Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Fiona Charlson, Conjoint NHMRC Early Career Fellow, The University of Queensland

You’re scrolling through your phone and transfixed by yet more images of streets reduced to burnt debris, injured wildlife, and maps showing the scale of the fires continuing to burn. On the television in the background, a woman who has lost her home breaks down, while news of another life lost flashes across the screen.

You can’t bear to watch anymore, but at the same time, you can’t tear yourself away. Sound familiar?

We’ve now been confronted with these tragic images and stories for months. Even if you haven’t been directly affected by the bushfires, it’s completely normal to feel sad, helpless, and even anxious.

Beyond despairing about the devastation so many Australians are facing, some of these emotions are likely to be symptoms of “eco-anxiety”.

Read more: The rise of ‘eco-anxiety’: climate change affects our mental health, too

If you’re feeling down, you’re not alone

Research on previous bushfire disasters shows people directly affected are more likely to suffer mental health consequences than those who have not been directly affected.

After Black Saturday, about one in five people living in highly affected communities experienced persistent post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression or psychological distress.

Recognising this as a critical issue, the Australian government has announced funding to deliver mental health support to affected people and communities.

But living in an unaffected area doesn’t mean you’re immune. In addition to contending with rolling images and stories of devastation, we’ve seen flow-on effects of the bushfires reach far beyond affected areas.

For example, schools and workplaces have been closed, people have been forced to cancel their summer holidays, and sports matches and community events have been called off. This disruption to normal activities can result in uncertainty and distress, particularly for children and young people.

What is eco-anxiety?

Distress around the current fires may be compounded by – and intertwined with – a pervasive sense of fear and anxiety in relation to climate change-related events.

The American Psychological Association defines eco-anxiety as “a chronic fear of environmental doom”.

While concern and anxiety around climate change are normal, eco-anxiety describes a state of being overwhelmed by the sheer scale, complexity and seriousness of the problems we’re facing. It can be accompanied by guilt for personal contributions to the problem.

Read more: Rising eco-anxiety means we should address mental health alongside food security

The Australian bushfires may have signalled a “tipping point” for many people who held a passive attitude towards climate change, and even many who have held a more active view of climate denialism. In the face of current circumstances, the crisis of climate change now becomes almost impossible to ignore.

While eco-anxiety is not a diagnosable mental disorder, it can have significant impacts on a person’s well-being.

Whether you think you’re suffering from eco-anxiety or more general stress and depression about the bushfires, here are some things you can do.

We’re pretty resilient, but support helps

We’re now living with the environmental consequences of a changing climate, and this requires people to adapt. Fortunately, most of us are innately resilient and are able to overcome stress and losses and to live with uncertainty.

We can enhance this resilience by connecting with friends and family and positively engaging in our communities. Making healthy choices around things like diet, exercise and sleep can also help.

Further, supporting those who are vulnerable has benefits for both the person giving and receiving assistance. For example, parents have a critical role in listening to their children’s concerns and providing appropriate guidance.

Read more: Babies and toddlers might not know there’s a fire but disasters still take their toll

Become part of the solution

Seeking to reduce your own carbon footprint can help alleviate feelings of guilt and helplessness – in addition to the positive difference these small actions make to the environment.

This might include walking, cycling and taking public transport to get around, and making sustainability a factor in day-to-day decisions like what you buy and what you eat.

Joining one of the many groups advocating for the environment also provides a voice for people concerned about the changing climate.

Finally, there are many ways you can provide assistance to bushfire relief efforts. The generosity shown by Australians and others internationally has provided a sense of hope at a time when many are facing enormous hardship.

Seeking professional help

Some people, particularly those living with unrelated psychological distress, will find it harder to adapt to increased stress. Where their emotional resources are already depleted, it becomes more difficult to accommodate change.

Although we don’t yet have research on this, it’s likely people with pre-existing mental health problems will be more vulnerable to eco-anxiety.

If this is you, it’s worthwhile seeking professional help if you feel your mental health is deteriorating at this time.

Read more: How to donate to Australian bushfire relief: give money, watch for scams and think long term

Whether or not you have a pre-existing mental health disorder, if you’re feeling depressed or anxious to a degree it’s affecting your work, education or social functioning, you should seek advice from a health professional.

Evidence-based psychological interventions like cognitive behavioural therapy reduce symptoms of anxiety and depression, improving mental health and well-being.

If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.

– ref. You’re not the only one feeling helpless. Eco-anxiety can reach far beyond bushfire communities – http://theconversation.com/youre-not-the-only-one-feeling-helpless-eco-anxiety-can-reach-far-beyond-bushfire-communities-129453

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Gabriel da Silva, Senior Lecturer in Chemical Engineering, University of Melbourne

As bushfire smoke blankets large parts of Australia, it’s time to examine what this complex chemical mixture is made of, to better understand what it’s doing to both our bodies and the planet.

I research the chemical processes that create pollutants in flames, and what happens when they are released into the air we breathe.

Bushfires are not the only source of smoke we are exposed to in our everyday lives. We breathe smoke from cigarettes, wood-fired heaters, coal-fired power stations and vehicles.

But smoke stemming from the bushfires is accumulating over cities in concentrations rarely seen before in Australia, badly affecting cities including Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra. This poses risks to public health and the environment. Read on to find out exactly what you’re breathing in.

It’s largely water

First, there is a lot of water in bushfire smoke. When fire rips through a forest it burns off the water held in the trees, sending rolling clouds of steam up into the atmosphere.

Water might seem harmless, but it actually enables bushfires to form their own weather. Water vapour condenses on smoke particles and forms huge pyrocumulonimbus clouds. We saw these storms in the current fire crisis. They can complicate firefighting efforts by producing wind and lightning strikes but unfortunately rarely bring rain.

Read more: Even for an air pollution historian like me, these past weeks have been a shock

These clouds also inject smoke high into the atmosphere from where it can circle the globe. We recently saw this when smoke from bushfires in Australia’s south-east drifted to New Zealand and then on to South America. Smoke lofted into the stratosphere influences the climate by blocking the movement of light and heat, and can even interfere with chemistry in the ozone layer.

The climate effect

Smoke also contains gases, most notably carbon monoxide (CO) and carbon dioxide (CO₂). Carbon dioxide is the end-product of combustion and is the most significant contributor to man-made global warming.

Forests sequester massive amounts of carbon as wood and other organic matter and much of this is released back into the atmosphere as carbon dioxide when burned.

Within about a year, these molecules could be anywhere in Earth’s atmosphere. CO₂ is so long-lived that many of these same molecules will remain circling the globe for hundreds of years.

Read more: We know bushfire smoke affects our health, but the long-term consequences are hazy

This bushfire season, more than 10 million hectares of land has already burned. Estimates based on satellite data put the subsequent CO₂ release at 400 million tonnes. This is close to Australia’s total annual greenhouse gas emissions of around 500 million tonnes of CO₂ equivalent.

Our planet’s climate emergency is already making Australia hotter and drier, with more frequent extreme weather events. The ensuing fires are in turn releasing carbon back into the atmosphere, forming a dangerous positive feedback loop.

The poisonous sibling

Whereas CO₂ presents a long-term threat to us all, its poisonous sibling carbon monoxide (CO) is a more immediate concern to those directly exposed to smoke. Carbon monoxide forms when combustion is interrupted on its way to make carbon dioxide.

At the high concentrations found in smoke, carbon monoxide can be deadly. It binds strongly to our haemoglobin – the molecule in red blood cells that carries oxygen around the body. At around 100 parts per million in air it can starve the human body of oxygen, asphyxiating its victims.

Carbon monoxide poisoning through smoke inhalation is a direct concern to firefighters and those sheltering from flames. Those fighting bushfires often work long shifts, sometimes over several weeks, with face masks that offer limited protection.

But that’s not all

In addition to these two gases, smoke contains trace levels of many other pollutants such as sulfur dioxide (SO₂) and nitrogen dioxide (NO₂). In a bushfire, these are produced through the burning of sulfur and nitrogen in plants.

(These gases are also produced through burning fossil fuels. Over eons, ancient trees fossilise into oil and coal but retain some sulfur and nitrogen).

Read more: In this new world of bushfire terror, I question whether I want to have kids

Both SO₂ and NO₂ irritate our respiratory system. Atmospheric SO₂ is also problematic because over time it gets converted in air into sulfuric acid, forming acid rain. NO₂, on the other hand, breaks down in sunlight causing harmful ground-level ozone to form.

We are still learning about other dangerous trace gases in smoke. For instance, in the last decade we have come to realise that highly toxic isocyanic acid from smoke can be present in urban air at concentrations approaching those which are known to impact our health. Unfortunately, little research is available for Australian conditions.

Don’t forget the tiny particles

The final component of smoke we need to consider are the solid particles, or particulate matter (PM). This is both soot that builds up during combustion, and ash that breaks down from the remnants of burnt fuel.

What we see following a bushfire are mostly the larger particles, which reduce visibility and settle on cars and buildings. But the most dangerous component to our health are microscopic particles around one millionth of a metre in size.

These particles can penetrate deep into our lungs and make their way into our bloodstream, potentially impacting almost every bodily system.

Moreover, because of their size they are more likely to stay aloft in air and be transported away from their source.

Particles smaller than 2.5 micrometres, known as PM2.5, settled on Canberra in recent weeks – a problem so severe on some days the city could lay claim to having the most polluted air in the world.

Be prepared

Bushfire smoke is a complex chemical mixture that can affect humans in many ways. As fires become increasingly common across our continent, we must become more familiar with what we are breathing in.

Australia’s unique vulnerability to climate change, as has been evident this bushfire season, means we should also lead the world in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

At the same time, Australians need to adapt. This means equipping our buildings with sensors and purifiers to respond to air pollution and educating the public on how to stay safe during an air quality emergency. It’s clear we must prepare for many smoke-filled summers to come.

Read more: Bushfires won’t change climate policy overnight. But Morrison can shift the Coalition without losing face

– ref. Bushfire smoke is everywhere in our cities. Here’s exactly what you are inhaling – http://theconversation.com/bushfire-smoke-is-everywhere-in-our-cities-heres-exactly-what-you-are-inhaling-129772

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Dale Nimmo, Associate professor/ARC DECRA fellow, Charles Sturt University

If you’ve been following the bushfire crisis on social media and elsewhere, you may have seen reports of benevolent wombats herding other animals to shelter into their fire-proof burrows.

These stories went quickly viral – probably reflecting the appetite for good news after the horrors of the bushfire crisis. However the accounts are not entirely accurate.

Wombats do not heroically round up helpless animals during a bushfire and lead them to safety. But wombats do help other animals in a different way – even if it’s not their intention.

Accidental heroes

Wombats can emerge as accidental heroes during a bushfire, by providing a safe refuge underground for other wildlife.

Wombat warrens – networks of interconnecting burrows – are large and complex, and considerably shielded from the above-ground environment. Small mammals are known to use wombat burrows to survive an inferno.

One study of the southern hairy-nosed wombat, for instance, found warrens with 28 entrances and nearly 90 metres of tunnels.

What’s more, temperatures deep within burrows are very stable compared to surface temperatures, with daily temperature fluctuations of less than 1℃, compared to 24℃ on the surface.

This thermal buffering would help a great deal during intense fires, and you can understand why other species would want access to these safe havens.

The wombat sharehouse

By placing camera traps outside 34 wombat burrows, a 2015 study showed a surprising variety of animals using southern hairy-nosed wombat burrows. Researchers observed ten other species, six of which used them on multiple occasions.

Read more: You can leave water out for wildlife without attracting mosquitoes, if you take a few precautions

The intruders ranged from rock wallabies and bettongs to skinks and birds. Little penguins were recorded using burrows 27 times, while the black-footed rock wallaby was observed using wombat burrows more often than wombats – nearly 2,000 visits in eight weeks! They were even observed using the burrows to specifically avoid birds of prey.

But wombats aren’t alone in providing real estate for other species. Hopping mice, echidnas, sand swimming skinks, barking geckoes and numerous invertebrates were found using the warrens of bettongs and bilbies in arid Australia.

Anybody home?

It’s also important to recognise wombats don’t have “a burrow”. Rather, they have multiple burrows within their home range. In fact, a 2012 study tracked one wombat to 14 different burrows.

While wombats are often regarded as quite sedentary, another study found the average home range size of common wombats is 172 hectares.

Read more: A season in hell: bushfires push at least 20 threatened species closer to extinction

They spend a few nights sleeping in one burrow, before moving onto another.

Since each wombat has multiple burrows, many can be vacant within a home range, and abandoned burrows are common in some areas. A 2007 study showed that even among “active” burrows (those with signs of recent use), only one in three are actually occupied by a wombat at any given time.

This means, at times, other species may not need to share burrows with wombats at all. It’s vacant real estate.

So how might a wombat react to an uninvited guest? This is difficult to know, and likely depends on who’s visiting. Wombats prefer not to share burrows with other wombats, although burrow sharing can be common when wombat populations are very high in one place.

In her book Wombats, Barbara Triggs recalls a fox being chased from a burrow by an angry wombat. Meanwhile, the crushed skulls of foxes and dogs in wombat burrows suggest not all intruders are welcome.

That a suite of species use wombat burrows suggests wombats may not notice or care about squatters – so long as they don’t pose a threat. But more research is needed on the fascinating interactions that take place in wombat burrows, particularly during fire.

The battle is not over

While empirical studies are needed, the available evidence suggests wombats may well provide an important refuge for other wildlife during fire.

In any case, it’s important to recognise that surviving fire is only half the battle.

Wombats and their house guests face a medley of challenges post-fire – not least avoiding predators in a barren landscape and eking out a living in a landscape with scarce food.

Read more: Animal response to a bushfire is astounding. These are the tricks they use to survive

– ref. Tales of wombat ‘heroes’ have gone viral. Unfortunately, they’re not true – http://theconversation.com/tales-of-wombat-heroes-have-gone-viral-unfortunately-theyre-not-true-129891

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Judith Seaboyer, Senior Lecturer, The University of Queensland

Public anxiety about the capacity of digital-age children and young adults to read anything longer than a screen grab has come to feel like moral panic. But there is plenty of evidence to suggest we must take such unease seriously.

In 2016, the US National Endowment for the Arts reported the proportion of American adults who read at least one novel in 2015 had dropped to 43.1% from 56.9% in 1982.

In 2018, a US academic reported that in 1980, 60% of 18-year-old school students read a book, newspaper or magazine every day that wasn’t assigned for school. By 2016, the number had plummeted to 16%.

Those same 12th graders reported spending “six hours a day texting, on social media and online”.

Read more: Why it matters that teens are reading less

American literacy expert and neuroscientist Maryanne Wolf describes the threat screen reading poses to our capacity for “the slower cognitive processes such as critical thinking, personal reflection, imagination, and empathy that are all part of deep reading”.

She asks:

Will the mix of continuously stimulating distractions of children’s attention and immediate access to multiple sources of information give young readers less incentive either to build their own storehouses of knowledge or to think critically for themselves?

But rather than taking up defensive positions on either side of the digital-analogue reading divide, Wolf encourages us to embrace both. As parents and teachers we can help our children develop a bi-literate reading brain. There are several ways we can do this.

Reading pathways

Reading is a learned skill that requires the development of particular neural networks. And different reading platforms encourage the development of different aspects of those networks.

Screen-reading children, immersed from toddlerhood in the pleasures and instant gratification of skimming, clicking and linking, develop cognitive skills that make them adept power browsers, good at the useful ability to scan for information and analyse data.

Read more: Three easy ways to get your kids to read better and enjoy it

But Wolf suggests this kind of reading “can short-circuit the development of the slower, more cognitively demanding comprehension processes that go into the formation of deep reading and deep thinking.”

Unless the cognitive skills required for deep reading are similarly developed and nurtured, new generations of readers – distracted by the ready availability of digital information – may not learn to venture beyond the shallows of the reading experience.

Along with others concerned with early childhood education Wolf advises encouraging paper literacy from infancy. She doesn’t recommend forbidding devices. Instead we should regularly turn them off and make the time and space to read books on paper with children.

We can model our own reading practices by setting aside our own smart phones to lose ourselves in a book.

Read more: Love, laughter, adventure and fantasy: a summer reading list for teens

But how can secondary and tertiary teachers help inexperienced readers? The problem is likely to be aliteracy, meaning students can read but they choose not to because they don’t see it to be important for learning. And because they haven’t read much, it’s hard work. The problem can seem intractable. But it can be done.

Turn off the phone and read

My first venture into helping tertiary students read better was a 2011-2013 cross-university government-funded project that set out to foster what we termed “reading resilience”. We found if students were persuaded to prioritise reading as they did a test or an essay, they would invest the time to get into the zone that is the other world of the text.

We complemented complex texts with a guide that encouraged students to think critically as they read and to keep going when the language seemed impenetrable, the narrative incomprehensible (or dull) and the length endless. Or when the siren call of the smart phone became irresistible.

They experimented with switching off their devices for blocks of two hours while they simply read. And they did read.

Students prioritised this difficult work because we rewarded pre-class reading with marks. Some classes uploaded one-page, carefully argued responses; others answered complex feedback-rich quizzes.

I surveyed a large first-year introduction to literary studies at the University of Queensland in 2013 before testing a version of the same “reading resilience” course in 2014. The rise in reading rates was exponential.

The number of students who completed all ten primary texts (including the poem Beowulf and Toni Morrison’s Beloved) more than tripled, and the number who completed the ten accompanying secondary texts (selected chapters from an introduction to literary theory and criticism) went up by more than six times.

Reported student satisfaction for this course from 2008 to 2012 had ranged between 64% and 75%. Once reading resilience was introduced, many complained about the reading load yet the level of overall satisfaction jumped to 86%.

We can all do it

It’s not just readers raised in a digital-age who have difficulty with long-form text. Have you have lost the skill of deep reading? Are you finding it increasingly difficult to stay with, say, a literary novel? You are not alone.

Wolf, who despite having two degrees in literature, confesses to the shocking discovery that recently she found herself struggling to stick with a beloved Herman Hesse novel.

Read more: 5 Australian books that can help young people understand their place in the world

We too can switch off our devices and set aside a space and time to revitalise the neural pathways that once made us immersive readers.

As Wolf argues, the skills of “deep reading” that involve “slower, more time-consuming cognitive processes […] are vital for contemplative life”. Deep readers are likely to be more thoughtful members of the community at a time when good citizenship may never have been more important.

– ref. If you can read this headline, you can read a novel. Here’s how to ignore your phone and just do it – http://theconversation.com/if-you-can-read-this-headline-you-can-read-a-novel-heres-how-to-ignore-your-phone-and-just-do-it-116524

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Duygu Yengin, Associate Professor of Economics, University of Adelaide

“Fake news”, the chief executive of Lufthansa has called it. But his counterpart at Air France calls it the airline industry’s “biggest challenge”. So does the president of Emirates: “It’s got to be dealt with.”

What they’re talking about is “flight shame” – the guilt caused by the environmental impacts of air travel. Specifically, the carbon emissions.

It’s the reason teen climate-change activist Greta Thunberg refused to fly to New York to address the United Nations Climate Action Summit in September, taking a 14-day sea voyage instead.

In Thunberg’s native Sweden, flight shame (“flygskam”) has really taken off, motivating people to not take off. Last year 23% of Swedes reduced their air travel to shrink their carbon footprint, according to a WWF survey. Swedish airport operator Swedavia reported passenger numbers at its ten airports in October were down 5% on the previous year.

The potency of this guilt is what put Lufthansa’s head, Carsten Spohr, on the defensive at an aviation industry conference in Berlin in November.

Read more: Flight shame: flying less plays a small but positive part in tackling climate change

“Airlines should not have to be seen as a symbol of climate change. That’s just fake news,” he declared. “Our industry contributes 2.8% of global CO₂ emissions. As I’ve asked before, how about the other 97.2%? Are they contributing to global society with as much good as we do? Are they reducing emissions as much as we do?”

Does he have a point? Let’s consider the evidence.

How bad are aviation CO₂ emissions?

The International Council on Clean Transportation (the same organisation that exposed Volkwagen’s diesel emissions fraud), estimates commercial aviation accounted for 2.4% of all carbon emissions from fossil-fuel use in 2018.

So it’s true many other sectors contribute more.

It is also true airlines are making efforts to reduce the amount of carbon they emit per passenger per kilometre. Australia’s aviation industry, for example, has reduced its “emissions intensity” by 1.4% a year since 2013.

However, the ICCT estimates growth in passenger numbers, and therefore total flights, means total carbon emissions from commercial aviation have ballooned by 32% in five years, way faster than UN predictions. On that trajectory, the sector’s total emissions could triple by 2050.

Alternatives to fossil fuels

A revolution in aircraft design could mitigate that trajectory. The International Air Transport Association suggests the advent of hybrid electric aircraft propulsion (similar to how a hybrid car works, taking off and landing using electric power) by about 2030-35 could reduce fossil fuel consumption by up to 40%. Fully electric propulsion after that could eliminate fossil fuels completely.

