is the logic of giving places like China and India a bit of leeway.  You may agree with that approach, or disagree with it, but it certainly has a moral dimension to it.

      I’m all right, Jack is a moral decision.  And I’m not sure if this is actually what Rudd meant when he referred to the great moral challenge.

    • Peetme says:

      11:39am | 15/12/10

      Personally, I think we have more to fear from people and their property being inundated as a result of local councils and their developer paymasters and stooges allowing people to build in flood prone areas, or from carrying out works which interfere with local drainage.

      After all, apart from events such as tsunamis, how many people have suddenly woken to an overnight sea level rise?

    • MarK says:

      12:15pm | 15/12/10

      “If AGW is affecting sea levels ..”

      If.

      So you have no idea or data to back anything up with.

      Lets decide that first eh?

      “Is it right to deal with a problem created by us..”

      You just said if. Now we created a problem. Make your mind up.

      “And I’m not sure if this is actually what Rudd meant ..”

      You are not sure? Don’t think Kevin was exaggerated a touch and creating a scare campaign to help him get his UN seat?

      The moral challenge facing Kevin then and now is how he will get onto the UN. Note well how he has moved from attacking Assange to giving him a free laptop.

      Rudd overreached as he usually does.

    • iansand says:

      02:04pm | 15/12/10

      Was that some MarK blather I saw passing?  Can anyone offer a translation?

    • The Badger says:

      03:01pm | 15/12/10

      iansand

      my translation would be bolt good - climate scientists bad

      which will no doubt be followed by a flurry of unrelated links to denier webistes, scattered thoughts and an attempt at being humorous by interjecting a suitable number of mmms and wows.

    • MarK says:

      03:32pm | 15/12/10

      Words are hard obviously.

      Translation….LAWL

    • TimB says:

      05:23pm | 15/12/10

      iansand says:02:04pm | 15/12/10

      “Was that some MarK blather I saw passing?  Can anyone offer a translation? “

      This from someone who arrogantly proclaims any geographical based arguments on the climate change issue to be “bullshit” without bothering to check his facts. Despite being given every chance to do so.

      I always suspected you were fullof it iansand, now I know for sure. The fact that you can’t argue against any of MarK’s points & have constantly to resort to the childish tactic of “I’m ignoring you, lalalalala” pretty much confirms it.

      Pathetic. Truly pathetic.

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      08:53am | 15/12/10

      While some idiots in Australia don’t believe in AGW, it is increasingly obvious that China does. If they do manage to cut carbon intensity by 45%, you can bet that they will impose a carbon tariff on high carbon emission countries…..

    • Anthony of WA says:

      09:25am | 15/12/10

      Correct and how many nuclear power stations are they building?

    • Shane From Melbourne says:

      09:42am | 15/12/10

      They plan to have about 100 nuclear power plants and about 70 GW of electricity by 2020. Whether they achieve that target is anyone’s guess…

    • Richard says:

      10:05am | 15/12/10

      China is the number 1 emitter of carbon in the world. Big-time believers I’d say.

      And disgusts me that our cheap coal gets shipped to China to supply Chinese citizens with cheap electricity, but our own stupid Labor State governments haven’t built any new power plants in 10 years, sending our electricity prices through the roof for average Aussie battlers.

    • Tripper Smurf says:

      10:17am | 15/12/10

      Enough to later fuel an arms race should the need to make some warheads….. aint you proud we sell uranium to them???

      In all reality, Australia should do the same here, especially as cleaner alternative nuclear technologies come online.

    • David C says:

      10:18am | 15/12/10

      carbon intensity is linked to GDP ie the more they grow the more they will emit just at a lower growth rate. Still wont stop them building a larg number of coal fired power plants or put more and more cars on the road.
      Our carbon intensity and indeed most of the westren world has been falling steadily for decades

    • neil says:

      02:51pm | 15/12/10

      What is increasingly obvious is that China is going to build lots of coal power stations so they can build cheap renewable energy gadgets that they can sell to those stupid round eyes in the west at grossly inflated prices and make a killing.

    • Anthony G says:

      09:13am | 15/12/10

      I believe the whole climate change debate has come about from western nations that are petrified by the emergence of China as a super power. The only way to slow Down China is to make it harder for them to grow.The Islands are disappearing from erosion and any talk about rising water levels is an absolute con and if you believe that you would believe anything

    • Blazes says:

      09:27am | 15/12/10

      Richard, the world is 4.6 billion years old! These things happen - land changes, sea levels rise (and fall) across millions of years - no reason to preach impending doom and isn’t it convenient for the left that the solution to it is a wealth redistribution tax?

