Don Henry is the Executive Director of the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF). Henry has led the ACF since 1998, helping it to become a strong advocate for the environment by promoting solutions through research, consultation, education and partnerships. In 2008, Henry won the Equity Trustees Not For Profit CEO of the Year award. In 1991 Henry was awarded a Global 500 Environment Award from the United Nations Environment Program in recognition of outstanding practical achievements in the protection of the environment. (source: wikipedia)

Don Henry, Executive Director, Australian Conservation Foundation

ECO: Why is it important in your opinion to eliminate fossil fuel subsidies?

HENRY: Recent analysis by the Australian Conservation Foundation shows the federal government spends $12 billion each year on subsidies that encourage greenhouse pollution, but only $1 billion on programs to tackle climate change.  The $12 billion of fossil fuel subsidies are a dead weight on the economy, the budget and the environment.  Not only do they encourage pollution, they also discourage industries from becoming more efficient, because they are getting paid from the public purse to keep on doing things the old, dirty way.

ECO: In September 2009 in a Communiqué from Pittsburgh, the G20 nations committed to “rationalise and phase out over the medium term inefficient fossil fuel subsidies that encourage wasteful consumption”.   As a member of the G20 has Australia done anything to phase out any subsidies?

HENRY: A Freedom of Information request by Greenpeace has uncovered documents that show bureaucrats last year identified billions of dollars of fossil fuel subsidies that should be cut for Australia to honour the G20 commitment.  Yet the government told the international forum no such subsidies existed.  It’s important our government comes clean about taxpayer-funded support for fossil fuel industries – and got on with the job of reforming those subsidies and putting us on the path to a clean energy economy.

ECO: Which subsidies should be targeted initially?

HENRY: The fringe benefits tax (FBT) concession for private use of company cars is projected to cost Australian taxpayers more than $1.2 billion dollars per year by 2012-13.  What possible justification is there for an investment of our nation’s wealth in tax concessions that mean that if you drive a company car, the benefits increase the more you drive it and the more you pollute the atmosphere?  Researchers at Latrobe University found 20 per cent of the beneficiaries of this FBT concession drive more than they otherwise would have in order to secure the increased tax benefits.  The FBT concession for company cars should be restructured to create positive incentives for efficient vehicles, to remove perverse incentives to drive more and to complement efforts to re-tool the Australian car industry for cleaner car production.

By far the largest fossil fuel subsidy, the fuel tax credits scheme, costs Australian taxpayers around $5 billion a year.  Most of this goes to subsidise the diesel fuel use of large mining, forestry and transport companies.  Let’s be clear about what the fuel tax credits scheme means.  It means if you are a commuter in Sydney’s western suburbs or Melbourne’s south-eastern growth corridor or outer Brisbane, with little or no access to reliable public transport, you pay 38 cents per litre in tax on the petrol you need to get to work.  But if you are the world’s wealthiest mining company, making record $10 billion half-year profits, you pay not a single cent in tax for the diesel you use for your off-road mining operations.  This is unfair and it’s bad for the environment.  It must be changed.

ECO: Do you think there would be political fall out from their removal?

HENRY: It’s time for the government to stand up to the big polluters and say enough is enough.  Australia cannot afford, environmentally or in terms of sound and responsible fiscal policy, to continue these subsidies.  We need to stop putting taxpayers’ money into pollution promotion and start investing in clean energy, like wind and solar, and in cleaner fuels and cleaner transport.

ECO: What should the government do with the money the elimination of fossil fuel subsidies will bring?

HENRY: The money saved by restructuring fossil fuel subsidies should be put towards a range of programs to tackle climate change and shore up our natural environment against the threats it faces.  Australia’s ecosystems are our silent life support systems. We need to invest in keeping them healthy and functioning. A new Climate Change & Ecosystem Protection Fund should be set up and resourced with at least $1 billion per year.  This would be put towards ending land clearing and forestry operations in high conservation value native forests, protecting wetlands in the Murray-Darling Basin, establishing a network of marine sanctuaries and National Heritage listing for the Kimberley.

The work on the plan, officially titled Zero Carbon Australia Stationary Energy Plan, is being led by Patrick who often goes overseas to find out what the rest of the world is doing to combat climate change.

Patrick Hearps

He was in Spain recently checking out solar thermal power plants with BZE’s executive director Matt Wright, wrapping the trip up with a three-week rock climbing holiday with friends on the Mediterranean south of Barcelona.

But with just two days left on the holiday he took a fall while climbing up some sea-cliffs on the Mediterranean coast.

“I’m used to falling, but this time a bolt, rusty from sea spray, broke and I hit the deck from about five metres up,” said Patrick.

He had to be rescued by helicopter, but thankfully he had no bones broken.

“I was just incredibly sore and stiff for a few weeks, but it hasn’t stopped me climbing,” he said.

“It’s my passion and that’s what you can find me doing when I am not working on the Zero Carbon plan.”

That’s the kind of never-give-up attitude Patrick has and one that BZE needs with its lofty, yet achievable aims.

“I’ve been rock climbing for a few years now. It’s an exhilarating and unique way to experience nature and I wish I had more time so I could get better,” he said.

So how did Patrick get involved in such a major project. His story goes back to childhood days.

“I grew up on a farm in Tasmania until I was 13-years-old. I loved the outdoors, and always had a keen interest in science and how things worked. I had heard about the greenhouse effect but didn’t really understand how big a deal it was,” he said.

“And while I had seen the hydro dam up the road which produced electricity just using the flowing water, the only cultural reference I had to coal was Ebenezer Scrooge’s coal heater which featured in Charles Dickens book A Christmas Carol.”

So when he eventually came to live in the Sunshine State he had a shock.

“A couple of years after moving to Queensland, I visited a coal power station and coal mine, and was absolutely amazed at both the scale of the plant, and the fact that we were still using technology and a fuel source from several centuries ago; burning vast amounts of coal in what is essentially a glorified kettle,” he said.

“Engineering was a natural path of study for me, and as I became fully aware of the scale of the climate and energy problem in my later years of uni, I knew that my role in life was to be part of solving one of the largest problems we have ever faced.

“So I took a job with ExxonMobil to gain experience with an international energy company, but frustrated by the old-fashioned views and limitations of full-time corporate work, I resigned to get more directly and immediately involved in creating a renewable future.  He says it is ‘incredibly enjoyable and satisfying’ working with the Melbourne Energy Institute and Beyond Zero Emissions on the project.

ECO put some more questions to Patrick:

ECO: How did you gather together such a wide field of expertise to develop the ZCA plan? Please give an indication of the global reach of this amazing venture and from where you have been drawing your technical knowledge and tell of the encouragement/hurdles you have experienced along the way.

PATRICK: The contributors to the Zero Carbon Plan are a diverse range of people. Key professions represented are chemical, mechanical, electrical, and environmental engineers along with physicists and others with specific qualifications and experience in renewable energy. Collectively, they have decades of experience in the energy industry and academia and understand the requirements of a rigorous study.

Furthermore, Beyond Zero Emissions through the media and research have links to institutions and companies in the global renewable energy industry. We have personally interviewed the CEOs and reps of the companies building and operating solar thermal power plants, in Spain and the US, such as SolarReserve, Torresol/SENER, Solar Millennium, Brightsource, Abengoa etc, along with researchers who have been involved in the field for decades.