Read more: Get set for take-off in electric aircraft, the next transport disruption

Even with the advent of electric airliners by mid-century, the huge cost and long lifespan of commercial jets means it could still take decades to wean fleets off fossil fuels.

A shorter-term solution might be replacing fossil fuels with “sustainable aviation fuels” such as biofuels made from plant matter. But in 2018 just 15 million litres of aviation biofuel were produced – less than 0.1% of total aviation fuel consumption. The problem is it costs significantly more than standard kerosene-based aviation fuel. Greater use depends on the price coming down, or the price of fossil fuels going up.

Pricing carbon

This brings us to the role of economics in decarbonising aviation.

An economist will tell you, for most goods the simplest way to reduce its consumption is to increase its price, or reduce the price of alternatives. This is the basis of all market-based solutions to reduce carbon emissions.

One way is to impose a tax on carbon, the same way taxes are levied on alcohol and tobacco, to deter consumption as well as to raise revenue to pay the costs use imposes on society.

The key problem with this approach is a government must guess at the price needed to achieve the desired reduction in demand. How the tax revenue is spent is also crucial to public acceptance.

Read more: Why our carbon emission policies don’t work on air travel

In France, opposition to higher fuel taxes led the government to instead announce an “eco-tax” on flights.

This proposed tax will range from €1.50 (about A$2.40) for economy flights within the European Union to €18 (about A$29.30) for business-class flights out of the EU. Among those who think this price signal is too low to make any real difference is Sam Fankhauser, director of the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment in London.

Trading and offsets

Greater outcome certainty is the reason many economists champion an emissions trading scheme (also known as “cap and trade”). Whereas a tax seeks to reduce carbon emissions by raising the price of emission, a trading scheme sets a limit on emissions and leaves it to the market to work out the price that achieves it.

One advantage economists see in emissions trading is that it creates both disincentive and incentives. Emitters don’t pay a penalty to the government. They effectively pay other companies to achieve reductions on their behalf through the trade of “carbon credits”.

The European Union already has an emissions trading scheme that covers flights within the European Economic Area, but it has been criticised for limiting incentives for companies to reduce emissions because they can cheaply buy credits, such as from overseas projects such as tree-planting schemes.

This led to the paradox of scheme delivering a reported 100 million tonnes of “reductions/offsets” from Europe’s aviation sector between 2012 and 2018 even while the sector’s emissions increased.

A better solution might come from a well-designed international trading scheme. The basis for this may be the global agreement known as the Carbon Offsetting and Reduction Scheme for International Aviation. Already 81 countries, representing three-quarters of international aviation activity, have agreed to participate.

Read more: Carbon offsets can do more environmental harm than good

What seems clear is that guilt and voluntary action to reduce carbon emissions has its limits. This is suggested by the data from Sweden, the heartland of flight shame.

Behind the 5% reduction in passenger numbers reported by Swedavia is a major difference between domestic passengers (down 10%) and international passengers (down just 2%). That might have something to do with the limited travel alternatives when crossing an ocean.

For most of us to consider emulating Greta Thunberg by taking a sailboat instead, the price of a flight would have to be very high indeed.

– ref. Shaming people for flying won’t cut airline emissions. We need a smarter solution – http://theconversation.com/shaming-people-for-flying-wont-cut-airline-emissions-we-need-a-smarter-solution-127257

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Jo Caust, Associate Professor and Principal Fellow (Hon), University of Melbourne

Artists are again finding themselves at the receiving end of criticism over funding.

A mural on the wall of a fire station funded through the Western Australia Percent for Art scheme has met with a hostile reaction in the light of the bushfire crisis.

In WA all new public buildings costing $2 million or more must spend 1% of the building costs on public art projects – a bipartisan initiative since 1989.

Public art plays an important role in connecting communities, humanising the environment and giving a community a unique identity, but WA Shadow Minister for Emergency Services Steve Thomas told the ABC “I think it is time for this policy to end”

“[It] is more important to put that money into the equipment [emergency services] require rather than art work to decorate the building,” he said.

Artists are a critical community resource, but this criticism is a familiar refrain in Australia where arts practice is seen as non-essential.

The federal government determined in December 2019 the arts no longer matter to the nation by disappearing the arts from mention as a governmental responsibility and continuing to cut arts funding.

Read more: Remember the arts? Departments and budgets disappear as politics backs culture into a dead end

Crucial fundraisers

Across the country, the average income of artists from their artwork is A$18,800, yet artists have raised millions of dollars in support of the 2020 bushfire crisis.

Comedian Celeste Barber has raised over $50 million from more than 1.2 million people to help those who need it.

Pink, Elton John, Metallica, Nicole Kidman and Keith Urban, Chris Hemsworth, Kylie and Danni Minogue – to name only a handful – have personally donated large amounts of their own money to help fighters and victims.

Visual artist Scott Marsh raised more than $60,000 by painting a mural in Chippendale lampooning Scott Morrison.

The Stardust Circus prevented a blackout at the Ulladulla Evacuation Centre by lending their generator. Theatre companies are organising collections at their performances for bushfire relief.

More than 32 concerts are taking place across the country with musicians giving their time for free to fundraise. Visual artists are auctioning their work.

Writers, illustrators and editors are donating books, mentoring, and naming rights to characters in forthcoming books to support firefighters.

As one viral Facebook post asked: “Tell me again that the Arts have no value?”

Restoring hope

Silo art, the painting of water towers and other utilitarian sites such as fire stations, have transformed rural areas by the impact of arts practice. This has contributed to the economic well-being of these communities, as well as making the local community feel a sense of pride in their town.

Art and artists can have a transformational role in rural communities by building resilience. Rural communities value their local history and artists can play an essential role in recording and validating a community’s culture.

Arts institutions, such as regional galleries, can also have a dramatic impact on a community. In 2012, the Bendigo Art Gallery generated $16.3 million for the local economy. The Book Town festival in Clunes, the Writers Festival in Byron Bay and the Folk Festival in Port Fairy are all crucial to the sense of community in those towns.

Artists can be critical in restoring hope and providing healing to a community after it has experienced trauma.

The Creative Recovery Network works together with emergency management agencies across Australia to help communities affected by trauma and natural disasters to recover from their experiences.

Urban Initiatives and Arterial created a moving memorial in collaboration with the local community to the 2009 Black Saturday bushfire victims at Strathewen.

The memorial incorporates 10,000 words by community members and serves as a place for community reflection as well as an ongoing learning site for young people. In this way the experiences are never forgotten, and passed on to the next generation.

While the arts can create provocation, they can also be a means of honouring feelings and processing grief. There are times when communities need more than financial relief to recover from loss. They need a way to make sense of it so they can move forward.

Committed to their community

Artists have stepped up in a huge way at this dark time in Australian history by volunteering their talents and resources to support communities and firefighters.

They have demonstrated artists and arts practice can contribute to our society with passion, ingenuity, and imagination. It is time the arts and artists received the respect they deserve by our governments and the broader community.

The arts always matter, but at times of crisis they are especially valuable.

– ref. Artists help communities during a crisis, not hinder. Why are we still told they don’t matter? – http://theconversation.com/artists-help-communities-during-a-crisis-not-hinder-why-are-we-still-told-they-dont-matter-129695

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shiva Pedram, Associate Research Fellow, University of Wollongong

In recent years, experts have focused on finding better ways to improve remotely delivered mental health care.

Now, virtual reality (VR) may pave the way for myriad new opportunities.

Using VR for remote therapy involves conducting “face-to-face” sessions in a virtual environment. This mode of treatment could make counselling more accessible to those living and working remotely.

My colleagues and I published a paper exploring VR’s potential in providing counselling for people in regional areas.

While face-to-face therapy remains the optimal treatment method, we discovered VR-based therapy was more effective than Skype-based counselling.

Taking advantage of available tools

We compared the experiences of 30 participants aged 21 to 63, who participated in both VR-based and Skype-based mock counselling sessions.

To deliver the VR sessions, the participants and trained therapists used the Oculus Go head-mounted display and vTime social networking app. This provided them with a multisensory and interactive VR experience.

Read more: ‘Use this app twice daily’: how digital tools are revolutionising patient care

We used cartoon-like avatars to represent the two therapists, modelled closely to how they looked in real life.

We then compared participants’ responses in both settings to determine which type of therapy was more engaging, less stressful and preferred overall.

Results were compiled based on factors including a perceived level of “presence” (being there), “co-presence” (being together with the therapist), “social presence” (engaging with each other) and “realism”.

Virtual environments bring real results

On almost all accounts, participants responded greatly in favour of VR-based therapy sessions. The use of VR generated high levels of engagement between client and therapist, without causing stress or feelings of sickness.

Participants reported their virtual experience was consistent with what they might expect from a face-to-face experience. This heightened sense of realism made the interaction more meaningful.

Using a VR avatar also encouraged most participants (22 out of 30) to more freely express themselves without fear of judgement. This was observed in both introverted and extroverted participants.

Our results suggest VR-based telehealth sessions could greatly reduce dropout rates for clients and produce positive clinical outcomes.

Moving beyond standard practice

In Australia, around 7 million people live in rural and remote areas. Many either can’t access face-to-face counselling, or have to travel large distances for it.

Remote workers such as mining and construction workers are at greater risk of mental health problems, usually requiring ongoing counselling or psychotherapy.

These individuals often work long hours in harsh climates, and some have to live far from family for extended periods. Accessing quality mental health care can be particularly difficult under such circumstances.

Currently, it’s common to use mobiles and video conferencing to deliver telehealth sessions remotely using programs such as Skype, Zoom and Facetime.

However, one of the biggest challenges with this is that clients are often unmotivated to commit to the treatment.

A phone session using audio without video doesn’t convey important non-verbal cues.

Read more: Why virtual reality won’t replace cadavers in medical school

Even with video, the physical distance between a therapist and client can prevent clients from being fully engaged. In this context, engagement refers to the client’s commitment to willingly disclose their thoughts, feelings, problems and history.

This is essential for successful psychological treatment, as past research has found clients displaying lower levels of engagement are more likely to discontinue treatment.

A successful program delivering VR-based mental health services to remote areas would have a far-reaching impact.

Further testing

So far in clinical psychology and psychiatry, the primary focus of VR has been its role in treating anxiety and stress-related disorders, specific phobias, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Soon, VR may be the next major avenue for remote mental health care delivery.

Moving forward with this technology, one important consideration will be assessing an avatar’s capacity to act and move in a believable manner.

In virtual environments, the use of hyper-realistic avatars can generate cold and eerie feelings (known as Uncanny Valley (UV) effects).

Similarly, avatars that are too unrealistic and cartoon-like could negatively impact a client’s experience.

In the next phase of our research, we will conduct clinical interviews via both VR and face-to-face methods, and measure participants’ physiological responses. This will include monitoring their heart rate, skin conductance (how much they sweat) and reported experiences.

We hope further trials will bring us closer to providing a world-leading VR-based therapy option for Australians living and working remotely.

Read more: Curious Kids: How do you know that we aren’t in virtual reality right now?

– ref. Virtual reality may be the next frontier in remote mental health care – http://theconversation.com/virtual-reality-may-be-the-next-frontier-in-remote-mental-health-care-129187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Melissa Pappas, PhD Candidate, UNSW

As fires continue to burn along Australia’s south-east, it’s impossible to ignore how climate change can wreak devastation and disrupt lives.

Australia has always experienced bushfires. However, climate change means this year’s bushfires were so extreme in their ferocity and spread they could be seen from space. And this is just a taste of what’s to come.

Read more: Weather bureau says hottest, driest year on record led to extreme bushfire season

I’m a marine scientist, and research the effects of climate change on coral reefs. Aside from bushfires, coral bleaching is one of the most severe manifestations of climate change in Australia. Watching corals turn white and die is just another daily reminder of the disasters our children will be up against.

Until now, my partner and I have both wanted to be parents one day. Now I’m not so sure. Here are the things I’m weighing up.

The forces at play

I am not alone in these family planning concerns. In September last year I hosted a Women in STEM seminar and photography exhibit showcasing female scientists at the University of New South Wales. One of the major points of discussion was how to plan for a family, knowing how climate change will affect the quality of life of the next generation.

Cases of “eco-anxiety” when it comes to family planning are on the rise. Many couples in my generation are rethinking what it means to start a family. Even Prince Harry and Meghan Markle said last year they’ll have only two children at most, for the sake of the planet.

But other factors also affect family planning decisions, such as religious, cultural and societal expectations. And of course there are the views of partners and spouses to take into account.

In my case, I come from a large Italian-American, Catholic family. My family expects me to settle down and have babies as soon as possible. But my partner and I both agree the planet cannot sustain a growing population that results from these traditional religious expectations.

Would going childless make a difference?

Studies show having fewer children is one of the most effective ways an individual can mitigate climate change. Choosing to have one less child prevents 58.6 tonnes of carbon emissions entering the atmosphere each year, according to a 2017 study. That’s like 25 Australians going car-free for the rest of their lives.

Read more: The rise of ‘eco-anxiety’: climate change affects our mental health, too

In fact, even if you do your bit to reduce emissions in your lifetime, such as riding a bike and using energy-saving lightbulbs, having two children means your “legacy” of carbon emissions could be 40 times greater than that saved through lifestyle changes.

But having one less child is not a quick fix for climate change. As research in 2014 pointed out, even one-child policies imposed worldwide, coupled with events causing catastrophic numbers of deaths, would still leave the world population at 5–10 billion people by 2100 – enough to cause stress on future ecosystems.

So it’s critical we, as consumers, start now in making our lifestyles more environmentally friendly if the world’s population continues to grow.

The above research concluded the most immediate and effective way to keep the planet’s warming at bay is policies and technologies to reign in global emissions.

The planet our children will inhabit

On our current business-as-usual trajectory, we’re on track for at least a 4℃ temperature increase by 2100. Even if the temperature increase was limited to 2.8℃ (now an optimistic scenario) major changes in weather patterns would occur by 2050.

These changes would bring more severe droughts, flooding, heatwaves, sea level rise and bushfires. This is not a future I want for my children.

Already, climate hazards have been implicated in pre- and post-natal health problems for children. Children whose mothers were exposed to floods while pregnant exhibited increased bedwetting, aggression towards other children and below-average birth weight, juvenile height and academic performance.

Read more: How family planning could be part of the answer to climate change

What’s more, exposure to smoke from fires during pregnancy may have affected brain development and resulted in premature birth, small head circumference, low birth weight and foetal death

This season’s bushfires caused a 51% spike in people needing help for respiratory issues on one of the most extreme days in Melbourne. Children are among the most vulnerable to respiratory issues stemming from poor air quality.

But it’s not just physical health in question – mental health is also at risk.

Today’s children already know that without major change, the world they were born into will limit their quality of life. It’s not only affecting their mental health, but also their process of identity formation, with children experiencing an “existential whiplash”.

They’re caught between two forces: the belief held by previous generations that if you work hard you’ll have a high quality of life, and knowledge that climate change will make parts of the planet inhabitable.

Weighing it all up

Of course, improvements in family planning are not solely a matter for the developed world. As experts have stated, family planning has the potential to empower women in developing nations, giving them the basic human right to choose whether to have children.

Policies to support this – such as better access to contraception and giving more girls a quality education – would be a “win-win”, improving reproductive rights and slowing the population growth to combat climate change.

Read more: Nine things you love that are being wrecked by climate change

As for my own situation, my mind isn’t yet made up. I am seriously considering not having kids altogether. Or perhaps my partner and I will have only one child, or adopt.

But one thing is clear. Whether you want to create a healthier planet or you’re concerned about the Earth your children will inherit, climate change should weigh heavily on your family planning decisions.

– ref. In this new world of bushfire terror, I question whether I want to have kids – http://theconversation.com/in-this-new-world-of-bushfire-terror-i-question-whether-i-want-to-have-kids-126752

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Shiva Pedram, Associate Research Fellow, University of Wollongong

In recent years, experts have focused on finding better ways to improve remotely delivered mental health care.

Now, virtual reality (VR) may pave the way for myriad new opportunities.

Using VR for remote therapy involves conducting “face-to-face” sessions in a virtual environment. This mode of treatment could make counselling more accessible to those living and working remotely.

My colleagues and I published a paper exploring VR’s potential in providing counselling for people in regional areas.

While face-to-face therapy remains the optimal treatment method, we discovered VR-based therapy was more effective than Skype-based counselling.

Taking advantage of available tools

We compared the experiences of 30 participants aged 21 to 63, who participated in both VR-based and Skype-based mock counselling sessions.

To deliver the VR sessions, the participants and trained therapists used the Oculus Go head-mounted display and vTime social networking app. This provided them with a multisensory and interactive VR experience.

Read more: ‘Use this app twice daily’: how digital tools are revolutionising patient care

We used cartoon-like avatars to represent the two therapists, modelled closely to how they looked in real life.

We then compared participants’ responses in both settings to determine which type of therapy was more engaging, less stressful and preferred overall.

Results were compiled based on factors including a perceived level of “presence” (being there), “co-presence” (being together with the therapist), “social presence” (engaging with each other) and “realism”.

Virtual environments bring real results

On almost all accounts, participants responded greatly in favour of VR-based therapy sessions. The use of VR generated high levels of engagement between client and therapist, without causing stress or feelings of sickness.

Participants reported their virtual experience was consistent with what they might expect from a face-to-face experience. This heightened sense of realism made the interaction more meaningful.

Using a VR avatar also encouraged most participants (22 out of 30) to more freely express themselves without fear of judgement. This was observed in both introverted and extroverted participants.

Our results suggest VR-based telehealth sessions could greatly reduce dropout rates for clients and produce positive clinical outcomes.

Moving beyond standard practice

In Australia, around 7 million people live in rural and remote areas. Many either can’t access face-to-face counselling, or have to travel large distances for it.

Remote workers such as mining and construction workers are at greater risk of mental health problems, usually requiring ongoing counselling or psychotherapy.

These individuals often work long hours in harsh climates, and some have to live far from family for extended periods. Accessing quality mental health care can be particularly difficult under such circumstances.

Currently, it’s common to use mobiles and video conferencing to deliver telehealth sessions remotely using programs such as Skype, Zoom and Facetime.

However, one of the biggest challenges with this is that clients are often unmotivated to commit to the treatment.

A phone session using audio without video doesn’t convey important non-verbal cues.

Read more: Why virtual reality won’t replace cadavers in medical school

Even with video, the physical distance between a therapist and client can prevent clients from being fully engaged. In this context, engagement refers to the client’s commitment to willingly disclose their thoughts, feelings, problems and history.

This is essential for successful psychological treatment, as past research has found clients displaying lower levels of engagement are more likely to discontinue treatment.

A successful program delivering VR-based mental health services to remote areas would have a far-reaching impact.

Further testing

So far in clinical psychology and psychiatry, the primary focus of VR has been its role in treating anxiety and stress-related disorders, specific phobias, panic disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder.

Soon, VR may be the next major avenue for remote mental health care delivery.

Moving forward with this technology, one important consideration will be assessing an avatar’s capacity to act and move in a believable manner.

In virtual environments, the use of hyper-realistic avatars can generate cold and eerie feelings (known as Uncanny Valley (UV) effects).

Similarly, avatars that are too unrealistic and cartoon-like could negatively impact a client’s experience.

In the next phase of our research, we will conduct clinical interviews via both VR and face-to-face methods, and measure participants’ physiological responses. This will include monitoring their heart rate, skin conductance (how much they sweat) and reported experiences.

We hope further trials will bring us closer to providing a world-leading VR-based therapy option for Australians living and working remotely.

Read more: Curious Kids: How do you know that we aren’t in virtual reality right now?

– ref. Virtual reality could expand therapy options in remote areas – http://theconversation.com/virtual-reality-could-expand-therapy-options-in-remote-areas-129187

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Cameron Webb, Clinical Lecturer and Principal Hospital Scientist, University of Sydney

Australia is in for a long, hot summer. The recent bushfires have been devastating for communities and wildlife. Drought is also impacting many regions.

Understandably, people want to leave water out for thirsty birds and animals.

Health authorities generally warn against collecting and storing water in backyards as one measure to protect against mosquito bites and mosquito-borne diseases caused by, for example, dengue and Ross River viruses.

Read more: How Australian wildlife spread and suppress Ross River virus

But it’s possible to leave water out for wildlife – and save water for your garden – without supplying a breeding ground for mosquitoes, if you take a few precautions.

For some mozzies, any water will do

Mosquitoes often look for wetlands and ponds to lay their eggs. But sometimes, anything that holds water – a bucket, bird bath, drain or rainwater tank – will do.

When the immature stages of mosquitoes hatch out of those eggs, they wriggle about in the water for a week or so before emerging to fly off in search of blood.

While there are many mosquitoes found in wetlands and bushland areas, Aedes notoscriptus and Culex quinquefasciatus are the mosquitoes most commonly found in our backyards and have been shown to transmit pathogens that cause mosquito-borne disease.

In central and north Queensland, mosquitoes such as Aedes aegypti can bring more serious health threats, such as dengue, to some towns.

