The Veil of Kyoto and the politics of greenhouse gas mitigation in Australia

This paper investigates how the Kyoto Protocol has framed political discourse and policy development of greenhouse gas mitigation in Australia. We argue that ‘Kyoto’ has created a veil over the climate issue in Australia in a number of ways. Firstly, its symbolic power has distracted attention from actual environmental outcomes while its accounting rules obscure the real level of carbon emissions and structural trends at the nation-state level. Secondly, a public policy tendency to commit to far off emission targets as a compromise to implementing legislation in the short term has also emerged on the back of Kyoto-style targets. Thirdly, Kyoto’s international flexibility mechanisms can lead to the diversion of mitigation investment away from the nation-state implementing carbon legislation. A final concern of the Kyoto approach is how it has shifted focus away from Australia as the world’s largest coal exporter towards China, its primary customer. While we recognise the crucial role aspirational targets and timetables play in capturing the imagination and coordinating action across nations, our central theme is that ‘Kyoto’ has overshadowed the implementation of other policies in Australia. Understanding how ‘Kyoto’ has framed debate and policy is thus crucial to promoting environmentally effective mitigation measures as nation-states move forward from COP15 in Copenhagen to forge a post-Kyoto international agreement. Recent elections in 2009 in Japan and America and developments at COP15 suggest positive scope for international action on climate change. However, the lesson from the 2007 election and subsequent events in Australia is a caution against elevating the symbolism of ‘Kyoto-style’ targets and timetables above the need for implementation of mitigation policies at the nation-state level

Late Pleistocene history of turbidite sedimentation in a submarine canyon off the northern Great Barrier Reef, Australia

Cores from slopes east of the Great Barrier Reef (GBR) challenge traditional models for sedimentation on tropical mixed siliciclastic-carbonate margins. However, satisfactory explanations of sediment accumulation on this archetypal margin that include both hemipelagic and turbidite sedimentation remain elusive, as submarine canyons and their role in delivering coarse-grained turbidite deposits, are poorly understood. Towards addressing this problem we investigated the shelf and canyon system bordering the northern Ribbon Reefs and reconstructed the history of turbidite deposition since the Late Pleistocene. High-resolution bathymetric and seismic data show a large paleo-channel system that crosses the shelf before connecting with the canyons via the inter-reef passages between the Ribbon Reefs. High-resolution bathymetry of the canyon axis reveals a complex and active system of channels, sand waves, and local submarine landslides. Multi-proxy examination of three cores from down the axis of the canyon system reveals 18 turbidites and debrites, interlayered with hemipelagic muds, that are derived from a mix of shallow and deep sources. Twenty radiocarbon ages indicate that siliciclastic-dominated and mixed turbidites only occur prior to 31 ka during Marine Isotope Stage (MIS) 3, while carbonate-dominated turbidites are well established by 11 ka in MIS1 until as recently as 1.2 ka. The apparent lack of siliciclastic-dominated turbidites and presence of only a few carbonate-dominated turbidites during the MIS2 lowstand are not consistent with generic models of margin sedimentation but might also reflect a gap in the turbidite record. These data suggest that turbidite sedimentation in the Ribbon Reef canyons, probably reflects the complex relationship between the prolonged period (> 25 ka) of MIS3 millennial sea level changes and local factors such as the shelf, inter-reef passage depth, canyon morphology and different sediment sources. On this basis we predict that the spatial and temporal patterns of turbidite sedimentation could vary considerably along the length of the GBR margin.

Session organiser/chair: The architecture of coal and other energies

Coal ignited the industrial revolution. An organic sedimentary rock that energized the globe, transforming cities, landscapes and societies for generations, the importance of ‘King Coal’ to the development and consolidation of modernity has been well-recognised. And yet, as a critical factor in the production of modern architecture, coal—as well as other forms of energy—has been mostly overlooked.

From Appalachia to Lanarkshire, from the pits of northern France, Belgium and the Ruhr valley, to the monumental opencast excavations of Russia, China, Africa and Australia, mining operations have altered the immediate social and physical landscapes of coal-rich areas. But in contrast to its own underground conditions of production, the winning of coal, especially in the twentieth-century, has produced conspicuously enlightened and humane approaches to architecture and urbanism. In the twentieth century, educational buildings, holiday camps, hospitals, swimming pools, convalescent homes and housing prevailed alongside model collieries in mining settlements and areas connected to them. In 1930s Britain, pit head baths—funded by a levy on each ton produced—were often built in the International Style. Many won praise for architectural merit, appearing in Nicholas Pevsner’s guides to the buildings of England alongside cathedrals, village manors and Masonic halls as testimonies to the public good.

The deep relationships between coal and modernity, and the expressions of architecture it has articulated, in the collieries from which it was hewn, the landscape and towns it shaped, and the power stations and other infrastructure where it was used, offer innumerable opportunities to explore how coal produced architectures which embodied and expressed both social and technological conditions. While proposals on coal are preferred, we also welcome papers that interrogate the complexity, heterogeneity and hybridity of other forms of energy production and how these have also interceded into architectural form at a range of scales.