For example, from the US Department of Energy’s Sandia National Laboratories and National Renewable Energy Laboratories, the German Aerospace Centre, the UAE’s MASDAR Institute and many more.

ECO: How difficult/easy has it been, as technical director of BZE, to draw together the scientific team to take this forward? Please give a little background.

PATRICK: The ZCA Project is primarily a pro-bono effort, started by Beyond Zero Emissions, using their networks of industry contacts, media and partner organisations to find people with the skills and motivation to work on the Zero Carbon Project, with the Melbourne Energy Institute providing both staff, students and alumni.

It should be pointed out from the start that what brings them together is an understanding of the physical scale of the climate and energy challenge, and a desire to get to work fixing it, recognising that the mitigation measures currently being looked at by most industry and policymakers just isn’t going to cut it.

Recognising the disconnect between policy, reality and perhaps the limitations of their day jobs, the authors are keen and motivated to put their skills to work truly creating the future they want to see, not just getting half the job done 10 years too late.

So while I wouldn’t say it has been an easy process to guide the project, once people are involved and feel ownership I am continuously impressed by the quality of work and ideas that come together.

ECO: Your forthcoming visit to Woodford is being eagerly anticipated by many festivalgoers. What does it mean to you personally in bringing the latest news of this important development to such an event which is noted for its green ethic? Also, whether this is your first Woodford experience or you have been before, what are you looking forward to seeing and experiencing at this festival?

PATRICK: I’ve never been to Woodford before, though I’ve had it highly recommended by friends. It sounds like a great combination of good music, relaxed atmosphere and people keen to find out how to create a better future.

I enjoy different audiences for different reasons. For example, when talking to relatively conservative audiences, it is a sense of achievement to be able to blow aside many people’s misconceptions about the ability of renewables to provide energy for society at a cost and scale that is required.

For relatively progressive audiences, as I suspect Woodford will be, it can be gratifying to give people information that can be used to strengthen their own work in pushing for a safe climate.

One of the great things about the ZCA Project is that it shows how achievable 100 per cent renewable energy in a decade really could be if we choose to push for the right decisions, which is more empowering than what we usually hear about it being too hard, too expensive or infeasible.

Being armed with the right information is important. And we are also always looking for more people to contribute to our work, whether on the technical side, or aiding in communication and organising, or if you can’t donate your time then helping to fund our research is also effective and appreciated.

ECO: Please tell us of your hopes and fears regarding the further development of this plan and the continuing research. Also, what can we, the public and interested parties, do for you?

PATRICK: Our research shows that we already have the technology, the knowledge, the resources, the money, the capacity to achieve 100 per cent renewable energy in 10 years, which is a necessary timeframe if we are to give ourselves a decent chance of avoiding runaway climate change.

I think its value is that it demonstrates that such an infrastructure rollout is achievable, while also giving us a sense of the scale of the task. It will require significantly more political commitment than is being shown today, and should be used as a benchmark for proposed climate mitigation measures.

It is encouraging to see other countries around the world pushing ahead on building a renewable energy future – the first few concentrating solar thermal plants in the US for 20 years are currently breaking ground, Spain is in the flurry of their $20 billion rollout of CST, China’s wind power output is growing exponentially at phenomenal rates, Germany’s commitment to their feed-in-tariff is seeing solar and wind installed in gigawatts per year, the countries around the North Sea are investing in huge offshore wind capacity, as are South Korea, and the Desertec Industrial Initiative has commitment and funding from Europe’s leading energy companies and banks.

However, Australia is at high risk of being left behind, as our leaders pretend that a tiny diversion from business-as-usual is all that is required.

Everyone can play a role in publicly pushing for more aggressive energy policy that will actually see us re-powering the country with renewables, and holding our leaders accountable.

Patrick Hearps will be at the Woodford Folk Festival Greenhouse venue on Wednesday, December 29 at 4.30pm, Thursday, December, 30 at 4pm for his BZE sessions, Friday, December 31 at 2pm with ‘Green Mythbusters and at 4pm with ‘Green Innovators’.

Ian Christesen puts some questions to Professor Tim Smith PhD who is the Director of the Sustainability Research Centre at University of the Sunshine Coast (USC). Prior to his appointment with USC, Dr Smith was a senior research scientist with the Resource Futures Program of CSIRO Sustainable Ecosystems.  He works on a number of projects around climate change adaptation and the issues around coastal community vulnerability. The Sustainability Research Centre also has prepared a set of sustainability indicators for the Sunshine Coast Regional Council.

Professor Tim Smith

What role to you see the University playing to assist the Sunshine Coast diversify its economy away from retail, construction and tourism? Firstly as an employer and more generally as an education provider?

The University of the Sunshine Coast (USC) is Australia’s fastest growing university, now with over 7,000 students and almost 600 staff (including over 200 academics).USC continues to develop new teaching and research programs to help diversify the Sunshine Coast economy. It is also the only university in the world that I know of that has a mission statement revolving around both sustainability and regional engagement. This places USC at the forefront of both developing and enhancing a sustainable knowledge economy for the Sunshine Coast, which is focused on sustainable outcomes through attracting and retaining highly qualified staff, contributing to sustainability industries through research and development, and training the next generation of sustainably-minded individuals (e.g. there were 150 students who enrolled in our 1st year “Foundations of Sustainability” course this year, and our enrolments in our major in sustainability and our post-graduate programs continue to grow). USC is also committed to a business incubator on campus (the Innovation Centre), which houses a large number of sustainability-related business such as Auzion who deals with solar and sustainable energy solutions.

What do you consider to be the greatest challenges we face in creating a more sustainable economy on the Sunshine Coast?

This question requires many PhD theses in order to properly respond … however, in a nut-shell the diverse communities of the Sunshine Coast need to collectively believe that we can create a more sustainable economy and take affirmative steps towards making it a reality. The problems of addiction to growth and short-term economic rationalism too often supersede any meaningful focus on quality of life—we have numerous measures of economic performance but no commitment to measuring our quality of life, hence our policy decisions and investments by government are dominated by improving the performance of the things we measure (and this unfortunately does not include quality of life).

What would be your top 3- 5 actions government and or business need to take into building a truly sustainable region and economy?

My personal view on the top 3 actions needed to build a truly sustainable region and economy consist of:

1. Measuring quality of life and focusing on improving these indicators instead of a focus on improving short-term measures of economic activity;
2. Establishing a line management structure whereby Treasury (at all tiers of government) reports to departments that deal with sustainability (in an integrated way) and not vice versa; and
3. Formation of consortiums between businesses, universities and communities to collectively lobby for greater support from communities and governments to build a sustainable region and economy—with the dominance of SMEs on the Sunshine Coast, we run a risk of not being seen as having a major influence on decision makers.

Do you think that the Coast can use its natural environment and lifestyle as attractants?

Of course— I moved here! The Sustainability Research Centre recently received funding to be part of a national project on coastal management with 7 partner universities. When we advertised for PhD students, USC received more than twice the number of applicants than any other university. It is not only the natural environment and lifestyle but the quality of our businesses, university and communities that attract people to our region. If we build on our combined strengths we can’t go wrong.

What strategies should be put in place to attract the new industries with the new jobs?  For example should we just agree that development and the construction industries will just continue as always with high levels of population growth and therefore we need to be working to make sure this industry cleans up its act and approaches it differently more sustainably?