Read more: After decades away, dengue returns to central Queensland

Mosquitoes can also impact our quality of life through bites as well as the nuisance of simply buzzing about our bedrooms and backyards.

So how can you stop mozzies making a home in your backyard?

Empty water containers once a week

Mosquitoes need access to standing water for about a week or so. Reduce the number of water-filled containers available or how long that water is available to mosquitoes.

Emptying a water-filled container once a week will stop the immature mosquitoes from completing their development and emerging as adults.

If you’re leaving water out for pets or wildlife, use smaller volume containers that will allow for easy emptying once a week. You can tip any remaining water into the garden, as mosquito larvae won’t survive if they’re “stranded” on soil.

For larger or heavier items, such as bird baths, flushing them out once a week with the hose will knock out most of the wrigglers and stop the mosquitoes completing their life cycle.

Make sure garden water doesn’t slosh about

Be careful with self-watering planter boxes. These often have a reservoir of water in their base and, while it may seem like a water-wise idea, these can turn into tiny mozzie hotels!

A simple trick to keep water available to plants, but not mosquitoes, is to fill your potted plant saucers with sand. The sand traps and stores some moisture but there is no water sloshing about for mosquitoes.

If you’re collecting water from showers, baths, or washing machines (commonly known as grey water), use it immediately on the garden, don’t store it outside in buckets or other containers.

Read more: How drought is affecting water supply in Australia’s capital cities

Gutters, ponds, tanks and pools

Make sure your roof gutters and drains are free of leaves and other debris that will trap water and provide opportunities for mosquitoes.

Ensure rainwater tanks (and other large water-storage containers) are appropriately screened to prevent access by mosquitoes.

A well maintained swimming pool won’t be a source of mosquitoes. But if it’s turning “green”, through neglect and not intent, it may become a problem. Mosquitoes don’t like the chlorine or salt treatments typically used for swimming pools but when there is a build up of leaves and other detritus, as well as algae, the mosquitoes will move in.

Read more: As heat strikes, here’s one way to help fight disease-carrying and nuisance mosquitoes

For backyard ponds, introducing native fish can help keep mosquito numbers down.

But if you want your pond to be a home for frogs, avoid fish as they may eat the tadpoles. Instead, try to encourage other wildlife that may help keep mosquito numbers down by creating habitats for spiders and other predatory insects, reptiles, frogs, birds, and bats.

Avoiding excessive use of insecticides around the backyard will help encourage and protect that wildlife too.

Mozzies can still come

There isn’t much that can be done about those mosquitoes flying in from over the back fences from local bushland or wetland areas.

Mosquitoes are generally most active at dusk and dawn so keep that in mind when planning time outdoors. But when mosquito populations are peaking, they’ll be active almost all day long.

Applying an insect repellent can be a safe and effective way to stop those bites.

Read more: The best (and worst) ways to beat mosquito bites

Covering up with long pants, long-sleeved shirt and shoes will provide a physical barrier to mosquitoes. If you’re spending a lot of time outdoors, perhaps even consider treating your clothing with insecticide to add that extra little bit of protection.

Make sure insect screens are installed, and in good condition, on windows and doors. Mosquitoes outdoors can be bad; you don’t want them inside as well.

– ref. You can leave water out for wildlife without attracting mosquitoes, if you take a few precautions – http://theconversation.com/you-can-leave-water-out-for-wildlife-without-attracting-mosquitoes-if-you-take-a-few-precautions-128631

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karen Cummings, Lecturer in Singing, University of Wollongong

“We tell ourselves stories in order to live.” – Joan Didion, The White Album

Theatre can be many things. It can provide a catalyst to action, help us make sense of the world, make us feel part of a broader human experience. Sometimes, what happens on stage is the catalyst. Other times it happens because of the gathering theatre creates.

I live on the south coast of New South Wales. In the two weeks before I saw The White Album at Sydney Festival there had been two catastrophic fire warnings. Many neighbours and friends left the area.

Joan Didion’s essay collection is performed by Early Morning Opera in its entirety, exploring Didion’s experience of the social, political and cultural upheaval of the 1960s.

Didion writes of the murders committed by the Manson Family, police brutality and violence against the black population, the rise of the Black Panthers, student radicalism and its brutal suppression.

The morning of the performance, with a cool change and a sea breeze, the smoke was clearing. It was the first time in weeks I felt safe leaving home, knowing there was no immediate fire threat. And yet, I still constantly checked my phone fearing a turn for the worse.

Didion was diagnosed as having “a fundamentally pessimistic and fatalistic view of the world.” Persistent, inexplicable physical symptoms led to a diagnosis of possible multiple sclerosis. She writes:

An attack of vertigo and nausea does not seem an inappropriate response to the summer of 1968.

An attack of vertigo and nausea does not seem an inappropriate response to the summer of 2020.

An uneasy summer

I live in a small community. Conversations with strangers on beach walks have become uncharacteristically easy and deep. We talk about headaches and tight chests and fear. The sense we have never seen anything like this before.

We share grief at what has been lost and what may never return.

20 young local artists performed alongside five members of Early Morning Opera, directed via radio mics. An onstage chorus, at times they watch the action, at other times they become the action.

Every performance ends with an audience discussion: the cast of volunteers in a line facing the audience. A company member instructed us this was time for the audience to discuss our responses, but was not a Q&A.

Didion describes experiencing a pervasive sense of threat that led her to be suspicious of strangers and of unknown cars. She regularly took down number plates:

I put these license plates in a dressing table drawer where they would be found by the police when the time came

One young performer described a similar fear of being attacked, and expressed anger at the ways this fear constrains her.

We spoke of the suffocating vulnerability of living with the current catastrophic bushfires.

A performer described her frustration at being handed the responsibility of organising activism when the blame for this crisis sits squarely on the shoulders of the older generations, who made up the largest part of the audience.

An older audience member responded by making the plea “we’re all in this together, there is no young or old.”

Audience members questioned whether 1960s radicalism was possible now. Someone contrasted the optimism of the 1960s in the possibility of sweeping political and cultural change with her feelings of helpless immobility in the 2020s. Someone raged against the control of our political systems by vested interests and their media representatives.

In The White Album, Didion presents herself as a passive observer of the times. She describes the events of the 1960s austerely, as though she could leave the culture at any point.

As a result, I found it hard to feel engaged with the production. I felt more like a voyeur than an engaged witness. But the energy in the room palpably lifted when the audience discussion began. There was a desire to be with each other and try to make some sense of a world collapsing. There was comfort in naming what we are experiencing.

One audience member described feeling hopeful knowing humanity had survived the social and political upheaval and danger of the 1960s; another commented the play showed us major cataclysmic upheaval has all happened before.

Except, it hasn’t.

Everything about the current crisis is unprecedented. Unprecedented drought, intensity of fire, animal deaths.

We are in uncharted territory.

A desire for connection

Didion’s final words in The White Album are “Writing has not helped me to see what it means.”

Instead, maybe it is through human connection we can begin to find a way forward. Audience members were reluctant to leave once the discussion was concluded at the 15 minute mark. Conversations continued in the foyer.

As we left the theatre, a friend commented to me: “the last 15 minutes was the best part.”

We have a desire to be with each other – even strangers – during this crisis. Those 15 minutes provided the audience space to find a voice for their experience, and to be heard.

The audience bought their recent experiences with them and imbued the production with a power and meaning it might not otherwise have had.

That is what good theatre does.

– ref. At a performance of The White Album, I found the community I needed in a time of crisis – http://theconversation.com/at-a-performance-of-the-white-album-i-found-the-community-i-needed-in-a-time-of-crisis-129693

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Mike Lee, Professor in Evolutionary Biology (jointly appointed with South Australian Museum), Flinders University

The scale and speed of the current bushfire crisis has caught many people off-guard, including biodiversity scientists. People are scrambling to estimate the long-term effects. It is certain that many animal species will be pushed to the brink of extinction, but how many?

One recent article suggested 20 to 100, but this estimate mostly considers large, well-known species (especially mammals and birds).

A far greater number of smaller creatures such as insects, snails and worms will also be imperilled. They make up the bulk of biodiversity and are the little rivets holding ecosystems together.

Read more: A season in hell: bushfires push at least 20 threatened species closer to extinction

But we have scant data on how many species of small creatures have been wiped out in the fires, and detailed surveys comparing populations before and after the fires will not be forthcoming. So how can we come to grips with this silent catastrophe?

Using the information that is available, I calculate that at least 700 animal species have had their populations decimated – and that’s only counting the insects.

This may sound like an implausibly large figure, but the calculation is a simple one. I’ll explain it below, and show you how to make your own extinction estimate with only a few clicks of a calculator.

Using insects to estimate true extinction numbers

More than three-quarters of the known animal species on Earth are insects. To get a handle on the true extent of animal extinctions, insects are a good place to start.

My estimate that 700 insect species are at critical risk involves extrapolating from the information we have about the catastrophic effect of the fires on mammals.

We can work this out using only two numbers: A, how many mammal species are being pushed towards extinction, and B, how many insect species there are for each mammal species.

To get a “best case” estimate, I use the most conservative estimates for A and B below, but jot down your own numbers.

How many mammals are critically affected?

A recent Time article lists four mammal species that will be severely impacted: the long-footed potoroo, the greater glider, the Kangaroo Island dunnart, and the black-tailed dusky antechinus. The eventual number could be much greater (e.g the Hastings River mouse, the silver-headed antechinus), but let’s use this most optimistic (lowest) figure (A = 4).

Make your own estimate of this number A. How many mammal species do you think would be pushed close to extinction by these bushfires?

We can expect that for every mammal species that is severely affected there will be a huge number of insect species that suffer a similar fate. To estimate exactly how many, we need an idea of insect biodiversity, relative to mammals.

How many insect species are out there, for each mammal species?

The world has around 1 million named insect species, and around 5,400 species of land mammals.

So there are at least 185 insect species for every single land mammal species (B = 185). If the current bushfires have burnt enough habitat to devastate 4 mammal species, they have probably taken out around 185 × 4 = 740 insect species in total. Along with many species of other invertebrates such as spiders, snails, and worms.

For your own value for B, use your preferred estimate for the number of insect species on earth and divide it by 5,400 (the number of land mammal species).

One recent study suggests there are at least 5.5 million species of insects, giving a value of B of around 1,000. But there is reason to suspect the real number could be much greater.

Read more: The Earth’s biodiversity could be much greater than we thought

How do our estimates compare?

My “best case” values of A = 4 and B = 185 indicate at least 740 insect species alone are being imperilled by the bushfires. The total number of animal species impacted is obviously much bigger than insects alone.

Feel free to perform your own calculations. Derive your values for A and B as above. Your estimate for the number of insect species at grave risk of extinction is simply A × B.

Post your estimate and your values for A and B please (and how you got those numbers if you wish) in the Comments section and compare with others. We can then see what the wisdom of the crowd tells us about the likely number of affected species.

Read more: How to unleash the wisdom of crowds

Why simplistic models can still be very useful

The above calculations are a hasty estimate of the magnitude of the current biodiversity crisis, done on the fly (figuratively and literally). Technically speaking, we are using mammals as surrogates or proxies for insects.

To improve these estimates in the near future, we can try to get more exact and realistic estimates of A and B.

Additionally, the model itself is very simplistic and can be refined. For example, if the average insect is more susceptible to fire than the average mammal, our extinction estimates need to be revised upwards.

Also, there might be an unusually high (or low) ratio of insect species compared to mammal species in fire-affected regions. Our model assumes these areas have the global average – whatever that value is!

And most obviously, we need to consider terrestrial life apart from insects – land snails, spiders, worms, and plants too – and add their numbers in our extinction tally.

Nevertheless, even though we know this model gives a huge underestimate, we can still use it to get an absolute lower limit on the magnitude of the unfolding biodiversity crisis.

This “best case” is still very sad. There is a strong argument that these unprecedented bushfires could cause one of biggest extinction events in the modern era. And these infernos will burn for a while longer yet.

– ref. Australia’s bushfires could drive more than 700 animal species to extinction. Check the numbers for yourself – http://theconversation.com/australias-bushfires-could-drive-more-than-700-animal-species-to-extinction-check-the-numbers-for-yourself-129773

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Liz Hanna, Honorary Senior Fellow, Australian National University

What we suspected is now official: 2019 was Australia’s hottest year on record. The country’s average maximum temperature last year (30.69℃) was a scorching 2.09℃ hotter than the 1961-1990 average.

For the whole planet, 2019 is expected to come in second (behind 2016) making the last five years the hottest on record since 1880.

As we brace for increasingly hot summers, we are mindful extreme heat can pose significant health risks for vulnerable groups. But the effects of heat on the incidence of accidents and injury are less clear.

In research published today in Nature Medicine, researchers in the United States looked at the impact warmer temperatures will have on deaths from injury. They found if average temperatures warmed by 1.5℃, we could expect to see 1,600 more deaths each year across the US.

Given Australia is ahead of the global temperature curve, we could see an even greater number of deaths from injury per capita as a result of rising temperatures.

Read more: Hot and bothered: heat affects all of us, but older people face the highest health risks

What the study did and found

The researchers analysed death and temperature data collected from 1980 to 2017 across mainland United States (so their results excluded the states of Alaska and Hawaii).

They looked at records from more than five million injury deaths from this 38-year period. They also identified temperature anomalies by county and by month, to understand how these deaths could relate to spikes in the weather.

Using a method called Bayesian Spatio-temporal modelling, the authors combined this information to estimate the rates at which injury deaths would rise with a 1.5℃ temperature increase.

They categorised injury deaths as either unintentional (transport, falls and drownings) or intentional (assaults and suicides), and stratified results further by gender and age group.

They found deaths from drownings would increase by as much as 13.7% in men aged 15-24 years, whereas assaults and suicides would increase by less than 3% across all groups. Transport deaths would rise by 2% for men aged 25-34 years and 0.5% for women in the same age group.

Overall, these increased risks would account for 1,601 additional deaths per year from injury across the US, an annual rise of 0.75% in overall deaths from injury in the population. They indicate 84% of these deaths would occur in males.

Although the primary focus was on 1.5℃ warming, the researchers also looked at a rise of 2℃. The found this would result in 2,135 additional deaths from injury (a 1% increase).

Why do deaths from injury increase in hot weather?

Higher temperatures are associated with irritability, and increases in conflict and interpersonal violence.

Research has shown each degree celsius increase in annual temperatures is linked to nearly a 6% average increase in homicides. Another study showed domestic violence rates increased by 40% when the daily maximum temperature exceeded 34℃.

Read more: How rising temperatures affect our health

Hyperthermia (abnormally high body temperature) can also lead to symptoms such as loss of concentration and fatigue. These factors can trigger incidents such as car accidents and faults operating mechanical equipment. So we can expect injuries to increase as we face more hot days.

A South Australian study of workers’ compensation claims found for every degree above 14℃, occupational injuries requiring more than three days off work increased modestly (0.2%).

Increases in drowning might occur due the higher proportions of people seeking relief in the water on hot days.

Importantly, climate change is heightening anxiety in rural communities, and more broadly throughout the population.

In Australia, heat is commonly associated with drought. Long droughts are known to be linked to spikes in suicide rates, especially among rural males.

We also know suicide rates rise in affected communities following bushfires, in the face of grief and trauma.

Read more: The rise of ‘eco-anxiety’: climate change affects our mental health, too

The reason for the gender disparity was not tested, but likely relates to the higher prevalence of risk-taking behaviour among males.

So what does this mean for Australia?

With global temperatures on course for a 3-5°C rise this century, limiting warming to 1.5℃ is optimistic. The effects are likely to be even greater than what is forecasted in this study.

This study assessed excess injury deaths with a level of warming Australia witnessed in 2019 alone.

Rising heat is possibly Australia’s number one threat from climate change. It leads to the catastrophic bushfires we’re seeing this summer, and pushes us beyond the temperatures our bodies can withstand.

When looking at deaths caused by heat, we need to look beyond those caused by heat-induced illness, and separate the many caused by injury.

Read more: How can we avoid future ‘epidemics’ of heat deaths?

We must strengthen the nation’s climate change and human health research to provide specific details on when, where and how we can best ameliorate heat harm.

We need to ramp up our prevention efforts in this space. All Australians should be made aware of the dangers of a hotter world through a federally funded public education strategy, akin to the successful “Life. Be in it” campaign, which successfully promoted the importance of being active.

Most urgently, we must focus on prevention through climate change mitigation, which will be the best and most far-reaching prevention strategy we can deliver.

– ref. Car accidents, drownings, violence: hotter temperatures will mean more deaths from injury – http://theconversation.com/car-accidents-drownings-violence-hotter-temperatures-will-mean-more-deaths-from-injury-129628

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Joelle Gergis, Senior Lecturer in Climate Science, Australian National University

Every time a weather extreme occurs, some people quickly jump in to say we’ve been through it all before: that worse events have happened in the past, or it’s just part of natural climate variability.

The recent bushfire crisis is a case in point. Writing in The Australian recently, columnist Gerard Henderson said:

In Victoria, there were further huge fires in 1983 and 2009. But until now, there was no suggestion that the state’s future would be one of continuing apocalypse.

Of course, Australia has a long history of bushfires. But several factors make eastern Australia’s recent crisis different to infamous bushfires in the past.

First is the enormous geographic spread of this season’s fires, and second, the absence of El Niño conditions typically associated with previous severe fires.

Thirdly and most important, these fires were preceded by the hottest and driest conditions in Australian history.

Understanding Australia’s climate

As Australia’s climate has warmed since the 1970s, fire weather conditions have become more extreme, and the length of the fire season has increased across large parts of the nation.

Human-induced warming has been evident in Australian temperatures since 1950. This has contributed to a clear long-term trend toward more dangerous fire weather conditions in many areas.

Read more: Weather bureau says hottest, driest year on record led to extreme bushfire season

As the planet continues to warm, natural climate variability in the Pacific, Indian and Southern oceans will continue to drive variations in Australian climate.

These natural climate drivers are complex. But taking the time to understand them, and how they interact with human climate influences, is critically important.

Natural climate variability refers to processes such as El Niño and its opposite, La Niña in the Pacific Ocean. Together these are known as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation, or ENSO. Other such processes include phases of the Indian Ocean Dipole (IOD) in the Indian Ocean and fluctuations in the Southern Annular Mode (SAM) across the Southern Ocean.

Right now, ENSO is not active, and a very strong positive IOD event – the strongest since 1997 – has just ended. Positive IOD events typically result in below average winter–spring rainfall over southern and central Australia, and are often associated with more severe bushfire conditions.

There has also been a marked warming of the atmosphere over Antarctica, known as sudden stratospheric warming. This has led to a weakening of the polar vortex, resulting in more negative conditions in the Southern Annular Mode – essentially the north–south movement of the westerly wind belt that loops around Antarctica.

New Australian research has found weakening and warming of the stratospheric polar vortex over Antarctica significantly increases the chances of hot and dry extremes, including more severe fire weather conditions across subtropical eastern Australia than is normal for spring-early summer.

Read more: The air above Antarctica is suddenly getting warmer – here’s what it means for Australia

This combination of unusual natural variability in the Indian and Southern Oceans, the unprecedented lack of winter rains in 2017, 2018 and 2019, and Australia’s hottest summer on record, have contributed to the extreme drought currently affecting 100% of New South Wales and 67.4% of Queensland.

These factors have combined to bake the landscape dry, even transforming usually wet sub-tropical rainforests into available fuel for this season’s catastrophic bushfire conditions.

How climate influenced past Australian bushfires

Historically, the most severe Australian bushfire seasons and droughts occurred when the Indian Ocean Dipole combined with El Niño to reinforce dry conditions. Both these climate drivers influence Australian rainfall and soil moisture, with the driest conditions over the southeast, but more broadly across most of the country (with the notable exception of coastal NSW).

As Australia’s climate continues to warm, a range of scientific sources suggest some established relationships between the historical drivers of Australian climate and their impact on rainfall and temperature may be breaking down.

Read more: ‘This crisis has been unfolding for years’: 4 photos of Australia from space, before and after the bushfires

For example, Australia’s hottest years on record were historically associated with El Niño events, in line with global temperature trends. However, global warming means even traditionally cooler La Niña years are now warmer than many El Niño years of the past. This suggests natural variability may be increasingly swamped by human influences on the climate.

Following Australia’s hottest summer on record, and a record-breaking year of heat and drought, the 2019–2020 bushfire season started as early as winter 2019.

In September, barely a week into spring, catastrophic bushfires wrought havoc in many areas of southern Queensland and northern NSW.

Even the usually moss-covered rainforests of the World Heritage-listed Gondwana Rainforests of Australia burned.

Similarly in Tasmania, the 2016 fires destroyed large areas of ancient Gondwanan forest, triggering a cascade of changes through the entire ecosystem.

Strikingly, the current catastrophic bushfires are occurring in the absence of El Niño conditions typically associated with severe bushfires in the past.

The notorious Ash Wednesday fires that devastated parts of south-eastern Australia in February 1983 occurred during one of the most intense El Niño events on record. Some 75 people were killed across the country’s south-east, and more than 2,000 homes were lost.

