Green Up Moggill

I sent the following on 23 June 2009 either by email or by via their web site to each of Campbell Newman, the State Minister of Transport Rachel Nolan and the state member in whose area the incident occurred, Scott Emerson:

On my way into the University of Queensland today on my bicycle, the
driver of the 428 bus that arrived on campus at about 8:40 behaved in
a consistently intimidatory way, including driving right up behind me
to stop at bus stops on the way, and overtaking me on the last stretch
of Hawken Drive before UQ so close I could have reached out to touch
the bus (this last event when the road was wide, and there was no
oncoming traffic, so there was absolutely no excuse). A bus is a
dangerous weapon when used in this fashion. Sooner or later this kind
of behaviour is going to result in serious injury or a fatality.

I have complained several times about the way bus drivers attempt to
push bikes off the roads to no effect.

This time if I get no satisfactory response be assured that I will
launch a public campaign.

I received a reply from Campbell Newman, dated 16 July, addressing my concerns in detail. The bus driver concerned has been placed on a performance improvement plan, and this information has been used to improve driver training.

I am yet to hear from the other politicians. While Campbell Newman is the person most able to take action, it is disappointing that the others did not take the matter seriously enough at least to reply.

While I disagree with Campbell Newman on many policy issues, I would like to thank him for taking this issue seriously and taking remedial action.

Nonetheless the city’s overall approach to bicycle safety is inadequate: incidents like this are not purely a matter of driver training but also a consequence of mixing too many incomptible vehicles on the same roadway. While there are some excellent bikeways, once you are off them you have little option but to mix with either heavy traffic or pedestrians. It’s as if the city, wanting to learn from its lesson of neglecting motorway construction in the era when that was considered a good idea, is trying to remedy this oversight by focusing solely on the equivalent of motorways for bicycles. It’s all very well to have a clear run between far out of the city and the city centre, but having to mix with other traffic in city and suburban streets remains a serious problem.

If everyone who had the option to use a bike felt safe to do so, traffic would be signficantly reduced, reducing the need for more roads. We would have a healthier population, and local businesses would do better because the average person would shop locally more often, rather than waiting until a long enough shopping list had accumulated to justify taking the car to the mall.

Let’s keep working on th big picture: a city that’s fun and safe to live in, with healthy lifestyle options accessible to all, not just the adventurous few willing to take their lives in their hands every time they venture onto the streets.

Philip Machanick, Greens candidate, Moggill

Transition Towns Kenmore Candidates’ Debate

18 March 2008

I was pleasantly surprised last year when I heard that the Transition Towns idea had made it to Kenmore. We cannot wait for governments to act in a time of crisis, a time that requires a major transformation.

Much of the failure of governments to act on the need for transformation is a failure of imagination. Someone needs to lead the way by showing what can be done, even if on a smaller scale than a government-driven transformation.

Here I would like to quote Margaret Mead:

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed people can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

How major a transformation are we facing? The changes we will need to make over the next years and decades are as big as the changes since the nineteenth century, with its gas lit streets travelled by horse and buggy. The twentieth century changed all that with the development of commercial air travel and the car, with cheap fossil fuels driving not only transport but also the apparently marvelous clean form of energy, electricity.

But that era is fast drawing to a close, and we must be ready for a new era, or we will be left behind as surely as those who believed the horse and buggy was the way of the future in 1909.

This urgency is caused by a failure of imagination that has slowed the pace of change, until we are faced with an increasingly urgent task of coping with carbon emissions reductions, a task on which we are way behind.

Two key issues are converging to drive change rapidly: peak oil and climate change. 30 years after Henry Ford first mass-produced his Model-Ts, horses were still in wide use. That is the natural pace of large-scale change, and we must face up to the fact that this time, because we have been so slow to get started, it will have to be faster.

If we do not try to get ahead of the worldwide current of change, we will be swept away by it. Our fossil-fuel dependent economy will collapse; our coal exports increasingly falling out of favour.

The choice we are facing is as stark as it is real. Get rolled over, or get into the lead.

Let’s see how change plays out close to home as well as for the state as a whole.

Climate change threatens food supply; we know the general trend, but cannot predict precise changes in weather patterns. It is therefore crazy to destroy prime farmland with projects like the Traveston Crossing dam, and coal mines out to the west of us in Felton and the Darling Downs – even more so when the future demand for coal is becoming uncertain. Food supply is also threatened by high energy costs; farmers should be included in energy production through solar and wind farms on unproductive land, and second-generation biofuels production, that does not compete with food supply.