People have both rights and responsibilities—we often forget about the latter. We all need to take a proactive approach to building the future we want on the Sunshine Coast. Make your voice heard and do something about it! There are so many examples of good work going on that inspire me on the Sunshine Coast and we need to support those who are doing it. Even in the construction industry there are examples of a genuine commitment to sustainability such as Adam Dew EcoBuild.

Any other comments you would like to make?

The Sunshine Coast is reaching a critical tipping point, there are multiple pressures from issues like population growth and climate change. We need both strong leadership combined with collective action to achieve a sustainable future for the Sunshine Coast.

Noosa Landcare natural resources manager Phil Moran. Image: Brian Rickards

Phil Moran is so passionate about the environment that he admits to hugging every tree he can.

In his youth he had ideas of pursuing a career in the legal profession, but it wouldn’t have been as satisfying for this man who instead grew to love the bush.

Phil is the natural resource manager for Noosa and District Landcare Group which is based in the Sunshine Coast hinterland town of Pomona. And his personal journey to that point has been a long and winding one.

While he now oversees this not-for-profit organisation that works with the community to deliver hands-on environmental solutions, he sees it as a life blessing.

“I am very fortunate to be able to a job that I love,” he said as we talked on the verandah of the Futures Centre nursery where Phil and his team work.

This is a man who worked in the tourist industry starting at the Tangalooma resort on Moreton Island and later becoming a trainee manager at Brisbane’s biggest hotel at the time. At 21 he became catering manager and stayed there for another nine years in a role he enjoyed and which eventually inspired him to open his own catering business.

“But always I had the bush in the back of my mind I had,” Phil said.

He had a friend who owned a piece of land on the outer limits of Brisbane and he went there when he could to learn about the bush. Later they took a trip to Malaysia, Sumatra and Thailand where Phil got a thrill from looking at the jungle.

That trip took place while he was running his business at Ashgrove where he catered to the Brisbane glitterati and had begun planting trees in at the back of the premises, starting his own small jungle which exists to this day.

But it was the end of another nine-year cycle when his sister became ill and he decided  to sell and move up to Cooroy where he bought himself 5 acres.

His real passion for the bush and its fauna and flora was awoken as he established a small wholesale nursery. At the same time he joined the Landcare group as a volunteer and helped out in its riparian nursery.

It began to take over his life. At first he worked one day a week for Landcare, then two days until eventually he was given paid work.
Since then he has seen the twin nurseries of Landcare grow steadily; the riparian nursery now producing nearly 90,000 tubestock a year and the Futures Centre performing similarly.

Phil was picking up a lot of tree planting knowledge as well as learning about the bush. One of his mentors at Landcare was Dave Burrows who left to eventually work as a  senior manager for Land for Wildlife.

When Phil was given a day a week killing off camphor laurel and privet on one of the council reserves at Yellowbelly hole he found he really enjoyed it – no mobile phone reception and he just got on with it, working in the wild.

He was also involved in some funded land projects such as Corridors of Green which linking riparian zones.

“I was paid as a labourer and I loved it,” said Phil.

One thing led to another. The group went through many changes and as more work became available Phil climbed up the ladder and was offered more work where eventually he was able to employ his past business acumen.

Burrows, who was the project officer for the Corridors of Green, moved on to a council position and it left a hole at Landcare which Phil was able to fill and get work for five days a week with them. Now Phil has climbed his personal tree to become the natural resources manager, responsible for 31 staff of which 24 are employed full-time. Of those 10 are the Green Army – a state government employment project.

“In fact, we are now the second biggest employer in Pomona,” said Phil.

He said another thrill he gets is to see kids he has trained move on and perform brilliantly at places such as the Sunshine Coast Regional Council. At a school talk about the environment two of his former ‘students’ who had made the big leap forward joined him.

“They were there in their council uniforms and stood out front with me, teaching that second generation of kids what they had been taught by the old bloke. I though it was a lovely circle and happy that I had infected them with that passion for the environment.

“That keeps me going as well as keeping me grounded.”

Phil says he certainly doesn’t do it for the money, saying it’s really caring about how we all live.

“I now live on 33 acres of land on the far west of the old Noosa council region. It was the first refuge to be declared in the shire. So my heart is there,” he said.

At first he lived in a tin shed on that property, but it was more than your ordinary tin shed. It was part of his continuing education.
“My place is rough country – quite steep, spotted gum country with basalt and phyllite. But I think of it as a university without the sandstone. You never stop learning – if I go for a walk I’ll see a plant I haven’t seen before,” he said.

“I have already identified 240 different species on my place so far.”

Phil’s attachment to the environment has led him to also be appointed as a board member for the UNESCO-recognised Noosa Biosphere. In 2007, the old Noosa Shire boundary was designated as a biosphere region – a first for Queensland.

A biosphere reserve is an international conservation listing awarded to an area with innovative approaches to conservation and sustainable development. Biosphere reserves promote a balanced relationship between humans and the biosphere.

Phil is also hands-on with the biosphere project, organising the Landcare team to help maintain and environmentally improve parts of the area with weed removal and tree plantings. He also does a blog for the biosphere.

Then Phil gets philosophical.

“Our biggest problem these days is the disconnect between day to day life and the environment,” he said.

“When I lived in the city, you’d get out of bed, have brekkie on the run, jump into air-conditioned car, join others in a traffic jam, get into a lift. You don’t even get to walk on grass. The only nature you see is a token one, on a computer screensaver.

“So it’s really hard to teach people about biodiversity — because they don’t get to experience it. But if I can give them little stories about how the way these things are all inter-related, hopefully the lights will come on.

“When I was a kid I’d be squatting down on the ground playing with ants and little lizards and things, but then you’d grow up and start going out to nightclubs and meeting girls. Then things like the environment might take a back seat.”

So Phil’s idea is to instill such a passion for the environment into kids, that they will never forget it and retain that connection.

“I have son who is almost 18. He grew up with me in my shed. Because I lived in it for 12 years out there with no power for four of those years, no TV or anything, we’d go out in the bush and we’d make cubbies, kill weeds and do stuff,” he said.

“My son can still walk around now and tell me that that’s a white-headed pigeon or that plant is looking sick, It’s amazing what ticks in kids’ minds. When his mates come up from Brisbane now, I hear him talking to them – he even told one not to whack a white ants nest. He’d say ‘no, leave them alone – that’s not the type that eats the house, it’s the one that cleans up the bush’.

“I never tried to force this environment stuff down his throat, It’s a symbiosis thing – kids tend to pick it up from you if you have that passion.”

He said Landcare likes to work with the schools.

“I go out to them to talk about weeds and I’ll help them with tree planting,” he said.

While Phil is encouraged by the kids, there are many things in the adult world of developers and governments that upset him – especially in his own region. The Cooroy-Curra bypass was a project he fought against as was the Traveston dam.
But successful or not, Phil has a belief that when the fight is over, it’s over. His way is ‘to work like hell’ in the initial stages to persuade authorities not to go ahead with a bad project and to try to get the best outcome for the environment.

“I’ll always work with people to get the best result. If I fail, I fail but I’ll give it a good shot. Once the law is passed I am not going to stand in front of a bulldozer – that’s not my area. I prefer to do the work beforehand.”