Ash Wednesday was also preceded by a positive Indian Ocean Dipole event. Together with the El Niño, this created a “double whammy” of drought conditions which provided the climatic backdrop for the fires.

Similarly, the 1994 Sydney fires were also influenced by a combination of El Niño and positive IOD conditions.

However the current drought is affecting areas such as coastal NSW which have not historically been influenced by positive IOD and El Niño events. This suggests other drivers are at play.

Perhaps most alarmingly, this summer’s bushfire crisis also differs from the past is the spread and extent of landscape burned. More so than during Victoria’s Ash Wednesday or Black Saturday, this season’s fires have burned large swathes of the country. In some cases, fires merged to form unprecedented “mega fires”. It is sobering to consider what might happen to the Australian landscape the next time an El Niño hits.

Of course it will take time before researchers can pinpoint the full extent to which climate change influenced the current drought and associated bushfires.

But it is already clear to experts that natural variability and human influences on the climate system are now interacting to generate extremes that may have no parallel in Australian history.

What this means for bushfire danger

As with land and sea temperatures, Australia has seen rising trends in fire danger indices in recent decades.

In particular, the annual accumulated Forest Fire Danger Index (FFDI) – which takes into account drought, recent rain, air temperature, relative humidity and wind speed – has increased in eastern and southern Australia.

Read more: Bushfires, bots and arson claims: Australia flung in the global disinformation spotlight

The bushfire season has become longer and more intense. In fact, the extraordinary conditions experienced during Victoria’s Black Saturday fires in February 2009 later prompted the creation of a new “catastrophic” fire rating, represented by a FFDI of 100 or greater.

On September 6 last year – less than a week out from winter – severe bushfires burned across Queensland and NSW. In most affected areas, daily FFDI values that day (pictured in the bottom right of the graphic below) were higher than anything observed so early in the season since records began in 1950. Astoundingly, a FDDI of 174 was recorded at Murrurundi Gap in the Hunter region of NSW.

Rewriting history

In the past, Australia only had to contend with natural climate variability. Now, our entire weather and climate systems are being altered and amplified by human activity. Climate change is making extreme events even more severe, resulting in unprecedented conditions that are rewriting our nation’s history.

The CSIRO’s most recent climate projections reconfirmed their projections released in 2015 which clearly showed Australia faces more dangerous fire weather conditions in future.

It will take time to understand the exact contribution of each climatic factor in the bushfire season of 2019–2020. However one thing is certain: unless there are global reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, temperatures will continue to rise, increasing the risk that catastrophic bushfire conditions become Australia’s “new normal”.

– ref. Some say we’ve seen bushfires worse than this before. But they’re ignoring a few key facts – http://theconversation.com/some-say-weve-seen-bushfires-worse-than-this-before-but-theyre-ignoring-a-few-key-facts-129391

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Raymond William Loveridge, Adjunct Professor – School of Built Environment, University of Technology Sydney

More than 2,000 homes have been destroyed in Australia since the start of the bushfire season. More will certainly be destroyed before the season ends in March.

Could these houses have been built to better withstand fire?

Read more: ‘This crisis has been unfolding for years’: 4 photos of Australia from space, before and after the bushfires

Quite probably. But that doesn’t necessarily mean Australia’s building regulations need reforming to ensure homes are made more fireproof.

Appropriate building codes are about weighing costs and benefits. Only analysing the reasons buildings were destroyed will tell us if more needs to be done.

Performances standards

Not all buildings are created equal. Newer buildings will generally be more fire-proof than older ones, due to building regulations having been improved over time.

In particular, national building requirements for residences in bushfire-prone areas were improved after the 2009 “Black Saturday” bushfires in Victoria, in which 173 people died and more 2,000 homes were destroyed.

Buildings are regulated by states and territories but governments have recognised the value of nationally consistent building codes through the National Construction Code. This code, among other things, sets minimum standards for the design and construction of new buildings on bushfire-prone land. (What land is deemed “bushfire prone” is defined by state and territory legislation.)

The National Construction Code is “performance-based”. It doesn’t specify how a building must be built, but how a building must perform. This means innovative designs, materials and construction methods can be readily approved.

A residential building on bushfire-prone land, the code states, must be designed and constructed to “reduce the risk” of ignition from a bushfire, appropriate to the risk from bushfire flames, burning embers, radiant heat and intensity of the bushfire attack.

The risk to which a building is expected to be exposed depends on the individual site and conditions such as vegetation type and density, and slope of land. Properties are assessed and given a “Bushfire Attack Level” (BAL) rating by inspectors.

There are six BAL levels that classify the severity of potential exposure to bushfire. The highest – BAL FZ – is for buildings exposed to an extreme risk, such as a house surrounded by trees that could produce direct contact from flames.

Lower BAL levels take into account risks from burning debris, ember attack and radiant heat. The lowest deems the risk insufficient to warrant any specific construction requirements.

Construction details for each BAL cover building elements such as floors, walls, roofs, doors, windows, vents, roof drainage systems, verandahs, and water and gas supply pipes. For example, fire-resistant timber may be required for floor framing, or windows may be required to use toughened glass.

Balancing competing interests

Are the requirements of the National Construction Code good enough?

If the aim is to minimise the number of buildings damaged or destroyed in extreme fire events, the answer is no.

But that’s not the aim. Like most government regulation, the code requirements are about balancing competing interests.

All building regulations are subject to cost-benefit analysis. They must demonstrate a “net cost benefit” to the community – that the cost of compliance will be less than the benefit delivered to the general community.

It’s a cold calculation about the risk and potential cost of homes being destroyed in bushfires versus the more certain costs involved in requiring all homes to be built to more stringent building codes.

Government policy treats potential property loss as a matter for owners to address through property insurance. There’s no reason to expect this to change any time soon.

Learning from experience

If the cost of building destruction in bushfires turned out to be greater than the cost of more stringent building requirements, there would be a strong rationale to improve the regulations. This is why post-fire analysis is so important.

A prime example is the royal commission into the causes and costs of the Black Saturday fires.

The commission’s final report made a number of recommendations for changes to the National Construction Code. These included new provisions to:

• make protection from ember attack a performance requirement
• address the design and construction of private (underground) bushfire emergency shelters
• include design and construction requirements for non-residential buildings, such as schools and aged-care centres, in bushfire-prone areas.

All governments agreed to the first two recommendations, which were promptly implemented in the National Construction Code (in 2010).

The recommendation about non-residential building was not implemented at the time because governments considered that planning laws would not allow these types of buildings to be built in a bushfire-prone area.

However, the 2019-2020 business plan of the Australian Building Codes Board (which administers the National Construction Code, includes a “bushfire provisions for non-residential buildings” project, so it is reasonable to expect changes to the code in future.

Read more: Bushfires won’t change climate policy overnight. But Morrison can shift the Coalition without losing face

This season’s fires may also provide impetus for other changes to the construction code. One key factor that will be worthy of research is the age of the buildings destroyed.

Depending on how many homes lost were built after 2010, it might be argued that changes made after the 2009 Victorian fire have been insufficient to keep up with evolving conditions.

– ref. Australian building codes don’t expect houses to be fire-proof – and that’s by design – http://theconversation.com/australian-building-codes-dont-expect-houses-to-be-fire-proof-and-thats-by-design-129540

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Aileen Marwung Walsh, ARC Laureate Research Scholarship, Rediscovering Deep Human History, Australian National University

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander readers are advised this article contains images and names of deceased people.

Review: Tell Me Why: The Story of My Life and My Music, by Archie Roach (Simon & Schuster)

Singer songwriter Archie Roach’s new autobiography Tell Me Why, is a grim portrayal of his life of suffering at the hands of 20th century white Australia.

The Australian government eugenics programs against Aboriginal people led to the removal of many thousands of Aboriginal children from their families: the stolen generations. Archie was one of them.

Archie’s many successes in the music industry did not begin until he stopped drinking. Archie sang Took the Children Away at the 1988 Survival Day event in Sydney. Though historian Peter Read had been working on the family tracing and reunion service Link-Up since 1981, it was Archie’s song that brought home the tragedy of the stolen generations for all of us.

Archie sings from the heart about what he knows and what he and his family have experienced. Given how much pain is visible, we can only imagine the rest. Archie’s first album was Charcoal Lane and in 1991 he won the ARIA award for Best New Artist and Best Indigenous Release.

He was born in 1956 at Mooroopna near Shepparton. Aboriginal people had moved there as a direct result of the Cummerangunja Walk Off on 6 February 1939, when around 200 people left a mission in southern New South Wales to protest poor conditions and government control.

However, Archie’s family was from the south and so they moved to Framlingham mission. He and his sisters were stolen from there when he was just four. They were placed in separate foster homes, some very bad, until Archie was placed more permanently with the Cox family. A Scottish family with, it seems, good hearts, they fostered Archie and another Aboriginal boy Noel.

Life was relatively good for Archie. But, when one of his birth sisters wrote to tell him that their mother had died, he and his foster parents discovered the government had lied to them. The Cox family had been told Archie’s family had perished in a fire.

Searching

Archie’s choices after this became limited by his inability to trust non-Aboriginal people as well as his deep desire to reconnect with his real family, to learn who he really was. He left the safety and security of his foster parents’ home when he was only 15, never to see them again, and began searching.

Soon, Archie was in Sydney. It was here he met one of the ugliest characters of his life story, Albert, an alcoholic living on the streets. To Albert, the young and impressionable Archie, was prey and a potential drinking buddy. Archie had never had alcohol before he met Albert but he writes that Albert turned him into an alcoholic while he was still only 16.

Archie had been raised by a good white family. For many people from the stolen generations, the notion of being good then becomes synonymous with being white. The Christian teachings in the missions are also about being good. For many Aboriginal people being good then mistakenly becomes antithetical to being Aboriginal.

For many of the stolen generations and later generations who grew up without proper Aboriginal culture, the white trash culture of street living begins to seem the Aboriginal way. While drinking in the streets and pubs of inner Sydney and Melbourne, Archie did find the rest of his family.

Most of Archie’s story is about drinking, the depth and the dangers, the epilepsy, and a drunken suicide attempt. For fellow Aboriginal people of the same era, the extent of this drinking and its effects are not new. Archie writes about the consistent choice to drink and his difficulty stopping.

He doesn’t explicitly write how his choice to keep drinking was a cop-out, but drinkers don’t have to be responsible for anything or anyone. Perhaps this is why Archie writes so little about his children. He didn’t choose his children — for a long time he chose booze.

Ruby Hunter is at the heart of Archie’s life story.

Ruby and Archie met when they were teenagers, they drank together and got sober together. Ruby was the strength behind Archie. She gave birth alone and raised the boys alone until Archie stopped drinking. But although Ruby (who died in 2010, aged 54) is there in Archie’s story, she is also strongly absent in Archie’s memoir. One senses the pain in the absence.

Archie would work for a while but then he would choose the booze again. He loved Ruby, but chose the booze again and again. Archie hasn’t tried to romanticise the drinking culture he was a part of in the book, but perhaps he has in his music. Charcoal Lane, the name of his first album, came from one of the places he used to drink. Can regret be romantic?

‘White trash’ culture

I recognise the choices Archie and so many others like him made as we grew up in cities or country towns without strong Aboriginal laws that could tell us how to behave right; while at the same time rejecting white colonial laws as a form of resistance.

It is an empty space, that in-between place, with the added difficulty of acceptance by white trash – the white alcoholics. The term “white trash” explains the ugliness of the colonisation of the Americas and Australia.

Although perceived as classist, researchers argue it’s more about forms of behaviour determined by a lack of knowledge of how to make good choices. Or how to be a good person – to take responsibility for one’s choices, as his experience with the principles of Alcoholics Anonymous later taught Archie.

Song lyrics begin each chapter of Tell Me Why and Took the Children Away, Archie’s first, award-winning song begins his autobiography. In many ways, it is his redemption song.

Archie visited the Framlingham mission, from where he was stolen, while he was drinking; but it was not until he stopped drinking that his Uncle Banjo told him what it was like for them, Archie’s parents, the generation left behind with the silence from the absent children.

This enabled Archie to stop thinking so much about his own pain, and more about the pain of others.

– ref. Tell Me Why review: Archie Roach’s pain is the pain of all of us – http://theconversation.com/tell-me-why-review-archie-roachs-pain-is-the-pain-of-all-of-us-127723

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Karleen Gribble, Adjunct Associate Professor, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Western Sydney University

Thousands of families with babies and toddlers have been affected by Australia’s bushfire disaster. This includes children whose homes have been under direct threat or impacted by severe smoke pollution, or where their parents volunteer or work as fire fighters.

Babies and toddlers may not be aware of the danger the fires pose to them or their families. But they find changes in their environment distressing and may notice the stress of their caregivers.

Routine and predictability makes young children feel safe. Evacuating, travelling long distances, noisy evacuation centres and staying in crowded or temporary accommodation disrupts this predictability.

Read more: Bushfires can make kids scared and anxious: here are 5 steps to help them cope

Kids communicate with behaviour, not just words

Babies and toddlers can’t easily communicate they’re unsettled with words so they show it in their behaviour. This might include:

When parents are stressed, they find it more difficult to notice their baby’s or toddler’s behavioural communications.

In the acute phase of an emergency, it may not be possible to respond to a baby or toddler. Very young children can find this extremely stressful.

Read more: After the firestorm: the health implications of returning to a bushfire zone

How to help your child cope

If your baby or toddler is showing signs of distress, provide them with responsive care. This involves watching and noticing their behavioural cues, including body movements and sounds, and responding to this communication in a nurturing way.

The behavioural changes you see in your child provide you with information about what they need.

A baby or toddler who doesn’t want to go to anyone but their mother is communicating that, right now, mum represents safety and only mum will do.

A child who is waking at night is saying, “I’m scared. I need you near to reassure me when I wake.”

A child who is demanding or withdrawn is indicating they need more attention, not less.

Try not to worry too much about feeding issues. Allow babies and toddlers to eat when they indicate hunger. Offer food frequently but don’t try force your toddler to eat.

Keeping your baby or toddler physically close will help you to notice their cues and provide responsive care. Baby slings can help parents do this while they get on with other things.

Consider delaying any changes that you were considering before the fires, such as starting solid foods, introducing a bottle, giving up the dummy, starting childcare or moving the child out of your bedroom. When things have settled down again, your baby or toddler should once again be able to manage these changes.

If you feel you’re struggling to provide responsive care to your baby or toddler, ask your family or friends for extra help or contact your child health nurse or doctor.

Breastfeeding mothers – stress won’t reduce your supply

Changes in babies’ feeding and sleeping behaviour during emergencies can be particularly concerning to breastfeeding mothers who worry the stress will affect their milk supply.

Research tells us stress has no impact on milk production. But it can slow the release of milk, making babies fussy at the breast.

Read more: Evacuating with a baby? Here’s what to put in your emergency kit

If this happens, keep offering breastfeeds. While feeding, focus on your baby and think about how much you love them. This will release hormones that make the milk flow and help you and your baby to feel more relaxed.

We all need to support parents through this disaster

Helping babies and toddlers to recover from an emergency shouldn’t just be left to parents. Those around families with babies and toddlers can help by cleaning or cooking, allowing parents to prioritise caring for their children and other pressing tasks.

The impact of an emergency can persist for some time. If you feel you’re still affected by the disaster, your baby or toddler might feel that too. Give them and yourself time. Babies and toddlers usually recover well after emergencies. Your love and responsive care is the key.

– ref. Babies and toddlers might not know there’s a fire but disasters still take their toll – http://theconversation.com/babies-and-toddlers-might-not-know-theres-a-fire-but-disasters-still-take-their-toll-129699

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Paul McInerney, Research scientist, CSIRO

When heavy rainfall eventually extinguishes the flames ravaging south-east Australia, another ecological threat will arise. Sediment, ash and debris washing into our waterways, particularly in the Murray-Darling Basin, may decimate aquatic life.

We’ve seen this before. Following 2003 bushfires in Victoria’s alpine region, water filled with sediment and debris (known as sediment slugs) flowed into rivers and lakes, heavily reducing fish populations. We’ll likely see it again after this season’s bushfire emergency.

Read more: The bushfires are horrendous, but expect cyclones, floods and heatwaves too

Large areas of northeast Victoria have been burnt. While this region accounts only for 2% of Murray-Darling Basin’s entire land area, water flowing in from northeast Victorian streams (also known as in-flow) contributes 38% of overall in-flows into the Murray-Darling Basin.

Fire debris flowing into Murray-Darling Basin will exacerbate the risk of fish and other aquatic life dying en masse in a repeat of the shocking fish kills of last summer.

What will flow into waterways?

Generally, bushfire ash comprises organic carbon and inorganic elements such as nitrogen, phosphorous and metals such as copper, mercury and zinc.

Sediment rushing into waterways can also contain large amounts of soil, since fire has consumed the vegetation that once bound the soil together and prevented erosion.

And carcinogenic chemicals – found in soil and ash in higher amounts following bushfires – can contaminate streams and reservoirs over the first year after the fire.

How they harm aquatic life

Immediately following the bushfires, we expect to see an increase in streamflow when it rains, because burnt soil repels, not absorbs, water.

When vast amounts of carbon are present in a waterway, such as when carbon-loaded sediments and debris wash in, bacteria rapidly consumes the water’s oxygen. The remaining oxygen levels can fall below what most invertebrates and fish can tolerate.

These high sediment loads can also suffocate aquatic animals with a fine layer of silt which coats their gills and other breathing structures.

Habitats are also at risk. When sediment is suspended in the river and light can’t penetrate, suitable fish habitat is diminished. The murkier water also means there’s less opportunity for aquatic plants and algae to photosynthesise (turn sunshine to energy).

Read more: How wildfire smoke affects pets and other animals

What’s more, many of Australia’s waterbugs, the keystone of river food webs, need pools with litter and debris for cover. They rely on slime on the surface of rocks and snags that contain algae, fungi and bacteria for food.

But heavy rain following fire can lead to pools and the spaces between cobbles to fill with silt, causing the waterbugs to starve and lose their homes.

This is bad news for fish too. Any bug-eating fish that manage to avoid dying from a lack of oxygen can be faced with an immediate food shortage.

We saw this in 2003 after the sediment slug penetrated the Ovens River in the north east Murray catchment. Researchers observed dead fish, stressed fish gulping at the water surface and freshwater crayfish walking out of the stream.

Long-term damage

Bushfires can increase the amount of nutrients in streams 100 fold. The effects can persist for several years before nutrient levels return to pre-fire conditions.

More nutrients in the water might sound like a good thing, but when there’s too much (especially nitrogen and phosphorous), coupled with warm temperatures, they can lead to excessive growth of blue-green algae. This algae can be toxic to both people and animals and often closes down recreational waters.

Read more: Strength from perpetual grief: how Aboriginal people experience the bushfire crisis

Large parts of the upper Murray River catchment above Lake Hume has burnt, risking increases to nutrient loads within the lake and causing blue-green algae blooms which may flow downstream. This can impact communities from Albury all the way to the mouth of the Murray River in South Australia.

Some aquatic species are already teetering on the edge of their preferred temperature as stream temperatures rise from climate change. In places where bushfires have burnt all the way to the stream edge, decimating vegetation that provided shade, there’ll be less resistance to temperature changes, and fewer cold places for aquatic life to hide.

Cooler hide-outs are particularly important for popular angling species such as trout, which are highly sensitive to increased water temperature.

But while we can expect an increase in stream flow from water-repellent burnt soil, we know from previous bushfires that, in the long-term, stream flow will drop.

This is because in the upper catchments, regenerating younger forests use more water than the older forests they replace from evapotranspiration (when plants release water vapour into the surrounding atmosphere, and evaporation from the surrounding land surface).

It’s particularly troubling for the Murray-Darling Basin, where large areas are already enduring ongoing drought. Bushfires may exacerbate existing dry conditions.

So what can we do?

We need to act as soon as possible. Understandably, priorities lie in removing the immediate and ongoing bushfire threat. But following that, we must improve sediment and erosion control to prevent debris being washed into water bodies in fire-affected areas.

Read more: In fact, there’s plenty we can do to make future fires less likely

One of the first things we can do is to restore areas used for bushfire control lines and minimise the movement of soil along access tracks used for bushfire suppression. This can be acheived using sediment barriers and other ersiosion control measures in high risk areas.

Longer-term, we can re-establish vegetation along waterways to help buffer temperature extremes and sediment loads entering streams.

It’s also important to introduce strategic water quality monitoring programs that incorporate real-time sensing technology, providing an early warning system for poor water quality. This can help guide the management of our rivers and reservoirs in the years to come.

While our current focus is on putting the fires out, as it should be, it’s important to start thinking about the future and how to protect our waterways. Because inevitably, it will rain again.

– ref. The sweet relief of rain after bushfires threatens disaster for our rivers – http://theconversation.com/the-sweet-relief-of-rain-after-bushfires-threatens-disaster-for-our-rivers-129449

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Melbourne

In the first Newspoll of the new year, Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s ratings have tanked as a result of his handling of the bushfire crisis.