    • G. David says:

      10:15am | 15/12/10

      A tide gauge to measure sea level has been in existence at Tuvalu since 1977, run by the University of Hawaii It showed a negligible increase of only 0.07 mm per year over two decades It fell three millimeters between 1995 and 1999. Obviously a fall could not be tolerated by the Global Warming Alarmists, so the gauge was closed in 1999 and a new, more modern tide gauge was set up by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s National Tidal Center by Flinders University at Adelaide, but the sea level has fallen even further since then, so Greenpeace employed Dr John Hunter. a climatologist of the University of Tasmania, who obligingly “adjusted” the Tuvalu readings upwards and, miraculously, he found a sea level rise of “around” 1.2 mm a year which, also miraculously, agrees with the IPCC global figure!

    • Just the facts says:

      12:43pm | 15/12/10

      The tide gauge you reference (U of Hawaii, since 1977) was closed in 1999. Probably because it was old and used antiquated technology.

      A new installation was set up by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s
      National Tidal Centre in 1991, and was run by Flinders University of Adelaide. They used modern sophisticated equipment called SEAFRAME.
      The trend for Tuvalu 1993 to 2008 is that the sea level is rising by 5.9mm per year.

    • neil says:

      03:33pm | 15/12/10

      The facts are that current reputable sea level projections indicate an average of 1,2 +/- 0.4 mm per year upto 2100 about 100mm.  Tuvalu may be sinking at 4.7 mm a year in addition. There’s nothing we can do about that.

    • Just the facts says:

      05:52pm | 15/12/10

      Don’t you love it,
      neil thinks the islands are sinking, the sea isn’t rising. The glaciers, the polar ice caps aren’t melting and causing the sea to rise.

      neil thinks the islands are sinking.
      get this from Bolt did you?

    • Denny Crane says:

      10:19am | 15/12/10

      This is junk science again, thier is no usch thing as global warming, we are still coming out of the last ice age, and the earth is going through yet another stage.

      Remember there was a medival warm period, when crops were grown high in the artic, this would envisage that the earth was warmer then, so what we have now is the earth being the earth nothing more or less.

      How can we have global warming check places like Minnesota & Wisconisn, in the last 2 winetres thay have head some of the worst snow storms in the lst 50 yaears, so do they not have global warming, because there is none.

      Remember the fake emails from the scientific community last year, that should have put a end to it, but no, because so many left wing governments have invested in what they see as a huge tax to releave there debt they will not relent on the junk science.

    • Richard The Lionheart says:

      10:20am | 15/12/10

      I don’t procreate, I just pay more tax. It’s all my fault and I must pay for other tiny nation’s overpopulation, human pollution/waste and mad desire for self government and independence. But they aren’t are they. I will never be thanked. Probably despised.

    • James1 says:

      02:00pm | 15/12/10

      Perhaps if you procreated you would pay less tax.

    • Richard says:

      10:27am | 15/12/10

      Now seriously you Labor government members, do you even have a gauge on the public mood? They say that you guys are too poll-driven, but I find that very hard to believe, because the public opinion is dead-set furious about electricity price rises: they’re all ready too high! And nobody believes Julia’s swift one about prices rising because of under-investment due to uncertainty. Where is this uncertainty coming from? I’m pretty sure if the Federal government categorically ruled out a price on carbon, if you clowns decided to forsake your dead-set determination to implement a huge tax on electricity, then that would spell an end of this so-called “uncertainty”.

      But you know what Richard Marley, we’re not scared of climate change anymore. Change is inevitable, the only constant in the universe is change. Change is not to be feared, change always has pros and cons, from a certain point of view.

      ~Perhaps with higher concentrations of carbon in the atmosphere, we will experience a second agricultural revolution, as crops and plants thrive under the new carbon rich conditions. Perhaps our vast territories in Antarctica will become more useful and valuable for us Australians… Who knows what will happen? Some people will suffer, some people will benefit, but that’s not the point.

      The point is: your first responsibility is to the Australian people. Australian people in the right-here right-now are really suffering from sky high electricity prices. I predict massive inflation to filter through to the common people in the next 6 months because of the extreme price hikes of electricity we’ve had and the ubiquitous necessity for electricity usage in all aspects of the economy. This will drive interest rates even higher yet again and cause even more suffering.

      Instead of charging at low-carbon energy producing windmills, or acting like some sort of white knight saviour to a handful of Tuvaluans, millions of Australians require you to act right now to bring down electricity prices: not in 2011, not in 2012, we need new gas and coal fired power stations to begin being constructed RIGHT NOW.

    • AnthonyG says:

      12:27pm | 15/12/10

      exactly. People are struggling to pay there inflated power prices now. If they go higher more people will be going without food because we are all using power at a minimum now. A tax on power or carbon will achieve nothing but increased poverty and all the tossers that can’t see though it will be screeming when the price of there late goes up .

    • Excellent says:

      03:56pm | 16/12/10

      Excellent
      let’s not do anything about climate change, because we can’t afford to spend a little more.
      Good thing you won’t be alive to explain this to your children’s children.
      Perhaps you can videotape it so they can know what a selfish #sshole their grandfather was.