One of Phil’s other major environmental roles, they seem to cling to him like lawyer vines, is as vice-president of the National Aquatic Weeds Management Group. It means he gets around Australia identifying the weeds and helping with action plans to get rid of them. But in his region there are significant water weed problems – cabomba, water hyacinth and salvinia being just a few examples.

However, it’s the education side of environmental matters that really gets his juices flowing. He loves to give advice to people who might have moved into the Sunshine Coast area and are looking how to best look after their properties.

“The year before last I did more than 90 property visits. I go out to their newly-acquired and identify the weeds and the native plants, erosion issues etcetera. It’s great to see the thrill they get when I say ‘Wow, look at this wonderful plant. Or even that’s bad, you need to get rid of that’.

“They’re really keen – they’ve actually reached out and sought advice – that’s encouraging. We’re even getting to real estate agents to get the message out there.”

Phil is also pleased that the local tourism industry is coming on board as many players are doing much to reduce their ecological footprint.

“They now recognise that they have a goose here with a golden egg that is the environment. I tell them they wouldn’t have their business without that healthy environment,” added Phil.

His message in this Year of Biodiversity is ‘to get out there and have a look. Go for a walk. Learn something that’s outside the square. Get involved with the Biosphere, your local catchment group, the local Landcare group, even a P&C group with school environment activities’.

“Go to the World Environment Day event at the Sunshine Coast university, go to the Festival of Water at Lake McDonald. Just get out to have a look at your environment and get a real feel for it,” he added.

And finally, some timely advice from this man who loves the land: ‘If you want to be involved in bush regeneration, it’s not neat and it will take a while. Nature’s the best –SHE is the teacher and we need to learn from her before it’s too late.

Tim Flannery

ECO: As far back as 1995 you were advocating a population policy by 2005 with an ultimate target looking out two centuries. Nothing has been done – in fact we seem to be heading to unsustainability at a much faster pace. What do you say to that?

TIM: I think that’s pretty much correct. Well, we need a population policy in this country rather than a series of programs that simply boost that population. We’ve got a number of pro-natalist programs and immigration programs, but we don’t have an over-arching population policy based on our environmental assessments, social assessments, and an economic assessment as to what the true population needs of our country are over the medium to long term. And that’s what we need.

ECO: How do you feel that even after all this time that the only decision as far as population policy is concerned is to not have a real decision at all and to let Australia head for limitless growth?
TIM: We have to win these battles but it takes a long time to do that. It took us a long time to get an environment minister in this country. Unfortunately, until enough people want this and understand the problem it doesn’t become a political priority. And, of course, one of the difficulties is we’re seeking to take something away from politicians effectively. At the moment they are at least arguably responsible for setting the programs and their parameters. It is all hard at the moment, but we have to keep pushing.

ECO: What size of population is sustainable in Australia and what should we do now that we may already be past that point?
TIM: We don’t know the sustainable population of Australia – and that’s one of the great tragedies. The government has never asked for a commission or commissioned a group to try to do that. That would be the first job of an independent body that would help set population targets into the future. But we just don’t know at the moment what the optimum population for this country is and therefore what sort of population size we should be aiming for by 2030 0r 2050.

ECO: Why can’t our leading decision-makers get their heads around this issue?
TIM: It’s a failing of all governments, not just this one. No government has done it before. Part of the problem is that government likes to have more taxpayers – they like growth just like businesses like to have more customers. They like growth as well.  But the populace as a whole doesn’t necessarily want high rates of growth. We have to deepen our democracy to the point where this becomes a real imperative politically.

ECO: Where should we be by 2020 let alone 2050 because of the world’s deteriorating food supply problem and with Australia having to feed more of its own? How will that change our dealings with the rest of the world?
TIM: A good question – for the agriculture minister. I haven’t seen the latest figures on our food security situation but my guess is that we are using more food domestically and exporting less than we were 30 years ago. I’d like to see the figures on that. That’s one of the factors that have to feed into a population policy.

ECO: How will the Catch 22 dilemma ultimately be resolved — the dilemma being how to sustain the Australian lifestyle that some tell us needs a growing economy which in turn needs a growing population where more people use up more of our finite resources in a shorter space of time and quickly destroy the lifestyle  we love so much?
TIM: I don’t believe a vibrant economy needs a growing population. There are plenty of countries in the world with stable or even declining populations that have a good economic status. It’s a matter of decoupling those two things to some extent. I think that’s entirely possible and, of course, every country in the world is going to have to do that in the medium term. It looks as if the world population will peak around 2050. So I think we can do that.

ECO: The social culture of many immigrants is to have large families. How do we deal with that issue?
TIM: What you have to do is have a national population policy with some rough targets. They are only guidelines, of course. Government can’t dictate family size to people but what we want to do is just have an overall policy setting which at least nudges the population towards where we think we might want to be.

ECO: On the issue of carrying capacity how do we reach that figure and how do we manage the country once we go past it? Does it mean we would then have to sacrifice our present level of living, which would be political dynamite?
TIM: No one knows what the optimum population for Australia is at this moment. We don’t have those figures. That’s the first job of any government or anyone who is concerned with this; to try to set up some kind of medium- to long-term target. Of course, population only changes very, very slowly. So you really need to deal with 20 year and 40 year time frames and so forth.

ECO: How can we win the argument and get politicians to see commonsense and no longer be blinded by vested business interests and perhaps their selfishness?
TIM: Again, we have to deepen our democracy to the point where people actually do get a say in it. One political party needs to put up a strong proposal about some sort of Reserve Bank board- type structure that would help set those medium to long term targets. That’s the only way we’ll get change in this area.

ECO: Is stabilisation of population an option? How do you get to that steady state situation?
TIM: The United Nations projections for world population are that it will stabilise around 2050 at around 9 billion. Many countries have already stabilised their populations. Of course it’s an option. How you get there is through good government policy, if that’s what you want to achieve.

ECO: What are your views on the increasing number of debates and forums about the population/growth issue?
TIM: They’re useful. Where there is a rational debate about this and you have a good cross-section of views – yes, then I think it is worth discussing the issue.

ECO: What is your greatest fear and your greatest hope now on the population issue?
TIM: My greatest fear is that things continue as they are. My greatest hope is that we end up with a rational population policy and an independent body that sets the medium to long-term population figures for the country.

In this edition we take an Up Close look at their lifestyle and why they decided to home-school their daughters.

“The most revolutionary thing you can do is to provide your children with a connection to nature.  If you feel you are a part of something, you will naturally respect it,” says Sally Johnson. She says it in a way that tells you that this is a statement made after many years of searching and learning.

Elly and Jessie play under the shade of a tree. Image: greghardwick.com.au

With so much news bringing almost daily predictions of pending doom, climate change has caused many people to simply switch off. Crowded by a growing population, along with an increasing trend to self-impose busy lifestyles upon ourselves, many people are starting to perform a collective head-in-the-sand reaction.

“It’s getting a bit depressing and we’re getting a bit immune to it. People don’t want to listen to it any more — it all sounds too bad to do anything about it,” says Sally.

However, she believes there is something we can all do — change the way we relate to the environment.

“I feel that there needs to be a shift, you push something on people through fear, and it never works.  People have to make a shift inside themselves and let that gradually take over”.

Local academic and author Dana Thomsen recognises our disconnection from nature as a major problem. She wrote, in her recently published book Sustainability innovators: Agents of change on the Sunshine Coast: “ Media coverage of climate change has raised awareness of human-environmental interactions on a scale not seen in recent times where the general trend has been an ever-increasing disconnection with our natural surroundings.”

Sally, her husband Paul and their two young girls, Jessie, 4 and Elly, 6 have lived on their property in the Noosa hinterland for the past seven years. Paul and Sally, both in their late thirties, have that healthy look that comes from years of eating well and spending time outdoors keeping active. Both of them have a keen interest in creating a sustainable lifestyle for their family. Their girls have a youthful sparkle in their eyes and they seem equally as relaxed handling the chickens, helping in the gardens or doing as children do, playing together under the shade of a tree.

Driving down their dirt driveway, cone-shaped piles of mulch are waiting to be placed around native plants. The familiar deep-green-leaves of local Lilly Pilly species line the left of the narrow driveway and on the right, healthy looking chickens quietly graze under a home-made dome, inspired by Linda Woodrow’s The Permaculture Home Garden.

The last big rains flooded the local area earlier this year and now the ground is dry and almost scorched in the midday sun. Trees, lining local streams, still have flood debris lodged a metre or so up the trunk, yet the stream beds are now dry with dead leaves and branches, all poised to be washed away by a summer deluge.

Paul and Sally Johnson. Image: greghardwick.com.au

Fruit trees dominate a northern slope close to their house as lorikeets swoop down to feed from a native grevillea. Despite the dry, hot and sometimes energy-sapping weather, the house and the surrounding land provide a calm retreat from the Sunshine Coast’s growing population.

Pointing towards the north-facing slope, with a keen smile on his face, Paul tells me of his future plans.

“We would like to do more with the gardens, like they do in Bali with directing water, playing with swales and deep ripping, so that the water stays in the ground rather than having to store it in a dam.”

The size and the number of fruit trees, along with the vegetable gardens displays just how much work they have done.

“Its small steps,” says Sally.  “While we still look at the big picture, at times it’s easy to think you’re getting nowhere. But we can now look back and see how far we have come.”

We sit down in the shade of the veranda. The modest timber clad house is cooled as an easterly breeze flows up the valley. The corrugated roof above us supports a 2 kilowatt grid-connect solar power system which sits beside a solar-hot-water panel and tank.

They chose the property due to its location. Few neighbours surround them and yet the area is known for its strong sense of community. For Sally, there was something more.

“The reason for wanting to live here, for me, was my childhood link with nature.  What I connected to in my childhood is what I want for my children.  To allow Elly and Jessie to have the same connection with nature is very important for me.”

Paul, has worked in the landscaping industry and now works for a tree-lopping business and Sally, who has studied applied science and wilderness management spends her weekdays home schooling her daughters.

Home schooling the girls, says Sally, gives them time to continually connect with nature.

“At that young age the connection with nature is the most important thing.  There’s plenty of time for the computers and watching TV when they’re older.”

There aren’t any concrete statistics in Australia for the number of children being home schooled, yet some believe there could be between 17,000 – 40,000 school-aged students, nation-wide. While the Sunshine Coast is thought to contain the highest number of home-schooled children in the country.

The most frequently asked question about home schooling is a concern about socialising. Yet local gatherings with up to 10 other home-schooling families, just in the Cooran area, means their children often get to mix with different age groups, free of the usual and sometimes difficult peer pressures of the school yard.

Through home schooling Sally wants her daughters to experience the small subtleties of nature. As she points out, if your first experiences are the bright flashy lights of new technology, then nature can seem almost dull and uninteresting.

It’s a problem that is recognised around the western world. “Right now children are spending their days inside and their evenings and weekends plugged into electronic media,” said Carl Pope, Executive Director of the Sierra Club — America’s oldest grassroots environmental organisation.

“They are missing out on the daily childhood joy of playing outside that their parents’ took for granted just twenty years ago,” he said.

According to the 117-year-old conservation organisation, research shows that when children spend time outside they are more creative and better focused.

“Children also have that curiosity of the world, that sense of wonder.  They like to see how things connect,” adds Sally.

“We’ll go for a walk with the girls and Elly, the eldest, will say; ‘Oh, that’s why that happens’ — she is putting things together that she learnt a few weeks ago. “

“We’ve learnt so much too,” says Paul.

“Children are so simple and uncomplicated — they often live in the moment.”

They also make interesting and quite profound comparisons. After watching a kangaroo with a joey in the pouch, Elly quickly noticed how differently we humans live.

“We need prams and lots of other stuff,” she said. “I think it would be better if we made things from nature and lived in smaller houses”.

Further information

Motivation and inspiration: Hunter Campbell “Patch” Adams, M.D.

Currently reading:
Walden: or life in the woods (Henry David Thoreau)

Professor Ian Lowe. Image greghardwick.com.au

Eco: Ian, what do think is the motivation for the Queensland government’s fascination with  continuing the mantra of population growth?

Prof Lowe: Well, there’s a superstition and it is only a superstition that growing population means a growing economy which gives the impression that things are going well.

I was at a conference a few years ago in Canberra, in which John Coulter, a former Democrat leader in the Senate, produced some figures that showed that there’s actually a negative correlation between population growth and economic indicators like Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.   So even if you’re so naïve as to think that the GDP is a measure of well being and that its growth means people are better off, places with a higher rate of population growth are doing badly and the places with a stable or even declining populations are actually doing well.

And there’s a simple economic explanation for it — if the population is growing, you need to invest in things that are in economic terms unproductive, like houses, sewage, water and roads. Where if your population is stable and you are only replacing old houses as they fall apart you can invest in having a more productive economy. So even in economic terms it’s just not very smart.

But the point is, of course, if there are more people here, then you need more houses, and more clothes and more food so the overall size of the economy is bigger and the government can say: “The economy is growing at three per cent, aren’t we good?”.

But again as John Coulter pointed out, if you have a rational economic system you would set against the increase in wealth, the decline in natural assets. So for example, if you sell Gorgon gas to China, yes you would have some money but you wouldn’t have the gas which would mean you that you didn’t have an asset for future generations of Australians to use and similarly if you concrete over your best agricultural land to accommodate another 500,000 people living in Queensland, yes you have the asset of those extra houses but you have the negative of having lost that agricultural land.

Eco: How do we overcome that issue, where especially here on the Sunshine Coast we’re almost addicted to growth.  In terms of the economy we are very much dependent upon the housing, construction and development sectors. How do we make the transition away from this and reposition ourselves for the future?

Prof Lowe: Well, what we need is a coherent, long-term economic strategy. Anyone with half a brain can see that it’s not sustainable to have 60 per cent of your jobs in the construction sector because you get this negative cycle that people are coming here because there’s jobs, but the jobs are only here because people are coming here.

Eco: So it’s like a Pyramid selling scheme?

Prof Lowe: Absolutely, yes. Well, you could argue that it’s a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi scheme is a particular type of corporate fraud for which you go to jail in which you produce generous dividends for the shareholders by selling the capital stock of the company. We’re running down the capital stock of the Sunshine Coast to provide generous dividends for this generation of shareholders in ‘Sunshine Coast Inc’ and that’s clearly not sustainable.

So if you were serious about the long term future of the Coast, you’d be thinking about which employment sources are genuinely sustainable. Now, local tourism aimed at people within Australia is a lot more sustainable than international tourism and that’s probably an area we can sustain but we should be investing in the knowledge-based industries that are likely to grow in the future, rather than assuming that we’ll always be able to find another wetland to concrete over to build houses for people who have come here to concrete over the wetland.

Eco: It appears, and one of the big discussion points has always been, that we don’t want the Sunshine Coast to become another Gold Coast. But it looks as though the new South East Queensland Regional Plan has basically said that within about 20 years we will have a population equivalent to that of the present-day Gold Coast.  Do you think it’s possible to have a population the size of the Gold Coast on the Sunshine Coast and still retain the sort of values and character that makes the Sunshine Coast what it is?

Prof Lowe: I can’t see how that’s possible. I mean if you look at the Gold Coast, it’s a similar area of coastline and the only way you can accommodate that many people and not damage as much of the coastline, would be to have more of them in the sort of  high-rise developments of the Gold Coast that no-one on the Sunshine Coast wants.

So, there’s a  fundamental conflict if you want to accommodate 500,000 people you either have to have a sprawling low-rise development which in transport terms and carbon terms is not sustainable, which then means you lose all your agricultural land and your natural assets, or you have 20-storey high-rise towers which produces an urban landscape that people see at the Gold Coast and they don’t like.

So, a more rational strategy would be to say we want to keep the target population of the Sunshine Coast at a level that would enable us to maintain our natural assets. And if you think about where all this began, Noosa Shire basically took that strategic decision to limit residential numbers and tourist numbers at a level that would maintain their natural assets. In economic terms, it’s entirely rational because tourism is their biggest industry.

Tourists don’t come to admire high-rise buildings or listen to inspired speeches from politicians, they come because of the natural assets. If we want the Sunshine Coast to continue to have a viable tourist industry, our first duty is to maintain those natural assets rather than concrete the joint over and turn it into another Gold Coast.

Eco: The Sunshine Coast Regional Council’s response to the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan was that they wanted the state to take any population targets out of the plan for the Sunshine Coast until they undertook what they called a sustainable carrying capacity exercise which not only looked at the biophysical constraints but also the character of the Sunshine Coast.  What do you think? What is the sustainable carrying capacity of the Coast? What does it really mean?

Prof Lowe: Yes, there’s no doubt you can cram more people into the same area if you want to have a different quality of life. I point out to people that Brisbane is roughly the same surface area as greater London and greater Tokyo which have respectively 8 and 12 million people compared with the 1.25 million of the greater Brisbane area. So there’s no doubt you can accommodate 5-10 times as many people in the same area but at a very different quality of life.

So, I agree with the principle that we should be looking at the carrying capacity but that carrying capacity is not an absolute number. There are different numbers based on different standards of living, different qualities of social experience. I mean in a sense we had that discussion as part of Maroochy 2025 and those people who were involved voted strongly for limiting the population and maintaining our natural assets. And, I would argue that the mayoral election on the Sunshine Coast was essentially a referendum on the future of the Coast.

The people voted 70/30 for the vision of not extending the Maroochydore/Caloundra approach to Noosa, but extending the Noosa approach to Maroochydore and Caloundra. I suppose what I would like to see is our elected representatives standing up for the platform on which they were elected and saying we were elected with an overwhelming mandate for limiting the population for the Sunshine Coast to a level that maintains our quality of life

Eco: I think it was interesting that when a recent survey was done in the Sunshine Coast Daily in conjunction with the University of the Sunshine Coast, it showed that 77 per cent of people considered that overpopulation of the Sunshine Coast was the most important issue which is almost identical to the current Mayor’s polling. So there is a high correlation, I think, between those two. One of the things that politicians are scared of, I suppose, is that the state government will take over planning powers away from Council and just ram through poor quality development. What’s your view on that?

Prof Lowe: Well I would rather they stood up and had a fight with the state government than adopt what one of my colleagues calls the “pre-emptive crumble”. Rather than have the state government enforce lousy planning on us we’ll do it for them. They were elected for the mandate to stand up to the state government and fight for the Sunshine Coast and I think in the current political climate the state government would be very reluctant to overrule a popularly elected regional council.

Eco: Especially the fourth largest local government in Australia?

Prof Lowe: That’s right. So I would rather the Council stood up to the State government and said we were elected with a mandate to protect the natural assets of the Coast and we’re going to do it. If you want to take us on, we’ll fight you politically and might even think about fighting them legally. A state government has powers over local government but the commonwealth government has powers over the state. Now Kevin Rudd’s probably not going to want to pick a fight with Anna Bligh but there’s no doubt that quality of life is a political issue. I’d welcome it becoming a political issue rather than just accepting that the state government caving into the developers is going to overrule what the people want.

Eco: Exactly. I know you’re a busy man Ian and I would like to thank you very much for your time and sharing your views on this important topic with Eco News.

Roberto Perez Rivero, a world-renowned Cuban permaculture and environmental educator, recently toured Australia as part of the Cuba Australia Permaculture Exchange.

Roberto has featured in the award-winning documentary film, The Power of Community, which shows how Cuba adapted to rapidly declining oil supplies. In his early 20s he found himself in the middle of a crisis, which would later become known as The Special Period.

When the Soviet Union collapsed in 1990, Cuba’s economy went into a nose dive. With imports of oil cut by more than half and food by 80 per cent, the people were desperate.

ECO caught up with Roberto as he ended his Australian tour with a final appearance on the Sunshine Coast at the Future Ready Expo. For five weeks he gave 24 presentations in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia with most venues reportedly packed to capacity.

If the numbers of people who attended his presentations are any indication, Australians are catching on quick to lessons about the consequences of peak oil. Ian Christesen interviewed him exclusively for ECO.

ECO: Tell me something about your background.

Roberto: Ok, yes. My background is as a biologist. I did my degree at the University of Havana and hand-wrote my thesis as there were no computers in Cuba. In fact, there are very few computers at the moment. So when I finally had access to a computer and typed my thesis, the director of the research centre (at the university) asked me if I knew something about permaculture and I didn’t. So that same day I did a little research in the Ministry of Agriculture and Farming where I found a little book that said more or less what permaculture was. The next day I was there (at the uni) and I talked about permaculture and he (the research director) told me that he was signing an agreement with a group of people from Australia that year to train people in permaculture and, if I wanted, I could be a part of this. I didn’t hesitate. I said yes. I always wanted to do something for nature and for the people. My biology training was addressing issues with nature and I thought that it was a good starting point to find out how permaculture worked by addressing the human problems; by trying to use natural solutions.

ECO: So what year was that, Roberto?

Roberto: It was 1993. The crisis, that was known as The Special Period, started in 1991. I was in the my third year of university and things got very, very difficult. We started getting skinnier and skinnier [laughs].We started using more bicycles, the situation was very difficult.

ECO: There weren’t many dogs and cats around in those days?

Roberto: Yes, especially cats [laughs]. I wanted to do more research and I wanted to do something for the people.  The more I learned about permaculture the more I found that permaculture was speaking to me.  They were using terms that I learnt in my training.  Terms about ecology, natural cycles and food forests. So all of these ideas were literally talking to me. The things that I learnt in biology were refining my skills in permaculture they could be applied to improve the life of the people.

ECO: When you were learning about permaculture in Cuba, what sort of government support did you have? Did The Committees for the Defence of the Revolution (CDR) assist? Was there a budget nationally for permaculture?

Roberto: No.  Although windows of opportunity existed, like research in organic farming, biodynamics and a huge grass-roots movement. We used the ideas that came from Australia and started trying to use those skills to help people in urban areas. That’s why in the beginning we tried to start roof-top gardens.

ECO: So it was primarily in urban environments?

Roberto: Totally. Why?  Because 35 per cent of the Cuban population were considered urban. And, because Havana had 2.2 million people at the time and contained almost 20 per cent of the population with less than 10 per cent of the land area.  So the biggest problems were there.  It’s a big country and we were able to spread the idea from there. So that’s where we started.  In Australia, we received help from The Australian Conservation Foundation’s Green Team and we finally got a project, partly funded by our Government.

In 1994, around August, the research centre that signed the first agreement was closed as part of the re-localisation of the Government.  We had some contact with part of the CDR.  We didn’t always have funding, we were trying to use the existing structure which was very grassroots based. Urban production was given high priority.

ECO: During that time, were you looking to spread permaculture outside of Havana, for example, into other urban centres like Santiago De Cuba?

Roberto: No, not yet.  In 1995 we started the first permaculture course, the first permaculture design certificate.  There was a rearrangement of the Government facilities and we realised that it was the time to find a more permanent partnership.

Since we already had the project, we tried to look at the non-government sector of Cuba.  Around November 1995 we approached the Foundation for Nature and Humanity(Fundacion de la Naturalez y el Hombre), FNH, Havana, which was led by Antonio Núñez Jiménez, who passed away in 1998.  He said that it was very, very important for Cuba, especially during that period.  So we signed an agreement and from that point on FNH became the focal point of permaculture in the country.

ECO: Do you think, Roberto, that looking back, without this special period happening, without that sort of crisis, that permaculture would have been readily accepted?  Was it something that happened only because of that time?

Roberto: I think it would probably follow the same course as has happened in most parts of the world.  In the case of Cuba there was an urgency to produce food, especially in the cities. But we needed to do it in a very creative way.

ECO: If Cuba gained greater access to oil, for example, from Venezuela, do you think that permaculture will be seen as less important?

Roberto: We are in that situation right now.  We can get oil from Venezuela, at about $28 per barrel.  But we are using half the oil that we were using in 1989 and permaculture is stronger than ever in Cuba.  An explanation for that, is that one, we have had almost 20 years (experience with permaculture) and these values are in the minds of the people. Secondly, it’s not only about the petrol or oil, because after that many years, agricultural production and the country’s infrastructure have changed a lot.  For example, it is not only about the petrol you have now. You buy new trucks because the old ones are rusty.  You will need to invest money in the infrastructure because the roads are very small, often used by only oxen and horse cart. If you consider the costs, permaculture is now very convenient for us.

ECO: Considering the differences in our political structures, can the Cuban example of urban permaculture be used here in Australia?

Roberto: I think that the differences are within how the community is structured.  Our society is deeply community-based and the components of our society, with African, Cantonese, Spanish and a little bit of French influence Cuba is deeply community-based. People rely on each other and that was something that really helped us to resist the worst of the crisis.  There were no riots. There was hunger, nutritional defects, but there were no droughts.  The response was ordered.  I think one of the biggest differences was that our society was not based on the individual.  So that makes the scenario more contentious. People in your society will need to learn to share.

ECO: Will our individuality and political structures exacerbate the peak oil crisis?

Roberto: Yes, especially because of the political structure, I think that you need to be a little stronger in terms of regulation. Free market solutions, unfortunately in my opinion, don’t seem to work.  Capital trading and those sorts of things are not giving the effect that was expected, they are just making it worse. I think that two things are going to hit in a big way.

One, an increase in the price of food, which is happening right now and there are riots happening around the world, because of the high rate of biofuel production.  When you look at wheat, we see that it doubled in price in the last year.  Biofuel itself is a good thing, but what is happening unfortunately, is that they are using human food crops as ethanol.  This is not the solution, but it directly affects us and the economy.  Food resources around the world are at a very low level.

The second  issue is with climate change. These strange events — droughts, hurricanes, typhoons, all of these make food production less reliable.  So between the two pressures of biofuels and climate change, the issues around food production are going to be very, very complicated, even before peak oil hits.

ECO: So it comes down to an equity issue.  Where the so-called developed world is taking away productive farm land for our fuel needs.

Roberto: Exactly, it’s absurd and almost criminal.  Rich countries are abusing energy and natural resources, and now they are taking away productive food crops. If you take away the food and you continue doing that to nature, the planet will be sick.

For more information on how corporations are making money while the world goes through a food crisis follow this link.

ECO: Do you think we are heading for a crisis on a global scale?

Roberto: Yes.  Because the world is adopting the American way of life. It is non-negotiable and based upon economic growth.  They are saying that to keep the economy growing, they can afford to allow a global temperature increase of 3 degrees.  That is total madness.  It is very sad because leaders are being influenced by the big companies.

ECO: I know you are a very busy man, so thank you very much Roberto for your time. Thank you for sharing your experience with us.

“I live in great luxury, in a magnificent Queenslander high on Point Vernon,” says the Minister for Sustainability, Climate Change and Innovation. Andrew McNamara’s definition of luxury, however, is unexpected: while his home has neither air conditioner, nor clothes dryer, nor swimming pool, its wide wooden verandas catch the prevailing breezes and solar panels heat its water.

He has plans to convert the whole house to solar power, becoming part of what he predicts will be an explosion of demand on the heels of the Queensland Government’s solar bonus scheme. From 1 July this year, the government will pay households and businesses 44 cents for every kilowatt hour generated by solar power systems and fed into the grid.

“I think (the tariff) marks one of those turning points in solar power. It reduces front end electricity bills and the repayment time on the systems comes down from ten years to three. I think it will now be picked up by governments and houses across Australia.”

His endorsement of solar power seems a big leap for someone who, before entering parliament seven years ago, sat on the board of Ergon Energy. Environmental interests and energy interests are usually thought to pull in different directions.

“That is traditional thinking,” he says, “but it’s completely wrong. Our wealth is built on the natural environment we inherit and the energy we extract from it. They’re not just linked, they’re the same thing.”

Ergon proved a valuable training ground for the future Minister. In 1999 the Beattie government declared within five years Queensland would generate 13 per cent of its electricity from gas. The announcement caused consternation in the Ergon board, of which Mr McNamara was a member.

“I learned the power of targets,” he says of the experience. “Governments setting targets for industry can drive enormous change. To take the gas industry from almost nothing to 13 per cent of Queensland’s power within five years was remarkable.
“For me, being on the Ergon board when the 13 per cent gas target was announced, and in Cabinet when the solar feed-in tariff was announced, was a sweet double.

“The rooftops of Queensland represent an unbelievable resource for gathering power and I expect the day will come when every roof is a solar collector”

“I think the solar tariff will change our power mix in Queensland significantly. What really excites me is that it’s a huge step towards recognising we need distributed power systems.”

In an energy-constrained world, losing 20 to 25 per cent of power by sending it vast distances is too inefficient. Local solutions provide answers.
“The rooftops of Queensland represent an unbelievable resource for gathering power and I expect the day will come when every roof is a solar collector. It’s shameful how far behind we are,” he says. “Copenhagen, with a third of the number of our sunny days is producing 35 per cent of power from solar. It’s just embarrassing.”