The Newspoll, conducted January 8-11 from a sample of 1,500 people, gave Labor a 51-49 lead on a two-party preferred basis, a three point gain for Labor since the last Newspoll in early December.

Primary votes were 40% Coalition (down two points), 36% Labor (up three), 12% Greens (up one) and 4% One Nation (down one).

Morrison also suffered a drop in his job performance rating, with 37% saying they were satisfied, down eight points from early December, and 59% saying they were dissatisfied, up 11 points.

His net approval was -22, down 19 points since December. Labor leader Anthony Albanese’s net approval, meanwhile, improved ten points to +9.

Albanese also led Morrison 43-39 as preferred PM, a reversal of Morrison’s 48-34 lead in December. Apart from Morrison’s first Newspoll as PM following the ousting of Malcolm Turnbull in August 2018, this is the first time an opposition leader has led the incumbent PM on this measure since Tony Abbott was in office.

The bushfire crisis almost certainly explains the crash in Morrison’s ratings, but will this be sustained? As memories of a key event fade, people tend to move back to their previous positions.

US Democratic primary polls: Sanders has narrow Iowa lead

As the US Democratic primaries and caucuses are about to begin, here are the latest polls from the US.

Three weeks before the February 3 Iowa caucus, the highly regarded Selzer Iowa poll, conducted for CNN and the Des Moines Register, has shown Bernie Sanders with a slight lead in the state.

Sanders was at 20% in the poll (up five points from November), Elizabeth Warren 17% (up one), Pete Buttigieg 16% (down nine), Joe Biden 15% (steady), Amy Klobuchar 6% (steady) and Andrew Yang 5% (up two).

No other candidate had more than 3%. The poll was conducted January 2-8 from 701 likely caucus attendees.

Read more: Buttigieg surges to clear lead in Iowa poll, as Democrats win four of five US state elections

The last Selzer Iowa poll had Buttigieg ahead at 25%, but he is down to third place in the new poll. After the last poll, there was much media attention on the former South Bend, Indiana, mayor, but he failed to catch on nationally. This failure has probably contributed to loss of enthusiasm in Iowa.

There are four early state primary contests: Iowa, New Hampshire (February 11), Nevada (February 22) and South Carolina (February 29). Fifteen states and territories then vote on March 3, otherwise known as Super Tuesday, when 36% of the total delegates will be awarded. This date could be decisive to determining who will be the nominee.

As I have written previously, the two states at the top of the calendar, Iowa and New Hampshire, are largely comprised of white voters. As such, they do not represent the diversity of the Democratic electorate.

Biden is doing far better with black voters, who made up 61% of the South Carolina Democratic primary electorate in 2016.

A recent poll of black voters nationally gave a Biden a huge lead with 48%, with Sanders on 20% and nobody else in double digits.

Sanders and Warren, the two most left-wing candidates, are leading in the latest Iowa poll. One explanation is that Iowa is a caucus, not a primary. Caucuses are conducted by the parties and are time-consuming affairs that require voters to attend meetings where supporters make their case for candidates.

Read more: US Democratic presidential primaries: Biden leading, followed by Sanders, Warren, Harris; and will Trump be beaten?

Primaries, meanwhile, are managed by the state’s electoral authority and operate like normal elections. As a result, caucuses have far lower turnout rates than primaries, and are more likely to be influenced by party activists.

In the 2016 Democratic presidential primary, Sanders performed far better than Hillary Clinton in caucus states, while Clinton performed better in most primary states.

The bad news for Sanders and Warren is that Democrats strongly encouraged states to use primaries this year. After Iowa and Nevada (February 22), only one state uses a true caucus, while four others have a party-run primary.

According to New York Times analyst Nate Cohn, 14% of pledged delegates were awarded by caucuses in 2016; this year only 3% will be. Left-wing candidates are most likely to be hurt by this change.

National Democratic polls and polls of other early states

The most recent RealClearPolitics national Democratic poll average has Biden leading with 29.3%, with Sanders at 20.3%, Warren 14.8%, Buttigieg 7.5%, Michael Bloomberg 5.8% and Yang 3.5%.

In New Hampshire, the RCP polling average has Sanders leading with 21.5%, followed by Biden at 18.8%, Buttigieg 18.3% and Warren 14.8%.

In Nevada, the only poll conducted in January has Biden at 23%, Sanders 17% and Warren and Tom Steyer both at 12%. And in South Carolina, the only January poll conducted had Biden in the lead at 36%, with Steyer in a surprise second at 15%.

The last Democratic presidential debate before voting begins will be held on Tuesday night at Drake University in Iowa. Six candidates have qualified. There will be three more debates in February.

US jobs still good, but wage growth down

In December, the US economy added 145,000 jobs. While this is down from 256,000 in November, it is still a good performance.

However, hourly wages grew only by three cents in December, and the annual hourly wage growth increased by just 2.9% – the first time it has been below 3% since July 2018.

We do not yet have the inflation report for December, but inflation increased 0.7% in October and November. Higher inflation undermines wage growth.

The US uses two surveys for its jobs reports. The number of jobs gained and wage growth are based on an establishment survey, while other statistics are based on a household survey. In December, the household survey was steady for the three most important indicators: unemployment at 3.5%, labour participation rate at 63.2% and employment population ratio at 61.0%.

The strong jobs reports and the fact the Dow Jones surged to near 29,000 are good news for President Donald Trump. The economy represents Trump’s best chance of re-election in November.

Trump’s ratings and head-to-head polls

With all polls, the FiveThirtyEight aggregate has Trump’s ratings at 41.8% approve, 53.5% disapprove, for a net approval of -11.7%. With polls of likely or registered voters, Trump’s ratings are 42.9% approve, 53.0% disapprove (net -10.1%).

In mid-December, Trump’s ratings rose to their highest since the very early days of his presidency. His ratings have since fallen by two to three net points since then, perhaps owing to the conflict with Iran.

In the most recent national head-to-head election polls, Biden led Trump by 4.5% in the RealClearPolitics average, Sanders led Trump by 2.6%, Trump led Warren by 0.2% and Trump led Buttigieg by 1.2%.

These polls were taken in early to mid-December, when Trump’s ratings were at their peak.

– ref. Morrison’s approval ratings crash over bushfires in first 2020 Newspoll; Sanders has narrow Iowa lead – http://theconversation.com/morrisons-approval-ratings-crash-over-bushfires-in-first-2020-newspoll-sanders-has-narrow-iowa-lead-129774

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nancy Cushing, Associate professor, University of Newcastle

Smoke from this season’s bushfires has turned the sun red, the moon orange and the sky an insipid grey. It has obscured iconic views tourists flock to see. Far more than an aesthetic problem, it has forced business shutdowns, triggered health problems and kept children indoors for weeks.

City dwellers in southeast Australia have been forced to take a crash course in the finer points of air pollution. We’ve learned about the dangers of inhaling tiny PM2.5 particles (those 2.5 microns or fewer in diameter). We’ve learned that only a close-fitting P2 mask will do much to protect us.

Still, we wear disposable paper masks and hold handkerchiefs to our faces, hoping any amount of filtering is helpful.

Even for an historian of air pollution like me, this situation is a shock. It is not the first time Australia’s major cities have been shrouded in bushfire smoke. But the terrible air quality is unmatched in terms of severity, duration and extent.

Historically, air pollution from smoke was considered outside human control and not subject to regulation. But these bushfires are clearly linked to global warming, for which government, corporations and individuals are responsible. It’s time to rethink the way we protect air quality.

The history of smoke

In recent weeks, apps such as AirVisual have confirmed what we city dwellers can already see and smell: since the fires on the north coast of NSW began in late October, our air quality has plummeted.

The New South Wales government’s Air Quality Index data has shown that since late October, days when the index was higher than 100 – signalling exposure is unhealthy – have outnumbered clear days in Sydney, Newcastle and the Illawarra.

Index readings above 2,550 have been recorded in Sydney, while the Monash monitoring site in Canberra reached a choking 5,185 at 8pm on New Year’s Day.

Bushfire smoke has affected the cities of NSW and the Australian Capital Territory in the past. In late January 1926, when Canberra was just emerging as a city, a thick haze of smoke sat over the site. Fires came within metres of Yarralumla, the residence which, the following year, would become home to the Governor-General.

In several years in the mid 1930s, bushfires burning to the north of Sydney left the city air thick with smoke. In October 1936, bushfire smoke forced a motor liner arriving from Hong Kong to warily enter the harbour sounding its siren, because it was invisible to signallers on South Head.

A New Zealand pilot, flying into Sydney from Longreach the following month, had to fly blind in “great clouds of dense smoke” covering much of NSW. In 1939, Canberra was covered by what visiting writer HG Wells described as a “streaming smoke curtain”.

Read more: How wildfire smoke affects pets and other animals

In the summer of 1944, Sydney was again enveloped in a smoke haze, this time from fires in the Blue Mountains and (later Royal) National Park in November. Photographs published at the time show the Sydney Harbour Bridge barely visible through dust and smoke at midday. The ongoing fires were blamed for an increase in diseases of the ears, nose and throat, and for cases of influenza and pneumonia, leading to a shortage of hospital beds.

In November 1951, all of NSW was said to be blacked out by bushfire smoke. In Sydney on the worst days, records show all four of the city’s airfields were closed because of “smoke-fog”.

A hazy legal framework

In each of these episodes, bushfire smoke disrupted transport, commerce, health and the enjoyment of the urban environment. But even as other forms of air pollution began to be regulated, smoke from bushfires escaped legislative attention.

What was understood as air pollution were the unwanted byproducts of industrial processes, whereas bushfire smoke was viewed as natural.

Read more: Pregnant women should take extra care to minimise their exposure to bushfire smoke

In NSW in 1866, an act based on British legislation restricted smoke from mills, distilleries and gas works. Further limitations on smoke production in built-up areas were included in later acts governing public health (1902), motor traffic (1909) and local government (1919).

After World War II Newcastle, the site of the country’s largest concentration of coal-burning heavy industry, began to pay closer attention to managing air quality. This pioneering work was given added urgency after 4,000 people died in heavy London smog in 1952.

In 1958, a NSW parliamentary committee delivered a report into smoke abatement. It did not mention recent issues with bushfire smoke, and also dismissed the impact of domestically produced smoke. The subsequent 1961 Clean Air Act focused on air pollution from industry, transport and power generation.

Air pollution legislation continued to evolve in following decades, targeting motor vehicle emissions in the 1970s, backyard burning of waste in the 1980s, and wood fires used to heat homes in the 1990s.

These measures have been successful. A 2006 study found that between 1998 and 2003, on the limited occasions when standards for PM10 in six Australian cities were exceeded, the main sources were not industry or transport, but dust storms and bushfires (with the exception of Launceston, where heating fires were the main contributor).

Looking ahead

Today, bushfire smoke is excluded from air quality regulations, despite its obvious role in pollution. It is still considered natural, and beyond human control.

However the link between the current fires and human-caused climate change, long predicted by climate scientists, suggests this exemption is no longer valid.

Read more: Our buildings aren’t made to keep out bushfire smoke. Here’s what you can do

As the Australian National University’s Tom Griffiths has written, the current fires in some ways repeat patterns of the past. But “the smoke is worse, more widespread and more enduring”.

When Australia begins the recovery from these fires, our business-as-usual approach requires a rethink. Measures to protect air quality should be a major part of this.

It is time that corporations, governments and societies which contribute to global heating be held to account for more frequent, intense and widespread bushfires, and the smoke which billows from them.

– ref. Even for an air pollution historian like me, these past weeks have been a shock – http://theconversation.com/even-for-an-air-pollution-historian-like-me-these-past-weeks-have-been-a-shock-129141

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Chris Wallace, ARC DECRA Fellow, Australian National University

The hope of many people enduring this summer’s firestorms is that better climate policy will arise phoenix-like from the ashes.

It is expressed loudly, fervently, sometimes abusively by people directly affected and those feeling solidarity with them.

It is also expressed secretly, whispered to like-minded confidants, by others who are part of or allied with the Liberal-National (LNP) coalition government of Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

On Sunday, Morrison indicated that he would take a proposal to establish a royal commission into the bushfires to his Cabinet.

But when it comes to climate policy, there are three possible scenarios in the aftermath of the crisis: everything magically changes for the better, everything stays the same or something different happens.

What these three scenarios look like

Everything magically changes for the better would look like this: Morrison announces the crisis has transformed his previous token admission of a link between bushfires and climate change into a revelation of the reality of global warming, with consequential policy change.

As logical and desirable as this seems, it is unlikely, not least because of Morrison’s character and personal beliefs.

Everything stays the same has a powerful impetus behind it. Morrison does not want policy change any more than his likely successor in the event of leadership change, Peter Dutton.

Read more: Key challenges for the re-elected Coalition government: our experts respond

Government-friendly journalists and commentators at News Corp and 2GB show no sign of changing tack either, so even if the government wanted to shift its policy, the media environment makes it difficult to do so. The forces of inertia are powerful.

Then there is the slim hope that something different happens. This scenario relies on all three of Australia’s main political groupings – the LNP, Labor and the Greens – realising they each face their own distinct climate policy challenge and rising to it.

Avoiding the appearance of a backflip

Opinion polls are not done over the summer holiday period, meaning the LNP has yet to see the impact of the bushfires on their public standing.

When polling resumes, Liberal and National MPs will understand the impact, and they won’t like it. Morrison and others will likely urge party members to hold their course since the next election is years away and a dozen other issues could distract attention from climate policy between now and then.

This tactic can prevail for some time but is not strategically sustainable: firestorms like those in the summer of 2020 will not be the last.

Read more: Grattan on Friday: When the firies call him out on climate change, Scott Morrison should listen

The emerging LNP argument that inadequate hazard reduction burns are to blame for the current crisis is risible. The Australian who has emerged with the most credibility from the bushfires – NSW Rural Fire Service Commissioner Shane Fitzsimmons – rejects it out of hand.

The LNP’s challenge, then, is to realise its current position won’t hold strategically and to transition to better policy ahead of that becoming obvious, managing the optics to avoid the appearance of a backflip.

The challenge for Labor and the Greens

Labor is benefiting from leader Anthony Albanese’s call for “an adult conversation” in Australia about climate policy. He is astutely citing British Tories like the late Margaret Thatcher and current Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who long ago accepted and acted upon the climate science the Morrison government viscerally rejects.

Labor’s homework now is to reconcile the views and interests of members and supporters prioritising climate policy over mining jobs, and vice versa.

This can and must be done if Labor is to build a coalition of support big enough to win office and then enact the climate and other policies the current firestorms make so urgent.

Read more: It’s the 10-year anniversary of our climate policy abyss. But don’t blame the Greens

The Greens, meanwhile, need to have an internal conversation about whether they want to continue making perfect policy the enemy of the good – leaving Australia with no emissions trading system (ETS) at all, for example, because they would not vote for one that did not meet their every demand – or join in efforts to begin on the path to better policy.

Central to that conversation must be a realisation their current strategy isn’t working – the LNP keeps returning to power.

A possible way forward

There is an obvious point the LNP, Labor and Greens might momentarily agree upon to move policy forward. It is the ETS proposed by Liberal Prime Minister John Howard in 2007.

Howard saw climate change coming. In late 2006, he established a prime ministerial task group on emissions trading chaired by the secretary of his Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Peter Shergold.

The Shergold Report, released in May 2007, said “emissions trading should be preferred to a carbon tax” and among the various kinds possible, a national “cap and trade” ETS was best.

In an address to the Liberal Party Federal Council in October 2007, Howard promised to establish a national ETS starting no later than 2012.

This will be a world-class emissions trading system more comprehensive, more rigorously grounded in economics and with better governance than anything in Europe.

Implementing an emissions trading scheme and setting a long-term goal for reducing emissions will be the most momentous economic decisions Australia will take in the next decade.

This emissions trading system must be built to last. It needs to last not five or 10 years, it needs to last the whole of the 21st century if Australia is to meet our global responsibilities and further build our economic prosperity.

Howard positioned the LNP as the party Australians could trust to implement an ETS in a way that gives “firms and families” the ability to “plan for the future with confidence”.

His authorship – and his framing of his ETS as an act of economic responsibility –provides a fig leaf Morrison can now use to move the LNP to a credible, sustainable and politically viable climate policy position.

“Something different” has to start somewhere. If Morrison can deploy the cunning he showed winning the 2019 election by drawing on Howard’s deep well of credibility within the LNP to implement the plan himself and then inviting – daring – Labor and the Greens to back him, it would be a signal political achievement.

And if Morrison doesn’t want to, Labor, the Greens, independent MPs and conscientious LNP MPs should vote together to turn Howard’s ETS into law right away. With political will, “something different” can start now.

– ref. Bushfires won’t change climate policy overnight. But Morrison can shift the Coalition without losing face – http://theconversation.com/bushfires-wont-change-climate-policy-overnight-but-morrison-can-shift-the-coalition-without-losing-face-129354

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Rhonda Garad, Senior Lecturer and Research Fellow in Knowledge Translation, Monash University

We have seen increasingly dramatic headlines over the years on the risks of menopausal hormone therapy (MHT), also known as hormone replacement therapy.

An alarming study in 2002, which found an apparent increased risk of breast cancer in women who took MHT, prompted the first of these headlines.

But newer evidence has been reassuring. It’s also a reminder that when considering your options, any risk associated with taking MHT needs to be balanced with the benefits.

This balance is the main thing your GP will consider when discussing whether MHT is right for you.

Read more: Making sense of menopausal hormone therapy means understanding the benefits as well as the risks

Remind me, what’s all this about breast cancer?

In 2002, the Women’s Health Initiative study found women who took MHT had a 26% increased risk of breast cancer. This finding, which was later disputed, led to a 55% drop in MHT use in the next three years.

A reanalysis of the data showed a lower risk of breast cancer in some women.

And in 2016, a statement from the world’s leading menopause specialists said the benefits of MHT are more likely to outweigh the risks if women with symptoms start taking it before they turn 60 or within ten years after menopause.

Read more: What causes breast cancer in women? What we know, don’t know and suspect

Then a study published in The Lancet in recent months suggested the risks might be greater than once thought.

However, this study combined the results of previous ones, including observational studies, which have limitations. Observational studies show associations between one factor and another, rather than one causes the other. So factors other than MHT might be at play in increasing a woman’s risk of breast cancer. As a result, these studies tend to overestimate the risks.

Other risks linked with MHT include thromboembolism (a type of blood clot). And in older women, there’s an increased risk of stroke.

So, if you are one of approximately one-third of women aged 40-65 suffering moderate to severe menopausal symptoms, what do you need to know?

What type of symptoms are we talking about?

Most women experience menopause (the date of her last period) at around 45-55 years of age. Some women’s periods stop before then, either spontaneously or due to some medical treatment, with varying symptoms and health risks.

However, menopausal symptoms may start before periods stop, and last on average seven to ten years. For a minority of women, symptoms can last for longer.

Physical symptoms include hot flushes, night sweats and vaginal dryness, with severe symptoms profoundly reducing women’s quality of life.

What are the benefits of MHT?

MHT is available in different forms such as a tablet, skin patch, gel, and vaginal pessary or cream. These have advantages and disadvantages.

For example, some act on the whole body such as tablets, gels, and patches while others such as vaginal creams and pessaries act on the local area only. Those that act locally have no increased risk of breast cancer or thromboembolism.

Read more: Don’t count on freezing ovarian tissue to delay menopause or stop your biological clock

MHT is an effective treatment for hot flushes, night sweats and vaginal dryness. Other treatments, such as bioidentical or natural hormones, have safety concerns. Others, such as phytoestrogens and many other herbal preparations, don’t work.

MHT also helps prevent osteoporosis, and may help prevent colon cancer, type 2 diabetes and coronary heart disease.

Different risks and benefits for each woman

The balance of risks versus benefits of MHT varies from woman to woman, depending on a number of factors. Here are some hypothetical examples.

1. Gina is a healthy 52 year old with menopausal symptoms, a family history of breast cancer (her mother was diagnosed at 65), and low bone density

If Gina’s menopausal symptoms are troubling her, then MHT is a reasonable option. Not only is it the most effective treatment for her symptoms, it has the added benefit for bone health. Gina will need a comprehensive assessment to decide the best type of MHT.

Breast cancer is the most feared risk of MHT. The risk depends on the type of MHT and how long it’s used. But that risk declines after Gina stops using it.

The Lancet paper showed that for women with a family history of breast cancer like Gina, MHT use does not further increase her breast cancer risk. But it also showed that longer use of MHT is associated with a slower decline in risk after stopping using it.

2. Sarah has menopausal symptoms, has had both ovaries removed and a hysterectomy, is obese and drinks moderately

Sarah’s going through what’s called a “surgical menopause” and has the physical symptoms that go with it, including hot flushes.

Her obesity and moderate drinking already increases her risk of breast cancer. The Lancet paper showed that the use of oestrogen only-MHT (the type of MHT she’d take because of her hysterectomy) does not further add to this risk.

However, her obesity is associated with an increased risk of blood clots. As the risk of blood clots increases if she takes oestrogen in tablet form, MHT as a skin patch or gel would be the best choice.

Losing weight may also improve Sarah’s hot flushes.

3. Sam went through menopause before she turned 45

One in 10 women experience menopause before the age of 45, like Sam.

This puts her at a 30% lower risk of breast cancer compared with women who experience menopause later in life.

However, early menopause is associated with a greater risk of premature death, including from heart disease as well as substantially greater risk of osteoporosis and fragility fracture in later life.

So her GP will likely advise her to take MHT until the average age of menopause. This restores her breast cancer, heart, and mortality risk to approximately what it would have been if she had not gone through an early menopause. It also reduces her risk of bone thinning (osteoporosis).

4. Lee is 65, has vaginal dryness but no more hot flushes

Vaginal symptoms, including discomfort from vaginal dryness, are common in postmenopausal women like Lee. And vaginal oestrogen preparations as a pessary are an effective and safe option.

Vaginal oestrogen acts locally so does not improve bone health and does not increase blood clots or breast cancer risk.

So how best to act on this?

The decision about whether to use MHT, which form, or to consider an alternative to MHT to manage your symptoms can be a complex one.

So, it’s important to form a partnership with your doctor who can guide you to make an informed decision. You may need several discussions over a period of time to fully consider what is right for you.

– ref. Thinking of menopausal hormone therapy? Here’s what you can expect from your GP – http://theconversation.com/thinking-of-menopausal-hormone-therapy-heres-what-you-can-expect-from-your-gp-124174

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Elizabeth Shi, Lecturer, Graduate School of Business and Law, RMIT University

Amid thick bushfire smoke in cities including Canberra and Melbourne, employers need to consider their legal obligations.

Some have directed their workers not to turn up in order to avoid to occupational health and safety risks. Among them is the Commonwealth department of home affairs which last week asked most of its staff to stay away from its Canberra headquarters for 48 hours.

Other employers want to know where they stand.

Each state and territory has its own occupational health and safety laws.
However most line up with the so-called Model Act, a federal act of parliament intended to harmonise state laws.

Under section 17 it imposes on employers a duty to, so far as is reasonably practicable, ensure health and safety by eliminating or minimising risks.

This employer’s duty applies not only to its employees, but also to other types of workers including independent contractors.

Meaning of ‘reasonably practical”

Under the section 18 of the Model Act, “reasonably practicable” means

that which is, or was at a particular time, reasonably able to be done in relation to ensuring health and safety, taking into account and weighing up all relevant matters

By themselves, these words aren’t much of a guide, so the Act includes examples of “relevant matters”, among them:

• the likelihood of a hazard or risk occurring

• the degree of harm that might result

• what the employer knows or ought reasonably know about the hazard or risk, and ways of eliminating or minimising hazard or risk

• the availability and suitability of ways to eliminate or reduce hazard or risk

• the cost associated with available ways of eliminating or minimising the risk, including whether the cost is grossly disproportionate to the risk

Meaning of ‘likelihood’

Employers should make themselves aware of the risk of an air quality hazard.
This can be achieved by checking the most up to date air quality index in the location on an environment protection authority website:

NSW

Victoria

Queensland

South Australia

Western Australia

Tasmania

Northern Territory

Australian Capital Territory

Workers who work outdoors are more likely to be subject to harmful effects of bushfire smoke than indoor workers.

They are more likely to experience irritation to their airways, nose and eyes.

They might also experience low visibility which might make their work more dangerous.

The machines they operate could also be impacted by the smoke and dust in a way which would make operating them more dangerous.

Special measures should be taken to protect workers who work outdoors, such as providing them with face masks or rescheduling their work.

Meaning of ‘degree of harm’

It is certainly arguable the likelihood of harm for indoor workers is much lower, especially if the air quality in their workplace is the same or even better than the air quality in their homes.

Employers should have up-to-date information about the health of their workers, especially those workers who have pre-existing conditions that might predispose them to harm from smoke.

Among these would be workers who have asthma or other respiratory disorders.

Special steps should be taken to protect them, taking into account their pre-existing conditions.

Meaning of ‘reasonably ought to know’

Employers should be checking up-to-date information on an environment protection authority website and on the website of Safe Work Australia which is the Commonwealth regulator for occupational health and safety laws.

It’s very likely law enforcers will presume the information on these websites constitute information the employer ought to have known in determining the appropriate action to take.

For example, it would be difficult for an employer to argue they didn’t know P2 rated face masks should be provided to workers when the Safe Work Australia website specifically mentions them as an appropriate way of eliminating or reducing air quality hazards.

Meaning of ‘availability of ways to reduce risk’

Safe Work Australia directs employers to have in place measures to manage the risks to health and safety of working outdoors when air quality is reduced, including:

• working indoors (where possible)

• rescheduling outdoor work until conditions improve

• ensuring buildings and equipment are functioning correctly and have not been affected by dust or debris

• cleaning dust and debris off outdoor surfaces

• providing personal protective equipment such as eye protection and correctly fitted P2-rated face masks.

Meaning of ‘cost of minimising hazard’

The cost of elimination or minimising hazard will be higher for some measures than others.

For example, it might cost more to direct workers to stay home than to provide face masks.

Read more: Our buildings aren’t made to keep out bushfire smoke. Here’s what you can do

These costs need to be weighed up against the likelihood and degree of potential harm.

If the likelihood and degree of harm is high, it’s unlikely law enforcers will be particularly sympathetic to arguments about cost.

– ref. What employers need to know: the legal risk of asking staff to work in smokey air – http://theconversation.com/what-employers-need-to-know-the-legal-risk-of-asking-staff-to-work-in-smokey-air-129432

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Anthony Veal, Adjunct Professor, Business School, University of Technology Sydney

When Microsoft gave its 2,300 employees in Japan five Fridays off in a row, it found productivity jumped 40%.

When financial services company Perpetual Guardian in New Zealand trialled eight Fridays off in a row, its 240 staff reported feeling more committed, stimulated and empowered.

Read more: Working four-day weeks for five days’ pay? Research shows it pays off

Around the world there’s renewed interest in reducing the standard working week. But a question arises. Is instituting the four-day week, while retaining the eight-hour workday, the best way to reduce working hours?

Arguably, retaining the five-day week but cutting the working day to seven or six hours is a better way to go.

Shorter days, then weeks

History highlights some of the differences between the two options.

At the height of the Industrial Revolution, in the 1850s, a 12-hour working day and a six-day working week – 72 hours in total – was common.

Mass campaigns, vigorously opposed by business owners, emerged to reduce the length of the working day, initially from 12 hours to ten, then to eight.

Building workers in Victoria, Australia, were among the first in the world to secure an eight-hour day, in 1856. For most workers in most countries, though, it did not become standard until the first decades of the 20th century.

The campaign for shorter working days was based largely on worker fatigue and health and safety concerns. But it was also argued that working men needed time to read and study, and would be better husbands, fathers and citizens.

Reducing the length of the working week from six days came later in the 20th century.

First it was reduced to five-and-a-half days, then to five, resulting in the creation of “the weekend”. This occurred in most of the industrialised world from the 1940s to 1960s. In Australia the 40-hour five-day working week became the law of the land in 1948. These changes occurred despite two world wars and the Great Depression.

Stalled campaign

In the 1970s, campaigns for reduced working hours ground to a halt in most industrialised countries.

As more women have joined the paid workforce, however, the total workload (paid and unpaid) for the average family increased. This led to concerns about “time squeeze” and overwork.

The issue has re-emerged over the past decade or so from a range of interests, including feminism and environmentalism.

Read more: It’s time to put the 15-hour work week back on the agenda

Back on the agenda

A key concern is still worker fatigue, both mental and physical. This is not just from paid work but also from the growing demands of family and social life in the 21st century. It arises on a daily, weekly, annual and lifetime basis.

We seek to recover from daily fatigue during sleep and daily leisure. Some residual fatigue nevertheless accumulates over the week, which we recover from over the weekend. Over longer periods we recover during public holidays (long weekends) and annual holidays and even, over a lifetime, during retirement.

So would we be better off working fewer hours a day or having a longer weekend?

Arguably it is the pressure to fit family and personal commitments into the few hours between getting home and bedtime that is the main source of today’s time-squeeze, particularly for families. This suggests the priority should be the shorter working day rather than the four-day week.

Read more: The ethics of the 4 day work week. It’s not just about the hours

Sociologist Cynthia Negrey is among those who suggest reducing the length of the workday, especially to mesh with children’s school days, as part of the feminist enterprise to alleviate the “sense of daily time famine” she writes about in her 2012 book, Work Time: Conflict, Control, and Change.

Historical cautions

It’s worth bearing in mind the historical fall in the working week from 72 to 40 hours was achieved at a rate of only about 3.5 hours a decade. The biggest single step – from six to five-and-half days – was a reduction of 8% in working hours. Moving to a six-hour day or a four-day week would involve a reduction of about 20% in one step. It therefore seems practical to campaign for this in a number of stages.

We should also treat with caution results of one-off, short-term, single-company experiments with the four-day week. These typically occur in organisations with leadership and work cultures willing and able to experiment with the concept. Employees are likely to see themselves as “special” and may be conscious of the need to make the experiment work. Painless economy-wide application cannot be taken for granted.

– ref. A life of long weekends is alluring, but the shorter working day may be more practical – http://theconversation.com/a-life-of-long-weekends-is-alluring-but-the-shorter-working-day-may-be-more-practical-127817

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Marcus O’Donnell, Associate Professor, Pro Vice-Chancellor, Teaching and Learning, Deakin University

There’s a strange absence at the heart of the National Gallery of Victoria’s summer blockbuster: Keith Haring, Jean-Michel Basquiat: Crossing Lines, and it’s not just the ghosts of these two vibrant artists who died tragically young. It’s the ghost of Haring’s sexuality, which although an abiding theme of his work seems to have been deliberately excised.

Keith Haring shot to fame when he started to fill blank, black-papered, ad spaces in the New York underground with his chalk line drawings. He completed over 5,000 of these over a five-year period in the early 1980s.

One of the fascinating pieces in the NGV’s sprawling tribute to Haring and his friend Basquiat, is a short video of Haring at work in the subway.

The speed at which this elfin figure darts around, completing each image in an astonishing single gesture, tells us something about the way Haring put his body into his art. As one critic put it: “He danced his drawings, perceiving the act as a performance and a shamanistic tribal ritual of everyday life.”

This shamanistic energy was directly linked to Haring’s sense of himself as a gay man. He told his biographer the flow of his drawings was connected to his sense of sexuality and this sexual/artistic flow was about establishing a “universal connection”.

“Sexual energy may be the single strongest impulse I feel – more than art,” he wrote in his journals.

Yet the words “sexuality” or “gay” don’t appear anywhere in the wall notes for this show. There is one passing reference to his homosexuality: describing a house where one of the works was created, the wall card notes that Haring lived there with his boyfriend Jean Dubose and others.

Read more: ‘Nothing quite prepares you for the impact of this exhibition’: Haring Basquiat at the NGV

But the dance around Haring’s sexuality is even more troubling when we contrast the public notes accompanying the show with the exhibition catalogue. The blurb on the catalogue says both artists “employed signs, symbols and words to explore ideas around race, sexuality, spirituality and other aspects of contemporary life”.

The introductory wall note in the gallery tells a similar story but omits the reference to sexuality: “Haring and Basquiat were humanists. Indifference was not their style. Each artist’s work speaks of struggles against exploitation, consumer society, repression, racism and genocide.” Why this difference in emphasis?

In the audio tour highlighting how the glittery sheen of Haring and Basquiat’s celebrity often obscured the true significance of their work, Jenny Holzer, an artistic contemporary, comments:

At times it seemed the fluff took over. Which was unfortunate, because the important political and cultural content, the societal references that were in both men’s work, were neglected in the party and money frenzy. You’d have to be dim to miss the gay pride and liberation message in Keith’s work, and that Jean-Michel was a race man, but people didn’t always talk about that.

While the NGV show attends to the theme of race it neglects the theme of gay pride in Haring’s work, seeming to commit the very mistake Holzer warns against.

It is puzzling that none of Haring’s many sexually explicit and gay-themed works have been included in this show: a particularly odd choice when Haring’s groundbreaking gay and HIV themed work would have played well into the exhibtion’s overarching narrative of political involvement. Was this a misguided attempt to make it more “family friendly”? (Many of the images are accompanied by “For kids” wall panels.)

Writing in Vanity Fair in 1997, art critic and former editor of Warhol’s Interview magazine, Ingrid Sischy warned staff at New York’s Whitney gallery not to fall into this trap as they prepared one of the first large Haring retrospectives. It’s sad I am writing this article with a similar message over 20 years later.

“[Haring’s] work … came after a long period of puritanism in art, and his images of the body, sex, and homosexuality were part of the taboo-busting that was as intrinsic to this period as the Reagan rightwingers,” Sischy writes.

The NGV exhibition celebrates both Basquiat and Haring’s connection to Andy Warhol and the lineage and influence is obvious. But Sischy notes that in one respect Haring “went beyond his idol”. Shes continues:

Because of the tenor of the times, Haring’s queer sexuality was much more out-front than Warhol’s enigmatic image, behavior, and sensibility … Haring’s open homosexuality cost him with critics who just couldn’t go there and who didn’t see sex as art, politics, a language all its own for a generation absorbed in exploring it.

His response to HIV

What is perhaps most shocking about the NGV show is the complete absence of images representing Haring’s response to HIV. The epidemic is mentioned as one of his political concerns but not depicted except abstractly in the extraordinary late apocalyptic piece Walking in the Rain.

Haring’s Ignorance = Fear Silence = Death was an iconic artistic intervention of the early AIDS epidemic and his widely distributed safe sex images were used in education campaigns that arguably saved lives. Haring set up the Keith Haring Foundation to help continue this HIV education work after his death.

In an interview with Rolling Stone published six months before he died, where he spoke about the importance of his HIV education work, Haring also spoke openly about being HIV positive and facing the end of his “story”.

When asked by the interviewer whether he thought all gay men should be open about their homosexuality he replied that people should be “normal about it”.

In summing up Haring’s distinctiveness historian Michael Murphy writes: “Haring unashamedly and unselfconsciously dared to express homosexual sex as SEX not subtext, oblique references or innuendo.”

For Haring sex and sexuality were a normal part of life and that is why it proliferates as a theme throughout his work from his earliest art school paintings to his extraordinary mural for the NYC LGBTI Centre, completed in the last year of his life to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Stonewall.

To reduce Basquiat to a black artist or Haring to a gay artist would be a simplistic misreading, ignoring the wonderful complexity of their work.

But if this exhibition had failed to recognise the importance to Basquiat’s work of his experience of being a young, black man, in the same way it has ignored Haring’s gayness, it would have been condemned.

By ignoring Haring’s sexuality the exhibition also misses a central narrative of the crossing lines in the parallel journeys of these two artistic pioneers. They each found a powerful vernacular language for their sense of identity and sense of difference. This is what makes them so relevant and so powerful today.

– ref. Why did the NGV put Keith Haring back in the closet? – http://theconversation.com/why-did-the-ngv-put-keith-haring-back-in-the-closet-129443

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Timothy Graham, Senior lecturer, Queensland University of Technology

In the first week of 2020, hashtag #ArsonEmergency became the focal point of a new online narrative surrounding the bushfire crisis.

The message: the cause is arson, not climate change.

Police and bushfire services (and some journalists) have contradicted this claim.

We studied about 300 Twitter accounts driving the #ArsonEmergency hashtag to identify inauthentic behaviour. We found many accounts using #ArsonEmergency were behaving “suspiciously”, compared to those using #AustraliaFire and #BushfireAustralia.

Accounts peddling #ArsonEmergency carried out activity similar to what we’ve witnessed in past disinformation campaigns, such as the coordinated behaviour of Russian trolls during the 2016 US presidential election.

Bots, trolls and trollbots

The most effective disinformation campaigns use bot and troll accounts to infiltrate genuine political discussion, and shift it towards a different “master narrative”.

Bots and trolls have been a thorn in the side of fruitful political debate since Twitter’s early days. They mimic genuine opinions, akin to what a concerned citizen might display, with a goal of persuading others and gaining attention.

Bots are usually automated (acting without constant human oversight) and perform simple functions, such as retweeting or repeatedly pushing one type of content.

Troll accounts are controlled by humans. They try to stir controversy, hinder healthy debate and simulate fake grassroots movements. They aim to persuade, deceive and cause conflict.

We’ve observed both troll and bot accounts spouting disinformation regarding the bushfires on Twitter. We were able to distinguish these accounts as being inauthentic for two reasons.

First, we used sophisticated software tools including tweetbotornot, Botometer, and Bot Sentinel.

There are various definitions for the word “bot” or “troll”. Bot Sentinel says:

Propaganda bots are pieces of code that utilize Twitter API to automatically follow, tweet, or retweet other accounts bolstering a political agenda. Propaganda bots are designed to be polarizing and often promote content intended to be deceptive… Trollbot is a classification we created to describe human controlled accounts who exhibit troll-like behavior.

Some of these accounts frequently retweet known propaganda and fake news accounts, and they engage in repetitive bot-like activity. Other trollbot accounts target and harass specific Twitter accounts as part of a coordinated harassment campaign. Ideology, political affiliation, religious beliefs, and geographic location are not factors when determining the classification of a Twitter account.

These machine learning tools compared the behaviour of known bots and trolls with the accounts tweeting the hashtags #ArsonEmergency, #AustraliaFire, and #BushfireAustralia. From this, they provided a “score” for each account suggesting how likely it was to be a bot or troll account.

We also manually analysed the Twitter activity of suspicious accounts and the characteristics of their profiles, to validate the origins of #ArsonEmergency, as well as the potential motivations of the accounts spreading the hashtag.

Who to blame?

Unfortunately, we don’t know who is behind these accounts, as we can only access trace data such as tweet text and basic account information.

This graph shows how many times #ArsonEmergency was tweeted between December 31 last year and January 8 this year:

Previous bot and troll campaigns have been thought to be the work of foreign interference, such as Russian trolls, or PR firms hired to distract and manipulate voters.

The New York Times has also reported on perceptions that media magnate Rupert Murdoch is influencing Australia’s bushfire debate.

Read more: Weather bureau says hottest, driest year on record led to extreme bushfire season

Weeding-out inauthentic behaviour

In late November, some Twitter accounts began using #ArsonEmergency to counter evidence that climate change is linked to the severity of the bushfire crisis.

Below is one of the earliest examples of an attempt to replace #ClimateEmergency with #ArsonEmergency. The accounts tried to get #ArsonEmergency trending to drown out dialogue acknowledging the link between climate change and bushfires.

The hashtag was only tweeted a few times in 2019, but gained traction this year in a sustained effort by about 300 accounts.

A much larger portion of bot and troll-like accounts pushed #ArsonEmergency, than they did #AustraliaFire and #BushfireAustralia.

The narrative was then adopted by genuine accounts who furthered its spread.

On multiple occasions, we noticed suspicious accounts countering expert opinions while using the #ArsonEmergency hashtag.

Bad publicity

Since media coverage has shone light on the disinformation campaign, #ArsonEmergency has gained even more prominence, but in a different light.

Some journalists are acknowledging the role of disinformation bushfire crisis – and countering narrative the Australia has an arson emergency. However, the campaign does indicate Australia has a climate denial problem.

What’s clear to me is that Australia has been propelled into the global disinformation battlefield.

Read more: Watching our politicians fumble through the bushfire crisis, I’m overwhelmed by déjà vu

Keep your eyes peeled

It’s difficult to debunk disinformation, as it often contains a grain of truth. In many cases, it leverages people’s previously held beliefs and biases.

Humans are particularly vulnerable to disinformation in times of emergency, or when addressing contentious issues like climate change.

Online users, especially journalists, need to stay on their toes.

The accounts we come across on social media may not represent genuine citizens and their concerns. A trending hashtag may be trying to mislead the public.

Right now, it’s more important than ever for us to prioritise factual news from reliable sources – and identify and combat disinformation. The Earth’s future could depend on it.

– ref. Bushfires, bots and arson claims: Australia flung in the global disinformation spotlight – http://theconversation.com/bushfires-bots-and-arson-claims-australia-flung-in-the-global-disinformation-spotlight-129556

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Geoffrey Dell, Associate Professor/Discipline Leader Accident Investigation and Forensics, CQUniversity Australia

While there is much speculation about the cause of the Ukrainian airliner that crashed after take-off from Tehran’s airport this week, killing all 176 people on board, there is presently very little factual information to go on.

Western intelligence has indicated a surface-to-air missile likely hit the plane in what may have been an “unintentional” act – an assertion Iran quickly dismissed.

As with any other crash, the world aviation community needs to know what caused this one in the interest of ongoing flight safety.

Political tensions between Iran and the US may make the investigation more challenging, but they should not prevent a thorough systematic analysis from occurring and the cause of the crash to ultimately be established.

Read more: Iran and US step back from all-out war, giving Trump a win (for now)

Who will have access to the black boxes?

The flight recorders hold the key to establishing what actually happened and why. And here’s where the political tensions are most problematic – Iran initially said it would not hand over the black boxes to the manufacturer of the aircraft, Boeing, or the US.

But new reports say Iran has now invited the US National Transportation Safety Board and Boeing to take part in the investigation.

Under the International Civil Aviation Organisation Annex 13 convention, the US has the right to appoint an adviser to the investigation, as does the aircraft manufacturer. The convention presumes a level of cooperation between all parties involved in crash investigations, which could prove difficult in this case. But that doesn’t necessarily mean a proper investigation won’t or can’t be conducted.

Responsibility for the investigation sits with the Iranians, but under the UN Civil Aviation Conventions, they can request assistance from any other country, if they don’t have the capacity to conduct it themselves.

There are many other countries with the necessary expertise to assist, including recovering flight data from recorders with very significant damage. France, Canada, UK, the Netherlands, Germany and Australia could all help, for example.

Other countries can only step in, however, if invited by Iran or if Iran chooses not to conduct the investigation.

What’s most important is that whoever leads the investigation must have access to all the information – the wreckage itself, flight data, radar data, maintenance records, crew data, flight plans, load sheets, and passenger and cargo manifests. Otherwise, the wrong conclusions can be reached.

Why is a field investigation important?

There also needs to be a parallel field investigation analysing the wreckage.

First, investigators should be ensuring they have accounted for all the wreckage. If some parts separated from the aircraft in-flight, they may be found some distance from the main wreckage site and may hold key clues that could lead to a better understanding of the cause of the crash.

As such, the terrain under the flight path needs to be surveyed carefully to locate all items from the aircraft.

Clearly, it will also be important to examine the wreckage of the engines for any evidence of pre-crash damage.

Read more: Here’s how airplane crash investigations work, according to an aviation safety expert

For example, if a fire had been burning inside the engine cowling, there may be evidence of scorching. Analysis of the internal engine components should also make clear whether the engines were still delivering power when the plane made impact with the ground or if there was a pre-crash structural or component failure.

Investigators should also look at the wing and fuselage surfaces next to the engines for any pre-impact damage. If an engine failure occurred, there may be evidence of impact damage from engine components after they burst out of the armoured casing.

This was the case with the fatal Air France Concorde crash in 2000, as well as the uncontained engine failure that nearly caused Qantas flight QF32 to crash en route from Singapore to Sydney in 2010.

Can evidence show if a missile hit the plane?

Analysing the aircraft engines, wing and fuselage surfaces may also provide evidence if the aircraft was struck by a missile.

This was the case with Malaysia Airlines flight MH17, which was shot down over Ukraine in 2014, killing all 298 people aboard. There was clear evidence of the aircraft structures being penetrated from outside the plane by high-speed particles.

Similar forensic analysis can be conducted on the remnants of the Boeing 737 in Iran, even if a high degree of fragmentation occurred in the crash. This should reveal the truth if a missile was responsible.

Read more: MH17 charges: who the suspects are, what they’re charged with, and what happens next

Would Boeing’s exclusion hurt the investigation?

Of course, it would be usual for the aircraft manufacturer to be involved. After all, it knows more about the technologies involved in building and operating the aircraft than anyone else.

That said, there are many global agencies that also know a lot about the engineering and operation of the B737-800 plane, such as the airworthiness authorities in other countries, who could be called upon to participate.

No doubt, Ukraine will be heavily involved, as will Canada, due to the number of Canadians who lost their lives in the crash. So, if Boeing was excluded from the investigation, it might be a set-back, but not a show-stopper.

Boeing is, however, responsible for assuring the ongoing safety standards for the global B737 fleet, so whether it is directly involved in the investigation or not, it is imperative the reasons for the crash are shared with global aviation agencies, the manufacturer and all other airlines.

It is worth reflecting in these sad occasions that the purpose of a crash investigation is to prevent future incidents. Unless the actual cause of this crash is understood, any possible problems in the global flight safety system may go unrectified, making the risk of future crashes higher than it otherwise would be.

The impact of the crash on the families of the victims is also immense and immeasurable. This is another reason why a proper, thorough and systematic investigation is so important. It ensures those who have tragically lost their lives, and their families and friends, will not have suffered in vain.

– ref. What investigators should be looking for in the Iran plane crash: an expert explains – http://theconversation.com/what-investigators-should-be-looking-for-in-the-iran-plane-crash-an-expert-explains-129689

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Juan Pablo Guerschman, Senior Research Scientist, CSIRO

In recent days, many worrying bushfire maps have been circulating online, some appearing to suggest all of Australia is burning.

You might have seen this example, decried by some as misleading, prompting this Instagram post by its creator:

As he explained, the image isn’t a NASA photo. What a satellite actually “sees” is quite different.

I’ll explain how we use data collected by satellites to estimate how much of an area is burning, or has already been burnt, and what this information should look like once it’s mapped.

Read more: A crisis of underinsurance threatens to scar rural Australia permanently

Reflective images

When astronauts look out their window in space, this is what they see:

It’s similar to what you might see from an aeroplane window, but higher and covering a wider area.

As you read this, many unmanned satellites are orbiting and photographing Earth. These images are used to monitor fires in real-time. They fall into two categories: reflective and thermal.

Reflective images capture information in the visible range of the electromagnetic spectrum (in other words, what we can see). But they also capture information in wavelengths we can’t see, such as infrared wavelengths.

If we use only the visible wavelengths, we can render the image similar to what we might see with the naked eye from a satellite. We call these “true colour” images.

Note that the image doesn’t have political boundaries, as these aren’t physical features. To make satellite imagery useful for navigation, we overlay the map with location points.

From this, we can predict where the fires are by looking at the smoke. However, the fires themselves are not directly visible.

‘False colour’ images

Shortwave infrared bands are less sensitive to smoke and more sensitive to fire, which means they can tell us where fire is present.

Converting these wavelengths into visible colours produces what we call “false colour” images. For instance:

In this shortwave infrared image, we start to “see” under the smoke, and can identify active fires. We can also learn more about the areas that are already burnt.

Thermal and hotspots

As their name suggests, thermal images measure how hot or cold everything in the frame is. Active fires are detected as “hotspots” and mapped as points on the surface.

While reflective imagery is only useful when obtained by a satellite during daytime, thermal hotspots can be measured at night – doubling our capacity to observe active fires.

This information can be used to create maps showing the aggregation of hotspots over several days, weeks or months.

Geoscience Australia’s Digital Earth hotspots service shows hotspots across the continent in the last 72 hours. It’s worth reading the “about” section to learn the limitations or potential for error in the map.

Read more: Spread the word: the value of local information in disaster response

When hotspots, which show “hot” pixels, are shown as extremely big icons, or are collected over long periods, the results can be deceiving. They can indicate a much larger area to be under fire than what is really burning.

For example, it would be wrong to believe all the areas in red in the map below are burning or have already burnt. It’s also unclear over what period of time the hotspots were aggregated.

Get smart

Considering all of the above, there are some key questions you can ask to gauge the authenticity of a bushfire map. These are:

• Where does this map come from, and who produced it?
• is this a single satellite image, or one using hotspots overlaid on a map? • what are the colours representing? • do I know when this was taken? • if this map depicts hotspots, over what period of time were they collected? A day, a whole year? • is the size of the hotspots representative of the area that is actually burning?

So, the next time you see a bushfire map, think twice before pressing the share button.

– ref. 6 things to ask yourself before you share a bushfire map on social media – http://theconversation.com/6-things-to-ask-yourself-before-you-share-a-bushfire-map-on-social-media-129557

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brian Oliver, Research Leader in Respiratory cellular and molecular biology at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research and Professor, Faculty of Science, University of Technology Sydney

In previous years, Australians might have been exposed to bushfire smoke for a few days, or even a week. But this bushfire season is extreme in every respect. Smoke haze has now regularly featured in Australian weather reports for several weeks, stretching across months in some areas.

What we considered to be short-term exposure we must now call medium-term exposure.

Given this is a new phenomenon, we don’t know for sure what prolonged exposure to bushfire smoke could mean for future health. But here’s what air pollution and health data can tell us about the sorts of harms we might be looking at.

Read more: Climate change set to increase air pollution deaths by hundreds of thousands by 2100

Short-term effects

We know poor air quality is having immediate effects, from irritated eyes and throats, to more serious incidents requiring hospital admission – particularly for people with existing respiratory and heart conditions.

After the smoke haze hit Melbourne on Monday, Ambulance Victoria recorded a 51% increase in calls for breathing difficulties.

This aligns with Australian and international research on the acute effects of exposure to bushfire smoke.

But the long-term effects aren’t so clear.

Long-term effects: what we know

When considering the long-term health consequences of air pollution, we draw on data from heavily polluted regions, typically in Africa, or Asia, where people are exposed to high levels of airborne pollution for years.

It’s no surprise long-term exposure to air pollution negatively affects health over their lifetime. It’s associated with an increased risk of several cancers, and chronic health conditions like respiratory and heart disease.

The World Health Organisation estimates ambient air pollution contributes to 4.2 million premature deaths globally per year.

A recent study in China reported long-term exposure to a high concentration of ultrafine particles called PM2.5 (which we find in bushfire smoke) is linked to an increased risk of stroke.

Read more: How does poor air quality from bushfire smoke affect our health?

We also know the dose of exposure is important. So the worse the pollution, the greater the the health effects.

It’s likely some of these long-term effects will occur in Australia if prolonged bushfires become an annual event.

Experimental studies

Observational studies, like the Chinese one mentioned above, demonstrate the long-term health effects of long-term exposure to air pollution. But we don’t really have any studies like this following populations which have experienced short- or medium-term exposure.

To explore the health risks of more limited exposure, we can look to experimental data from cell and animal models.

These studies follow the models for days (short-term) or weeks (medium-term). They show exposure to any type of airborne pollution – from traffic, bushfires, wood or coal smoke – is detrimental for health.

The results show increased inflammation in the body, and depending on the model, increased incidence of respiratory or heart disease.

What about bushfire smoke?

We don’t have a lot of experimental data on the effects of bushfire smoke specifically, apart from a few studies on cells in the lab.

In my lab we’ve found the short-term in-vitro effects of bushfire smoke are comparable to the smoke from cigarettes. This does not however mean the long-term heath effects would be the same.

Read more: Pregnant women should take extra care to minimise their exposure to bushfire smoke

If we think about what’s burning during a bushfire – grass, leaves, twigs, bushes and trees – it’s also reasonable to draw on experimental data from wood smoke.

Wood smoke contains at least 200 different chemicals; some of them possible carcinogens.

In one small study, ten volunteers were exposed to wood smoke for four 15 minute periods over two hours. Afterwards, participants experienced increased neutophis, a type of agressive white blood cell, in both their lungs and circulation. The concentration of particulate matter in the wood smoke was lower than the levels we’ve seen in Sydney.

These short term studies show bushfire smoke is toxic, and it’s this toxicity which is likely to cause long-term effects.

One review found lifelong exposure to wood smoke, for example from indoor heaters, is associated with a 20% increased risk of developing lung cancer. Though it’s important to remember this is long-term exposure; the risks associated with medium-term exposure are not yet known.

How can we apply these findings?

Taking data from one type of airborne pollution and applying it to different pollutants – for example comparing the smoke from only one type of wood to bushfire pollution – is complex. The chemical make up is likely to differ between pollutants, so we need to be cautious extrapolating results.

We also need to be wary about how we translate results from cell and animal studies to humans. Different people are likely to respond to bushfire smoke differently. Our genetic make up is important here.

And with variable factors like at what age the exposure starts, how long it lasts, and other factors we’re exposed to during our lives (which don’t exist in a petri dish), it’s difficult to ascertain how many people will be at risk, and who in particular.

Looking past the haze

The human body actually has a remarkable capacity to cope with air pollution. It appears our genes help protect us from some of the toxic effects of smoke inhalation.

But this doesn’t mean we’re immune to the effect of bushfire smoke; just that we can tolerate a certain amount.

So would a once in a lifetime medium-term exposure have a chronic effect? At the moment there’s no way of answering this.

Read more: How rising temperatures affect our health

But if, as many people fear, this medium term exposure becomes a regular event, it could cross into the long-term exposure we see in some countries, where people are exposed to poor air quality for most of the year. In this scenario, there’s clear evidence we’ll be at higher risk of disease and premature death.

For now, we desperately need studies to help us understand the effects of medium-term exposure to bushfire smoke.

– ref. We know bushfire smoke affects our health, but the long-term consequences are hazy – http://theconversation.com/we-know-bushfire-smoke-affects-our-health-but-the-long-term-consequences-are-hazy-129451

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Salvatore Ferraro, PhD candidate, RMIT University

Calls by the head of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission Rod Sims for Australian businesses to cut the hurdle rates of return they expect on new investments should be taken with a grain of salt.

A hurdle rate is the minimum annual return that an investor or firm demands in order to allow a new project to go ahead.

For years, interest rates have been falling, cutting the cost of borrowing, but the hurdle rates of return demanded from that borrowing have remained little changed.

Sims told the Australian Financial Review this month that the rates of return demanded should be lower because interest rates were lower.

“We don’t want to lose investment that we should otherwise get because of hurdle rates that are too high,” he said.

“And we don’t want overseas companies coming in and buying our assets because they’ve got more realistic hurdle rates”.

It is straight from the Reserve Bank’s playbook.

Both the present Reserve Bank governor Phillip Lowe and his predecessor Glenn Stevens have said the same thing.

“We hear reports that a hurdle rate of return of 13-14% has been hard-wired into the corporate culture in some companies,” Lowe said in October.

Yet, “at low interest rates, many investments that didn’t make sense at higher interest rates should now make sense”.

This is especially so for investments with long-term payoffs, because future returns no longer need to be discounted as highly. This means that low interest rates give us the opportunity to lengthen our horizons and think about projects with really long-term payoffs.

Lowe and Sims are right to observe that some hurdle rates remain surprisingly high.

What if the reluctance to invest is rational?

Investment in mining and manufacturing projects is way below earlier peaks notwithstanding record low interest rates, even though investment in other industries is close to its historical high.

Which suggests something else could be in play, and not only here. Some overseas hurdle rates are as high as 12% to 15%.

A dampened appetite for risk is one explanation, thanks to a rise in global economic policy uncertainty. Another is challenging business conditions, especially in Australia’s two largest sectors; banking and resources.

Consensus estimates of future profits have been downgraded.

Profit forecasts have been downgraded

Among the ASX 200, which are the 200 most valuable companies traded on the Australian Securities Exchange, the consensus forecast for annual returns has slid to its lowest point in three years. Among the major banks consensus estimates have slid to their lowest level in two decades.

This largely reflects the lift in minimum capital requirements imposed by the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority, higher compliance costs associated with the implementation of the banking royal commission recommendations and the divestment of high returning wealth management businesses whose activities are no longer tenable for banks in the wake of the royal commission.

Demands from shareholders have been upgraded

In contrast, the expected profitability of mining companies has improved. But they are increasingly disciplined about how they use their capital, focused instead on generating free cash flow.

They are conscious of catering to greater demand from their shareholders for dividends and share buybacks.

Those shareholders remember well the destructive growth strategies pursued at the peak of the China boom a decade ago.

Most are happy that the dividend payout ratio for the sector has climbed well above long term norms to 60%, meaning that six dollars out of every ten dollars of profit is paid out to shareholders rather than invested back in the business.

Read more: We asked 13 economists how to fix things. All back the RBA governor over the treasurer

Against this backdrop, the competition watchdog and the Reserve Bank bemoaning what they consider to be stubbornly high hurdle rates will do little to precipitate a recovery in investment.

The Reserve Bank would achieve more by making an unambiguous commitment to do whatever it takes to achieve its inflation target, which it has undershot for the past five years.

It would boost expectations for wages growth, which remains close to record lows, boost consumer spending, and make investment more worthwhile.

– ref. High hurdle rates are holding back businesses, but perhaps they should be – http://theconversation.com/high-hurdle-rates-are-holding-back-businesses-but-perhaps-they-should-be-129435

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Yves Rees, David Myers Research Fellow, La Trobe University

Today marks the 100th anniversary of the establishment of the League of Nations — the intergovernmental organisation, headquartered in Geneva, that emerged from the ashes of the first world war.

Although the League was branded a failure due to its inability to prevent the second world war, recent scholarship has stressed that its legacies continued long after 1939. As the template for modern global governance, and direct precursor to the United Nations, the League profoundly shaped the world we live in today.

For Australia, the League’s establishment marked the beginning of our independence on the global stage. Thanks to the lobbying of Prime Minister Billy Hughes, Australia was granted the right to participate as an autonomous member nation. For the first time, our young nation would step out from Britain’s shadow and speak for itself in international affairs.

But who would speak for Australia?

A century ago, Australia was renowned as an international leader in women’s rights. The Commonwealth Franchise Act (1902) made us the world’s first nation to grant white women the right to vote and stand for parliament. The League was also on board with equality of the sexes. Article 7 of the League Covenant stipulated that all positions were “open equally to men and women.”

Read more: Birth of a nation: how Australia empowering women taught the world a lesson

Yet despite Australia’s reputation as a feminist trailblazer, our 1920 and 1921 delegations to the annual League of Nations General Assembly were male-only affairs.

Australian women’s organisations were determined to get women included. From early 1921, the National Council of Women lobbied Prime Minister Billy Hughes to follow the example of Norway and Sweden and send a female delegate to Geneva. The President of the International Council of Women, Lady Aberdeen, also lent her support.

Hughes was loath to heed these calls but he did make a partial concession: the 1922 Australian League delegation would include a woman as “substitute” or “alternative” delegate, to represent the nation “on all questions relating to women and children.”

The individual chosen was Sydney feminist and playwright Marguerite Dale, who travelled to Geneva alongside three men.

Read more: Hidden women of history: Flos Greig, Australia’s first female lawyer and early innovator

Female substitute delegates

From 1922 until 1939, every Australian League delegation included a female substitute (the League formally disbanded in 1946, but no General Assemblies were held during the war). Local women’s organisations made nominations. The federal government made the final selection.

The women chosen tended to be prominent feminists and social reformers, such as Bessie Rischbieth (1935), founding president of the Australian Federation of Women Voters; pioneering woman doctor and National Council of Women leader Roberta Jull (1929); and Melbourne Argus journalist Stella May Allan, known as “Vesta” (1924).

These women were real-life versions of Edith Campbell Berry, the protagonist of Frank Moorhouse’s celebrated trilogy of novels Grand Days (1993), Dark Palace (2001) and Cold Light (2011), which depict an Australian woman’s diplomatic exploits in interwar Geneva.

Australia’s female delegates stayed at the Hotel de la Paix, overlooking Lake Geneva, and were swept up in a hectic schedule of meetings and social events. Expected to confine their activities to “women’s issues”, they were typically appointed to the fifth committee, concerned with humanitarian affairs.

Before an audience of international diplomats and global media, they spoke on issues such as the traffic in women and children and the welfare of adolescents.

One individual who deviated from “women’s issues” was 1927 substitute delegate Alice Moss, who became the first woman appointed to the League’s finance committee.

Read more: Bringing Edith home: Frank Moorhouse’s Cold Light

Also notably outspoken was Ethel Osborne, who in 1932 put forward a motion to the political committee to increase women’s involvement as delegates and secretariat officials.

After returning home, Australia’s female substitutes worked to mobilise public opinion in support of the League. At women’s groups and town halls nationwide, they delivered passionate entreaties about its importance. “If we were to allow it go out of existence, we would be stepping right back into the middle ages,” insisted 1936 substitute delegate Edith Waterworth.

Meanwhile, the campaign for a full woman delegate continued unsuccessfully. Indeed, for the life of the League, only men would represent Australia as full delegates.

Yet Australia was still one of the few countries to consistently include women in its League delegations.

There were only six women out of 177 total delegates at the 1922 General Assembly, a figure which climbed to 14 in 1930. As late as 1936, when 50 countries sent delegations to the League Assembly, there were still only a mere 12 women included.

Women at the table

The tide finally turned in 1943, when Australia began to recruit women into the diplomatic service. That year, Julia Drake-Brockman, Diana Hodgkinson and Bronnie Taylor were appointed the nation’s first female diplomatic cadets. In 1946, Drake-Brockman was named third secretary to the Australian delegation to the brand-new United Nations in New York.

At the UN, Drake-Brockman worked alongside feminist Jessie Street, who was instrumental in enshrining the principle of gender equality in the UN Charter.

In the UN era, Australian women’s diplomatic work would continue to be dogged by sexism — Drake-Brockman’s 1946 marriage prematurely ended her promising career – but they were permitted to represent the nation on ostensibly equal standing with men.

Yet it would take until 1974 for Australia to appoint its first female ambassador, and until 1997 to have a female Head of Mission to the UN.

And, importantly, aside from rare exceptions — such as Aboriginal activist Joyce Clague, who participated in a 1966 UNESCO conference — Australia’s Indigenous women and women of colour were not given opportunity to represent the nation on the global stage.

Only in 2018, when Julie-Ann Guivarra was appointed ambassador to Spain, was an Indigenous Australian finally included at the highest levels of international diplomacy.

– ref. The League of Nations was formed 100 years ago today. Meet the Australian women who lobbied to join it – http://theconversation.com/the-league-of-nations-was-formed-100-years-ago-today-meet-the-australian-women-who-lobbied-to-join-it-129185

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Benjamin T. Jones, Lecturer in History, CQUniversity Australia

Bill Shorten promised a plebiscite on Australia becoming a republic if he won the 2019 federal election. That did not happen but it is interesting to imagine what the result of such a vote would have been.

On the one hand, membership of the chief lobby group, the Australian Republic Movement, has been growing steadily since 2015. For monarchists, however, the popularity of the Princes William and Harry and their young families has been seen as crucial to maintaining the royal link.

This is why the decision of Harry and his wife Meghan Markle to “step back” from their position as senior royals and split their time between North America and Britain is significant.

A large part of the couple’s appeal is that they appear relatable when compared to the Queen or Prince Charles. It certainly is relatable for a couple in their 30s with a young family to want to move from home and be financially independent. The catch for monarchists is that much of the couple’s popularity comes from their rejecting traditional royal roles.

Harry’s public image has been carefully stage managed by Buckingham Palace. With his father, brother, nephews and niece all ahead of him, it is unlikely he will ever assume the throne. Nevertheless, he remains one of the most recognisable royals and is key to how the public, in Britain and Australia, sees the royal family.

As a younger man, Harry had a reputation for wild parties and was notoriously spotted wearing a Nazi uniform. His career in the military and his advocacy for wounded soldiers, however, have endeared him to many. His marriage to a popular actor was a further coup for the royal marketing team.

The Queen is the longest serving British sovereign, having reigned for 67 years. There has long been concern that her son, and next in line to the throne, Charles, does not share her popularity. Monarchists fear that his reign could spark republican movements around the Commonwealth and even in Britain.

The disturbing details of Prince Andrew’s relationship with sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have further eroded the reputation of the royal family. As a result, the roles of William and Harry as the public faces of the monarchy are seen as crucial. It is regularly rumoured the Queen may even bypass Charles to give the crown to William.

In this context, the decision of Harry and Meghan to step back and the perception that they, particularly Meghan, have been poorly treated by the royal family is a gift to republicans.

Australia and the monarchy

Australia’s relationship with the monarchy is complex. In the colonial era of the 19th century and the dominion era, until the middle of the 20th, the royals were seen as the epitome of Britishness. Crucially, Australians overwhelmingly also saw themselves as British.

The most spectacular example of a royal stepping back from their duties during this period was when Edward VIII abdicated in 1936. His decision to pursue a relationship with divorced, American, socialite Wallis Simpson caused a constitutional crisis. Australian prime minister Joseph Lyons concurred with other commonwealth leaders that she would not be accepted as queen so the king must abdicate.

Despite the scandal, it was never seriously proposed then that Australia should cut its ties with the British monarchy. This is a key contextual difference to today’s situation.

Harry and Meghan’s decision comes at a time when Australians are talking very seriously about becoming a republic, although recent polling has provided mixed results. A February 2018 poll by Research Now found 52% supported a republic with 25% unsure and just 22% supporting the monarchy.

A Newspoll in November 2018, just after a royal tour by Harry and Meghan, found only 40% supported a republic with 48% against. This was the first time since 1999 that a poll found more people opposed the change.

In 2019, it was even reportedly proposed that Harry might be made the governor-general of Australia. This move would have potentially boosted royal support but was ultimately dismissed.

A Dynata poll in June 2019 then found that support for a republic among under 25-year-olds had grown to 57%, with 50% of those 25-34 supporting a change.

With the future of the monarchy uncertain, Buckingham Palace appears disappointed with Harry and Meghan. An official statement noted “these are complicated issues that will take time to work through”. Reading between the lines, it’s likely the decision – reportedly made without consulting the Queen or Prince Charles – hurt.

The monarchy has transformed itself over the last century. Issues like divorce and marrying an American (both forbidden for Edward VIII) have been gradually, perhaps grudgingly, accepted. Its chameleon-like nature has let it survive from the age of empires to the age of democracy.

In principle, the issue of a republic (in Australia or Britain) is separate from the personalities of the royal family. Regardless, if Harry and Meghan are seen as separated from the monarchy, or worse yet, victims of it, its long term survival is threatened.

– ref. Prince Harry’s decision to ‘step back’ from the monarchy is a gift to republicans – http://theconversation.com/prince-harrys-decision-to-step-back-from-the-monarchy-is-a-gift-to-republicans-129624

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Hutchison, Associate Professor and ARC DECRA Fellow, The University of Queensland

With 26 fatalities, half a billion animals impacted and 10.7 million hectares of land burnt, Australia faces a record-breaking bushfire season.

Yet, amid the despondency, moving stories have emerged of phenomenal fundraising conducted through social media.

At the forefront is Australian comedian Celeste Barber, whose Facebook fundraiser has raised more than AUD$45 million – the largest amount in the platform’s history.

Presenting shocking visuals, sites such as Instagram, Twitter and Facebook have been monumental in communicating the severity of the fires.

But at a time when experts predict worsening climate conditions and longer fire seasons, short bursts of compassion and donations aren’t enough.

For truly effective action against current and future fires, we need to use social media to implement lasting transformations, to our attitudes, and our ability to address climate change.

Get out of your echo-chamber

Links between social media and public engagement are complex. Their combination can be helpful, as we’re witnessing, but doesn’t necessarily help solve problems requiring long-term attention.

Read more: Climate change is bringing a new world of bushfires

Online spaces can cultivate polarising, and sometimes harmful, debate.

Past research indicates the presence of online echo chambers, and users’ tendency to seek interaction with others holding the same beliefs as them.

If you’re stuck in an echo chamber, Harvard Law School lecturer Erica Ariel Fox suggests breaking the mould by going out of your way to understand diverse opinions.

Before gearing up to disagree with others, she recommends acknowledging the contradictions and biases you yourself hold, and embracing the opposing sides of yourself.

In tough times, many start to assign blame – often with political or personal agendas.

In the crisis engulfing Australia, we’ve seen this with repeated accusations from conservatives claiming the Greens party have made fire hazard reduction more difficult.

In such conversations, larger injustices and the underlying political challenges are often forgotten. The structural conditions underpinning the crisis remain unchallenged.

Slow and steady

We need to rethink our approach to dealing with climate change, and its harmful effects.

First, we should acknowledge there is no quick way to resolve the issue, despite the immediacy of the threats it poses.

Political change is slow, and needs steady growth. This is particularly true for climate politics, an issue which challenges the social and economic structures we rely on.

Our values and aspirations must also change, and be reflected in our online conversations. Our dialogue should shift from blame to a culture of appreciation, and growing concern for the impact of climate degradation.

Users should continue to explore and learn online, but need to do so in an informed way.

Reading Facebook and Twitter content is fine, but this must be complemented with reliable news sources. Follow authorised user accounts providing fact-based articles and guidance.

Before you join an online debate, it’s important you can back your claims. This helps prevent the spread of misinformation online, which is unfortunately rampant.

A 2018 Reuters Institute report found people’s interaction (sharing, commenting and reacting) with false news from a small number of Facebook outlets “generated more or as many interactions as established news brands”.

Also, avoid regressive discussions with dead-ends. Social media algorithms dictate that the posts you engage with set the tone for future posts targeted at you, and more engagement with posts will make them more visible to other users too. Spend your time and effort wisely.

And lastly, the internet has made it easier than ever to contact political leaders, whether it’s tweeting at your prime minister, or reaching out to the relevant minister on Facebook.

Read more: Listen to your people Scott Morrison: the bushfires demand a climate policy reboot

Tangible change-making

History has proven meaningful social and political progress requires sustained public awareness and engagement.

Consider Australia’s recent legislation on marriage equality, or the historical transformation of women’s rights.

These issues affect people constantly, but fixing them required debate over long periods.

We should draw on the awareness raised over the past weeks, and not let dialogue about the heightened threat of bushfires fizzle out.

We must not return to our practices of do-nothingism as soon as the immediate disaster subsides.

Although bushfire fundraisers have collected millions, a European Social Survey of 44,387 respondents from 23 countries found that – while most participants were worried about climate change – less than one-third were willing to pay higher taxes on fossil fuels.

If we want climate action, we must expect more from our governments but also from ourselves.

Social media should be used to consistently pressure government to take principled stances on key issues, not short-sighted policies geared towards the next election.

Opening the public’s eyes

There’s no denying social media has successfully driven home the extent of devastation caused by the fires.

A clip from Fire and Rescue NSW, viewed 7.8 million times on Twitter alone, gives audiences a view of what it’s like fighting on the frontlines.

Images of burnt, suffering animals and destroyed homes, resorts, farms and forests have signalled the horror of what has passed and what may come.

Social media can be a formidable source of inspiration and action. It’s expected to become even more pervasive in our lives, and this is why it must be used carefully.

While showings of solidarity are incredibly helpful, what happens in the coming weeks and months, after the fires pass, is what will matter most.

– ref. As fires rage, we must use social media for long-term change, not just short-term fundraising – http://theconversation.com/as-fires-rage-we-must-use-social-media-for-long-term-change-not-just-short-term-fundraising-129446

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Ian Parmeter, Research Scholar, Centre for Arab and Islamic Studies, Australian National University

US President Donald Trump’s statement overnight confirming the US would not take further military action in response to Iran’s missile strikes on American bases in Iraq eases regional tensions for now.

In hitting back at the US over last week’s assassination of General Qassem Soleimani, the leader of Iran’s elite Quds Force in the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Iran was clearly pulling its punches.

The missiles it fired at US bases near Baghdad and in northern Iraq produced no US casualties and appear to have done little damage to the bases. Media reports quoting Western intelligence sources claim that some of the missiles were aimed deliberately short of the target. It’s clear the Iranian regime did not want to give Trump an excuse for retaliation.

Read more: Iran vows revenge for Soleimani’s killing, but here’s why it won’t seek direct confrontation with the US

Moreover, the regime has described its missile attacks as a “proportionate” response to Soleimani’s killing – which it obviously was not. It also said its response was “concluded”, implying it would not launch further strikes against the US.

In addition, according to several media reports, Iranian officials have claimed to their domestic audience the strikes killed more than 80 US military personnel, but the US is hiding the real toll. Such statements are aimed at quelling popular pressure for a more robust response.

Fortunately for the region, Trump’s overnight statement indicates he is prepared to leave matters at that. In addition, there is no evidence yet the crash of a Ukrainian airliner shortly after take-off from Tehran’s airport is linked to the missile strikes (though investigations are continuing).

That means that, for now, the risk of escalating tit-for-tat strikes or something closer to all out war between the US and Iran has receded. Most in the region will now breathe easier. This is especially true for Iraq, which could have been drawn into a broader conflict as there are still about 5,000 US troops stationed there.

But many questions remain unresolved, any of which could heighten the risk of renewed military conflict between the two sides.

Can Iran pressure Iraq to expel American troops?

A first friction point is whether US troops will remain in Iraq much longer.

Last week, the Iraqi parliament ordered the expulsion of all foreign forces (which include Australian military trainers) from Iraq. Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul Mahdi has said he will implement the parliament’s demand – which the parliament itself has no power to enforce.

Abdul Mahdi is also under enormous pressure from Iran to expel US forces. The Iranian regime would clearly see their removal as additional payback to the US for the Soleimani assassination.

But Abdul Mahdi, a moderate, is known to fear a possible resurgence of the Islamic State in Iraq. The group’s rise there in 2014 was the reason the Iraqi government invited US forces to return after they had left in 2011. Iraqi forces by themselves would probably not be able to contain IS.

Moreover, the US has given Iraq US$5.8 billion in military aid since 2014.

Read more: What next for Iran’s proxy network after killing of Qassem Soleimani

A further problem from Abdel Mahdi is that Trump has threatened sanctions on Iraq if it expels US forces. He has implied that such sanctions would also include repayment of aid moneys.

While US troops remain in Iraq, there is the constant prospect of lethal attacks on them by a range of Iraqi militias loyal to Iran, such as Kata’ib Hezbollah, the militia that started the latest US-Iranian confrontation by killing a US contractor in late December.

Another militia strike that resulted in a US death would almost certainly spur a Trump military response against Iran – which Iran would, in turn, likely react to.

What happens with the nuclear deal now?

The second friction point is Iran’s statement following the Soleimani killing that it is no longer bound by the restrictions of the nuclear deal Iran signed with the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany in 2015.

This agreement, from which Trump withdrew in 2018, put restrictions on Iran’s uranium enrichment and stockpile levels with the aim of preventing the country from developing a nuclear weapon.

Iran said earlier this week it would no longer remain bound by the deal’s restrictions, meaning it would, if it chose, exceed the enrichment and stockpiling limitations. At the same time, however, it said it would remain within the deal and continue to allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

This playing with words appears to have been aimed at keeping the Europeans (Britain, France and Germany) from re-imposing UN sanctions on Iran if it formally left the agreement.

Read more: Iran’s cultural heritage reflects the grandeur and beauty of the golden age of the Persian empire

Significantly, in his overnight statement, Trump emphasised that Iran would never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. The strong implication was that if Iran is discovered to be enriching uranium to weapons grade, the US will take action to stop this.

Such action would probably be military, though the US has worked with Israel in the past on cyber-technology to stymie Iran’s enrichment centrifuges.

That raises the question of how effective continuing IAEA oversight of Iran’s nuclear program will be. Before the nuclear deal was agreed, Iran was adept at putting obstacles in the way of IAEA inspectors – though it does not appear to have done so since the agreement entered into force.

Neither side wanting further conflict

For all the fragility of the current situation, there are two reasons to hope that calm will prevail for at least the next few weeks.

The first is that Iran’s options are limited. The relatively minor missile attacks on Wednesday indicate Iran does want to take on the US in direct conflict. Iran knows it would suffer.

The second is that Trump appears happy to declare victory and leave matters roughly as they stand.

He can boast to his now fiercely re-energised base that his action in eliminating Soleimani has made Americans safer. He also won’t want to get into a major Middle East conflict in an election year. Indeed, the opposite. He will almost certainly try to remove US troops from Iraq this year – but on his terms, not Iran’s.

So far, this is a win for Trump.

– ref. Iran and US step back from all-out war, giving Trump a win (for now) – http://theconversation.com/iran-and-us-step-back-from-all-out-war-giving-trump-a-win-for-now-129615

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Johan Barthélemy, Research Fellow, SMART Infrastructure Facility, University of Wollongong

As more commercial precincts develop, we see more shopping trolleys abandoned far away from the shops they belong to. Programs are in place to tackle this issue but haven’t solved the problem. We need a more sophisticated multi-pronged approach, including smart use of technology, to limit the number of abandoned trolleys and their impact.

Many councils have declared war on abandoned trolleys. A recent clean-up operation by four Western Sydney councils collected 550 trolleys in a day, Local Government NSW reported.

Read more: To end share-bike dumping, focus on how to change people’s behaviour

These wayward trolleys are not only making the streets and public spaces untidy, but also have negative social and environmental impacts. Trolleys left on the street or kerbside create safety risks for motorists, cyclists and pedestrians. Dumped trolleys can clog rivers, drains, creeks and culverts, which can contribute to flash flooding during extreme weather events.

Recovering trolleys is time-consuming and sometimes risky depending on the location. Collection often involves a significant cost to councils and commercial businesses.

A range of existing solutions

Due to its complexity this is not a “one size fits all” type of problem. A good starting point is the adoption of tougher policies and regulations by state and local governments.

These policies typically target the trolley owners, the retailers, making them accountable for their property and forcing them to be part of the solution. As a result, some supermarkets have encouraged customers to return trolleys after use by introducing coin-operated trolley locks or by offering rewards for returning lost trolleys.

Recent campaigns have also promoted responsible use of trolleys, with the message that abandoning a trolley is an act of littering or illegal dumping, which is subject to fines. This echoes policies already in place for share bikes and scooters.

However, Local Government NSW (LGNSW) President Linda Scott recently said:

Councils are virtually powerless because they can only fine customers who are caught abandoning trolleys in public places, which is impractical and almost impossible to enforce.

The NSW government is now considering giving councils stronger powers. This could include the power to fine retailers that fail to collect abandoned or impounded trolleys.

Involving the local community

To reduce the number of abandoned trolleys in an area, we first need to know where they are. Involving the local community is a good way to get that information. Councils and retailers can create dedicated channels to report lost trolleys via phone numbers, social media and smartphone applications.

A good example of a community engagement tool is Trolley Tracker. It’s a platform that includes online forms, a phone number and an app to report abandoned trolleys. This information goes to councils, retailers and collection contractors. Trolley Tracker has received reports of almost 3 million abandoned trolleys since its inception.

Research into understanding why trolleys are not returned would also allow councils and commercial businesses to create data-driven solutions.

Smart tracking solutions

Smart devices can be fitted to trolleys to ensure they do not leave the shopping precinct. These devices use geofencing, a location-based service that triggers an action or an alert when the device leaves a defined geographical area. The location of the device can be determined via GPS, WiFi, or any other wireless technology.

Geofencing follows the trolley in real time, making recovery easier. The device will send an alert when the trolley leaves its defined area.

These devices can also trigger a wheel-locking mechanism that activates automatically to stop trolleys being taken from the shopping precinct. This system has been implemented, for instance, in Ipswich and Cairns, Queensland.

Ipswich City Council fines retailers that fail to install wheel locks. “Today abandoned trolleys are a rare sight in Ipswich,” says the LGNSW, which is pushing for the system to be adopted in NSW.

Using artificial intelligence

Over the past decade, computer vision and artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms have progressed very rapidly. AI can now be trained to detect specific objects such as trolleys in images and video.

Read more: AI can help in crime prevention, but we still need a human in charge

This trained algorithm could be deployed in the existing CCTV infrastructure of the council or the shopping centre. This would speed up the detection and collection of abandoned trolleys. While this approach has the benefit of using existing CCTV networks, the footage is limited to the field of view of the fixed cameras.

This limitation could be overcome by having councils collaborate with their garbage trucks. Indeed, these trucks are packed with cameras monitoring their surroundings at all times. As the trucks regularly patrol the whole road network, it is an easy fix to embed the AI in these trucks for monitoring and locating abandoned trolleys.

Through a mix of complementary solutions including policies, community engagement, smart tracking technologies and AI, it is possible to reduce the number of abandoned trolleys.

– ref. The war on abandoned trolleys can be won. Here’s how – http://theconversation.com/the-war-on-abandoned-trolleys-can-be-won-heres-how-127718

Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Matteo Farina, Adjunct Lecturer, Flinders University

The world is starting to see the gradual decline of Facebook, with 15 million US users dropping off between 2017 and last year.

Nonetheless, Facebook remains the largest social network in the world. As of late last year, almost 60% of Australians had a Facebook account, half of whom logged-on daily.

And while most of us intuitively understand what others find interesting, there’s a growing body of research on online engagement and the characteristics of viral content.

For my research, I studied more than 1,200 posts from 266 Facebook users – everyday people aged 21-40 – to identify the common denominator among “successful” Facebook posts.

Share if you agree

For the study, I decided to create a distinction between “likes” and comments. I treated likes as a simpler form of acknowledgement, and comments as a more active mode of engagement – they require time, effort and a deeper understanding of the content.

Read more: #travelgram: live tourist snaps have turned solo adventures into social occasions

I found posts which performed relatively well in terms of engagement (more than five comments), could be characterised by certain linguistic features.

Successful posts tended to prompt further action from readers, or used humour to engage.

Conversations on Facebook feeds generally start by “tellings”, meaning posts which contain narratives. For example, what a friend is doing, a video, or a selfie.

Among the content I studied, the more popular posts requested a response of some kind, usually through questions, or requests such as “click on this funny link”.

Simply adding “what do you think of this?” at the end of a post was likely to increase engagement – and this was true for posts with varying subject matters.

I also found posts that were simple to understand performed better, as opposed to those which were vague or confusing – sometimes referred to as vaguebooking, like this example:

Laughter is the best medicine

Humour also increased engagement.

Research has shown conversations driven by jokes encourage involvement and inclusion.

I observed this too, with funny posts securing more responses. Similarly, posts that were not overtly funny were more likely to do well if they received funny comments.

Ongoing conversations also stimulate further engagement. Successful Facebook users didn’t just post content, they also responded to comments on their posts.

The take home message?

Although the success of Facebook content also relies on privacy settings, the number of friends a user has, how active the user is and how popular they are outside Facebook, strategically designed posts can give any user a quick upper hand.

And it’s likely you can use the same principles on other platforms such as Twitter or Instagram.

Read more: Before you hit ‘share’ on that cute animal photo, consider the harm it can cause

– ref. Winning at social media is probably simpler than you think – http://theconversation.com/winning-at-social-media-is-probably-simpler-than-you-think-128704