Travel will unavoidably become more expensive, especially with high-emissions technologies. There are two remedies for that in and near cities: improved electrified public transport to reduce the need to drive cars, and better placement of facilities and services to reduce the need to travel. Once you have everyone in electrified public transport, you can clean up the electricity supply. For Brisbane, the Greens propose a light rail system that would bring the city closer to the outer suburbs. We also propose two new solar thermal power plants for the state, as a first step to clean base-load power. Other obvious steps, back in Moggill, include local health facilities and more schools in the outer suburbs.

In an era of expensive energy, we may just score the advantage of rediscovering the concept of community, a neighbourhood where your kids go to school, you go to the doctor, you spend your leisure hours, you get to know your neighbours and the elderly need not be lonely.

What’s more, if we no longer had pure dormitory suburbs – and here I think of the ex-pineapple farms in Moggill – many more of us would work close to home. How good would that be?

In this new world, building roads like the Kenmore Bypass no longer makes sense: we will get around by public transport, and use our cars for leisure. How many people, in any case, like to drive their car in heavy traffic?

Another big source of traffic – and of unacceptable danger to children – is travel to and from school. The dangers of school drop-off zones is one of the most frequent complaints I hear. A comprehensive school bus system would not only take cars off the roads, but make our children a lot safer.

Back to health. There are many good arguments for large tertiary hospitals. You can’t build a team of top specialists unless they have enough cases to keep in practice. On the other hand, the increasing cost of moving people means that small local hospitals make sense. These smaller hospitals would cover emergencies and routine cases, with the big tertiary hospitals covering the more difficult cases. So we propose a small local hospital be built somewhere in this electorate.

The state Labor government has the balance wrong: they are moving the Royal Children’s Hospital to a smaller site, and have no plan for small local hospitals.

For the longer-term, we propose building on our world-class research to develop the clean energy technologies of the future that the rest of the world desperately wants. I’ve worked in top universities and research labs. The talent we have here is right up there. Why then do we allow great innovations in solar technologies to slip out of our grasp, to be commercialized in the US or China? Queensland is the sunshine state and, the state government tells is, the smart state. Why not put these two together and become the smart sunshine state?

One of the things you so often hear is that doing the right thing by the environment is all very well, but where do we find the money?

I have some ideas on that. To fund our little local hospital, let’s draw a line through the destruction of the Royal Children’s Hospital. We could build a pretty good local hospital for a fraction of the $2-billion saved.

To fund a transition to clean energy and to fund the great clean energy research we know we can do right here in Queensland, in our great universities, in the CSIRO right here in our own electorate, I’m eyeing an even bigger chunk of misallocated money. The state government is planning on spending over $30-billion on doubling our capacity to export coal by 2015. How crazy is that? Haven’t they heard there’s a worldwide movement to cap carbon emissions?

Let’s grab back as much as we can of the money that’s being allocated to crazy projects, projects based on a nineteenth century mindset, and use that money to build the economy of the future with real green jobs, jobs in delivering safe, clean, efficient public transport, energy-efficient homes, clean energy and communities we can all be proud to live in.

We don’t need the Kenmore Bypass. We don’t need the Traveston Crossing Dam. We don’t need to redouble our efforts to export coal. We do need to gear our economy, our lifestyle, our way of doing business for the future.

The smart sunshine state. That’s what the Greens stand for.

It is quite bizarre that you can get a TransLink ticket from Nambour to the city, but not from Karana Downs.

Just in case it’s not obvious how bizarre this is, here is a map showing how far Nambour out is:

View Larger Map

And here’s a map to the same scale showing how far out Karana Downs is:

View Larger Map

The city and state governments have seriously dropped the ball on this one.

The Greens plan for Karana Downs is to extend the city Buz network to the area, with connection to the existing 444 service that currently goes out towards Moggill. In the longer term, once light rail is in place, we will provide a feeder service to light rail.

Karana Downs may be a relatively recent addition to Brisbane, but the public transport network is ultimately a state responsibililty and includes many cities and towns that are not part of Brisbane. How hard can it be to get this right?

Another critical area of need in Karana Downs is a High School, which has long been talked about, but nothing has happened. A high school will relieve considerable pressure on the roads as well as building the local community.

Government cash handouts irresponsible, says Greens candidate

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

“The prime minister has announced a fiscally irresponsible $40-billion stimulus package on top of his previous $10-billion dollar effort, with very little of it targeted at retooling the economy for the twenty-first century. President Obama on the other hand has outlined a clear message of hope for the future for the United States. What we need to do in Australia is sit up and take note,” says Dr Philip Machanick, Greens preselected candidate for the Queensland state seat of Moggill. “Usually government spending on this scale would be highly inflationary. The massive worldwide recession represents a once in a lifetime opportunity for governments to spend big on the future without a major inflation risk. Instead, our federal and state governments are blowing enormous sums on short-term economic stimulus. This is mind-bogglingly irresponsible, faced as we are with the twin challenges of the twenty-first century of climate change and depleting fossil fuels,” he continues.

“The United States is embarking on a massive Green New Deal, rebuilding and retooling their economy for a clean energy future. The Greens here have already started campaigning for a similar concept, with plans for solar thermal power plants, enhanced incentives for home solar power and solar hot water, and an emphasis on public transport. The long-term future of the Australian and the Queensland economy is in creating quality jobs in a clean energy economy. There is enough cause to pursue a clean energy strategy for environmental reasons, but economic reality increasingly favours going clean and green,” Dr Machanick elaborates. “The US is already one of the most protectionist economies in the world, and carbon taxes will be the trade barrier of the future, whether our industries like it or not. If we continue to produce aluminium by the dirtiest possible process, we can expect to get priced out of the market. If most of our exports are either fossil fuels, or produced by heavily emitting technologies, our industries will be increasingly uncompetitive in a carbon-taxed world market.”

Dr Machanick also emphasises the importance of diversifying Queensland’s economy. “If Queensland continues to rely so heavily on resources for state revenues, we will remain subject to the boom and bust cycles typical of commodity-based economies. Already, mines are laying off workers in the thousands. If the economic downturn continues, many more will be out of work. Sad though this is for those who’ve lost their jobs, this presents a great opportunity to follow President Obama’s lead by re-orienting the Queensland economy to the new reality of the twenty-first century. Yet the two economic stimulus packages on offer are both designed for a twentieth-century economy: more roads, more capacity to export coal, support for building old-fashioned cars, cash handouts to encourage consumerism. Where is the investment in renewable energy, in making it easier to leave your car at home, in research in technologies we can sell to the rest of the world? The odd gesture like a partial program to insulate roofs of houses and an improvement in the solar hot water rebate does not do it. The federal government claims that its roof insulation program will do the equivalent of taking 1-million cars off the road by 2020. Where is the plan that will actually take cars off the road?

“The Greens have long stood for the principle of sustainability not only as an environmental concern, but as a basis for sound economics. We are pleased that the US is now moving in the same direction we have long advocated. This is the time for Queensland to embrace the politics of hope and confidence in the future that the Greens represent.”

Dr Machanick promises to work hard at developing the solutions we need for this century. “Queensland should be both the smart and the sunshine state. We have some of the best science in the country, and some of the best solar resources. How can it be then that Germany, hardly a sunny country, has far more solar power installed than we do? Much of our best science ends up overseas, with no financial benefit to the taxpayer. At a time of economic emergency, the fiscal irresponsibility of subsidising obsolescent projects and once-off cash handouts is crazy. Money poured down a sinkhole is money wasted at the best of times; money wasted now means that much less opportunity to tackle the real problems. We need to change the focus of government from rewarding inefficiency, and launching grand projects that make neither environmental nor economic sense, to working for the future – and working smartly for the future.”

###

Background

“Greens launch green-collar jobs package for Queensland”: http://qld.greens.org.au/media-releases/greens-launch-green-collar-jobs-package-for-queensland
“Why Obama’s green jobs plan might work”: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-greenjobs4-2009jan04,0,378269.story

Contact

Contact: Dr Philip Machanick, Greens preselected candidate for Moggill
Email: greenupmoggill@gmail.com
Phone: 042 234 6909
Website: www.greenupmoggill.org

---

Some people think that the hard economic times ahead are a good reason to go slow on dealing with climate change.

Think again.

These are the same people who ran the world’s economy into the worst economic crisis since 1929.

The Queensland economy is heavily reliant on coal revenues. Coal is about 80% of the problem of climate change, and we are a big contributor not only through our own use but our exports. However, coal is not a huge employer. Modern mining is more capital than labour intensive. Less that 3% of all Queenslanders work in mining of any description. Many more work in tourism than in coal. We should be working hard to protect our great environmental icons, like the Great Barrier Reef. We cannot do that without international cooperation. But it is crazy to expect that cooperation if we don’t set realistic emissions targets ourselves.

The next notion is that it is somehow wise to rely on coal revenues, because fossil fuels will be with us for the next 200 years or so. That kind of estimate relies on use at current rates, an unrealistic starting point since we know usage is growing. How much? The authoritative BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2008 shows that energy use grew 2.4% from 2006 to 2007. One of the arguments of the pro-fossil-fuel lobby is that we mustn’t curtail use of fossil fuels because that would be unjust to developing countries, so let’s allow the growth rate to be higher to allow them to industrialise. I’ve graphed three scenarios for depletion of reserves:

• continued use at today’s rate, calibrated to get reserves to zero in 200 years (blue curve)
• continued escalation at 2.4% (red curve)
• escalation of demand at 5% per annum (yellow curve)

---

Fossil fuels could run out in as little as 50 years. That’s good cause to pause and think.

What will happen if one of the faster depletion scenarios pans out?

First, long before any fossil fuels disappear from production, we will be subject to wild swings in price, as a combination of supply shortages and speculation push prices through the roof, only ending when the world economy crashes. Sound familiar?

Second, the various types of fuel will not deplete at the same time. Coal will be around a lot longer than oil for example. The trouble is we are increasingly being left with the dirtiest, least efficient forms of fuel. Converting coal into something like oil is expensive and emissions-intensive.

That brings me to the final problem. The faster emissions grow, the sooner we will be forced to make deep cuts. Why? Because in pre-industrial times, natural processes of carbon emission and absorption were in balance. While some extra CO₂ can be absorbed, not all can; about half remains in the atmosphere in the short term. After 1000 years, almost 20% of the excess we’ve emitted will still be there. What this means is that once we’ve hit a CO₂ level that is generally accepted to be the safe limit, we will have to move to world-wide zero-emissions. Anything less will continue to add to the level in the atmosphere. Worse, the biggest sponge of CO₂ is the oceans. Dissolved CO₂ forms an acid in water, and ocean acidification is one more threat to the Great Barrier Reef, already endangered by temperature rises.

---

Rushing headlong into maximising coal exports therefore is a crazy approach. We will suddenly find ourselves on the wrong side of a worldwide moratorium on coal use. And if the current resistance to change is anything to go by, we’ll get there only after irreparable damage has been done. What will it take? Loss of the Great Barrier Reef? The collapse of the Kakadu and the Murray-Darling ecosystems?

All of these are not only great environmental resources and Australian icons but much bigger sources of jobs than mining.

What is the alternative?

We need a coherent plan to phase out coal, and to move to renewables. If we wait until the rest of the world moves, it will be like running out of road at a cliff, and pressing the accelerator. Phasing out coal with the big investment we already have in coal power plants cannot happen fast without economic disruption. That’s why a slow phase down has to start as soon as possible. Yet we see no action on that front, nor do we see any attempt at slowing coal exports. On the contrary, exports are being ramped up. Or at least capacity is; at time of writing, demand drops as a result of the worldwide recession were resulting in job losses on the mines.

That brings me to the great opportunity the recession offers. Governments are trying to spend their way out of it. Much of the work in ushering in a new green economy is necessarily labour-intensive. We can install solar hot water on every available roof. We can pump money into research to make new initiatives like hot rocks geothermal and solar thermal power viable. We can start working on a public transport network with mostly electrical vehicles, the better to be able to convert to clean power at a flick of a switch. We can work on making Queensland not just the smart state or the sunshine state but the smart sunshine state.

Wouldn’t that be great? We are already world leaders in sporting achievement and the biological sciences. Why should we not be world leaders in the new energy economy?

Coal is holding us back. We are world leaders in exporting something that, increasingly, no one will want. Why can’t we aim to be world leaders in what everyone is going to want soon: renewable energy technologies? Coal is dirty stuff as soon as it’s out of the ground. Why don’t we keep it there, until we figure out a better use for it – and a way of using it without wrecking the environment? Coal is a complex mix of chemicals, not just carbon. Once oil runs out, we will need a source of industrial chemicals, not just stuff to burn.

If Queensland and Australia are to take their place in the world as leaders, we need to think long-term. And protecting one industry at the cost of all else is not only failing to think long term, it is stupid. Surely we can do better than that.