Mr McNamara predicts the Federal Government’s carbon trading system (announced in March and planned for 2010) will transform the energy sector, providing a massive boost to renewables. However, he also admits government action is too late.

“We needed to get our act together 30 years ago. We are pretty well locked into two degrees of global warming no matter what we do. So the battle is on two fronts: firstly to try and stop the two degrees we know are coming turning into four, and secondly to adapt to the two we know are coming.”

Adaptation work, he says, includes giving Queensland’s biodiversity the best chance of survival by ensuring clean waterways, north-south and east-west connectivity of nature corridors, and redoubled efforts on pests and weeds.
As part of staving off the spectre of a four-degree rise, Mr McNamara is currently reviewing last year’s Climate Smart 2050 policy. While the strategy committed to a 60 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions between 2000 and 2050, he says “it doesn’t go far enough in addressing the scale of the problem. It focuses too much on stationary energy and not anywhere near enough on emissions from other sectors”.

Some 40 per cent of Queensland’s emissions are from stationary energy, and much of Climate Smart 2050 looked to “clean coal” power stations for answers. However, the technology does not yet exist and is predicted to take well over a decade to deliver any greenhouse gas savings.

In the meantime, Queensland’s coal powered stations continue to pump between 40 and 50 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent into the atmosphere every year, overwhelming the relatively small emissions savings made elsewhere, e.g. the 13 per cent gas policy.

It’s just as well, then, that in early March Mr McNamara convinced the government to require assessments of greenhouse gas implications, mitigation options and alternatives in all cabinet submissions.
“It’s an enormous reform and I believe we’re the only government in Australia doing it. I think the British government’s just introduced something similar, but not quite as extensive.

“I think it’s a very significant change in mindset that should filter through everything we do. It’s something I’m very proud of.”

The reform precedes a review of the Integrated Planning Act by Deputy Premier Paul Lucas, which Mr McNamara predicts will require all councils to take into account the implications of climate change in development applications and approvals.

It remains to be seen if Mr McNamara’s initiatives, designed to help steer the climate change juggernaut away from disaster, keep the support of a comparatively conservative cabinet.

Well versed in the evidence and predictions of climate change, he is confident that the public opinion tide has turned.
“There’s a much broader acceptance and understanding across the community about the challenges. I’m still not sure people have quite got their heads around the scale of the impacts that are already locked in.”

Peak bodies from the building industry have approached the government offering to roll out vast improvements in energy, water and carbon emissions if they are mandated. While encouraged by the approaches, Mr McNamara admits such improvements in the sector will hinge on regulation, “because you need to keep the playing field level”.

Coastal development is about to feel the early effects of disrupted weather patterns, Mr McNamara forecasts, driven not by regulation but by risk.

“I believe the insurance industry is on the verge of reassessing risk in relation to coastal communities as a result of climate change. When the insurance industry changes its premiums for coastal development or withdraws the offer of insurance, the finance industry will withdraw the offer of finance, and we will see a fundamental shift.”

Towards sustainable development?

“The word ‘sustainable’ has been brutally misused down the years, as if putting it in front of something grants sustainability; like magic – sprinkle the sustainable word over it and it’s good,” he says.
“I’d like to reclaim the word, and I was glad the Premier made me the Minister for Sustainability because it implies interaction between human use of the planet and the environment.”

Klaus Langner of Latronics

In this section we explore the stories behind the people. Whether they are running a successful sustainable business, have an esteemed academic background, or simply approach life in a way that considers the planet and the community around them; we want to share their story. In Up Close we promote the positive stories of the people that make a difference.

This month we look at Klaus Langner and his successful Caloundra business, Latronics.

In an era when we are witnessing Australia’s electronic and renewable energy manufacturing base rapidly retreating to China, here on the Sunshine Coast a local business is showing the way forward.

When considering the questions I wanted to ask, at first I was thinking about his past and where in Germany, Klaus Langner was from. After all, having lived in the German speaking part of Switzerland in the early 90′s I thought I might be able to relate to his homeland in some small way.

But, it quickly becomes obvious once we meet that Klaus is a man of the future. His blond shoulder-length hair, angular features and warm smile seems matched to the industry and coastal location he works in. His manner of speaking portrays an open-minded person who is certain of his direction in life, as well as the direction of his business.

He takes me behind the front reception area and right away I notice how open and light the place is.

“Every desk faces a window so everyone can look outside,” he points out.

No cubicles to be seen, which all too often give that familiar rabbit-warren appearance, typical of most offices. Klaus feels it is vital that everyone gets the opportunity to gaze outside towards native plants and have reflected sunlight instead of uninspiring blank walls and fluorescent lighting.

Just metres away is the electronics assembly area where a small team puts together the circuitry necessary for the range of inverters Latronics have become famous for around the country over the past 22 years. For most of us an inverter is a ‘black box’ that changes the steady currents of a battery, or photovoltaic panel, into the alternating currents we rely on for our electricity.

At Latronics it is more than just a box. Their inverters are a complex arrangement of circuit boards, put together meticulously by human hands. No machines, no automation. Klaus explains how machines are prone to errors as they simply don’t know when they are doing something wrong. The money he saves on avoiding automated mistakes goes into paying people instead.

And it’s people he truly cares about. When thinking of assembly lines and electronics, I think of impersonal factories, noise, heat in summer and cold, dark areas in winter. But this is no ordinary workplace. The work areas are quiet and clean, and in my short visit it appears Latronics is more like one big family.

Sixteen people find employment here — mainly local youth who live in the Caloundra area. It becomes obvious that Klaus’s philosophy and calmness is rubbing off on his workers as they quietly go about their business.

Family and community come first and work and money come a distant second, he explains while stretching his arms apart to emphasise the point.

“It is important we have local people, so we don’t place stress from travel on the families of our workers,” he adds.

On the way to another large assembly shed we pass ponds, built to take the over-flow from water tanks, neatly grassed lawns, compost bins, outside decked areas for workers to relax and even chickens in a small coop under a tree. As we enter the building he points to the Styrofoam collected from packing boxes, lining and insulating the tin walls.

He also proudly displays the new solar-cooker. Looking more like a satellite dish than a barbeque, it uses the sun’s heat to quickly cook your preferred plat du jour. It appears that those who dedicate a life to the renewable energy industry are always looking for ways to use the abundant free energy from our nearest star.

At Latronics they not only use the sun passively for outside cooking and inside lighting, they use it for electricity generation as well. Klaus takes me up some stairs and points to a large bank of photovoltaic panels on the shed we’ve just walked from.

Workers are on the roof of the main building installing more panels and, by the time they’re finished, there will be 21 kW of electrical energy generated courtesy of the sun. This is impressive when considering the average solar-powered house can get by with as little as 1 kW. Some of the rows of panels ingeniously slide on tracks so that whilst they pump out power in the hot midday sun, they also shield sky-lights and the people below.

As I leave I’m impressed with the entire site, the way everything is integrated and how it reflects a man who cares for the local environment, the people he employs and their combined futures.

It may at first appear like something that belongs in an ABC documentary about a futuristic European or American eco-industrial site. But it doesn’t, and the Sunshine Coast is better for it.