    • TEZZA says:

      10:29am | 15/12/10

      I think that the over-crowding on Kiribatsu probably has less to do with the land shrinking, than it has to do with the population expanding. Curiously, it was only an hour ago that I read an article in today’s Australian newspaper, to the effect that a recent report of the New Zealand Parliament says that some Pacific Islands (such as Tokelau, Cook Islands and Niue) are becoming so depopulated due to inhabitants moving to N. Z. that they may no longer be viable, economically or socially. (see http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/aid-to-pacific-islands-has-not-helped/story-e6frg6so-1225971152558).
      True coral atolls are the result of coral reefs growing atop underwater peaks or reefs; so with global warming doesn’t it follow that as corals move south following the warming waters, will we not see new coral atolls appearing in places where it is nowadays too cold for coral to grow. Can we look forward to coral growing on Long Reef off Sydney?

    • Warwick says:

      10:41am | 15/12/10

      If the Australian government really believed the Man Made Global Warming story they would be taking active steps to reduce the amount of coal being exported to Japan and China. Remember Hansen’s warning, when he likened coal trains to the death trains taking Jews to Hitler’s extermination camps?

      At the moment the only thing hindering the Australian coal companies from sending more and more shiploads of the stuff abroad is that the coal cannot be loaded quickly enough at the coal ports. So the Commonwealth Government is spending truckloads of taxpayers’ money to set up more rail tracks and bigger coal loaders and everything else necessary to load coal day and night onto the enormous super-carriers waiting offshore. Damn the global warming - just count the cash.

      Until our governments take real measures to cut back these rivers of coal that are streaming out to the factories and powerhouses of the world we can be sure that they don’t really believe their green propaganda. They are just telling likely stories to capture the bleeding heart vote. Sea level rising, more floods, more droughts, species extinctions - these are just low grade melodramas constructed to create the impression that our governments are doing something to protect us from the rapacious, fire breathing dragons of industry and business.

    • concerned citizen says:

      02:31pm | 15/12/10

      Hey there Richo,
      With your wealth of information I was curious to why your mob put a desal plant on our soon to be vanished coast? Also why didnt you speak up when your hometown spent millions doing up its waterfront? Or do coastlines just vanish off small islands in the pacific?

    • michelle dennis says:

      04:45pm | 15/12/10

      Your comment:Australia is an island of affluence and influence in a sea of poverty and effluence.
      Move all washed out flooded small islanders to Australia if they agree to vote ALP

    • Merv Iles says:

      07:00pm | 15/12/10

      If Climatic Change swallows up small islands like New Zealand,Ireland, Britain ,Tonga and Fiji, Australia might never play International Rugby Union again.
      Australia would then have to become a Republic

    • Leigh says:

      07:27pm | 15/12/10

      “Man-made climate change” is a load of old rubbish, and sending money to Third Worlders who obviously cannot cope with modern life - especially money - will not make an iota of difference to them or the climate.

    • James says:

      10:26am | 17/12/10

      Leigh is being crushed by the “white man’s burden”, poor Leigh

    • Alby says:

      10:54am | 19/12/10

      Lee, I agree.
      James, nothing I could say will help you.

    • Mark says:

      10:09pm | 15/12/10

      People who believe that Tuvalu will sink beneath the waves should check out coral atolls in wikipedia.
      It looks more boat people will arrive in twelve months than the total of Tuvalu’s population.
      Tuvalu’s population is so small that they could be added to the crowd at most soccer matches and the crowd would still look small.

    • Alby says:

      09:25pm | 18/12/10

      “Global Warming” is driven by latte sipping yuppies brought up in air conditioned houses driving air conditioned cars and work in air conditioned offices. They just can’t cope with a hot summers day.
      This summer, when we are told “it’s the hotest day for 60 years”, that just means there was a hotter day 60 years ago

    • Concerned Citizen says:

      01:54pm | 18/02/11

      Dear Mr Marles,

      As a Geelong resident and now an all knowing climate change guru please tell me why your are not encouraging your home town to stop wasting millions on its forshore, as alas it will be below sea level soon. Mr Marles are we safe from innundation too is our island big enough?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

ToryShepherd

Cheeky beers with morning papers in unexpected sunshine http://t.co/MD7VPRne

Anthony Sharwood

http://t.co/Zq0nGxkf nice pic of Thredbo this morning

Paul Colgan

@seamus yeah it's now called Smooth or Soft or Douchey Dad FM or something

Paul Colgan

It's a Sydney thing, but 95.3FM... Why? It used to be all Bohemian Rhapsody and Walk this Way; now it's Father to Son and Country Road. Wah.

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

We don’t deserve this huge, exciting scientific project

I’d like to be able to say that sharing the world’s largest radio telescope with South Africa…

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

Mining money talks the loudest in Australian politics

When North Queensland Liberal MP George Christensen got the idea of launching a new political organisation…

Please enter your password

Please enter your password

Help! I’ve succumbed to a crippling modern illness that can strike at any moment. Symptoms include:…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter