Author Archives: hmcadmin

PLEA Network

22 September 2015, The Daily Beast, When Education Doesn’t Prevent Child Marriage. Going to school is supposed to empower young girls—and delay early marriage and childbirth. That’s the conventional wisdom, at least. But a new study on Malawi shows another outcome. There are endless studies showing education as a golden key for young girls in the developing world: Just a year of high school can bump up their economic prospects by 25 percent; cut chances of child marriage by more than half across Africa and Asia; and decrease infant mortality and total children birthed over a lifetime. Statistics aside, education is the best tool for empowering for young girls and women trying to survive in patriarchal society. It builds a framework for a world with gender equality. The benefits to applaud are endless, but merely providing education is not an insta-fix. A new study challenges this seemingly simple equation where education equals a better life. Read More here

PLEA Network

21 September 2015, The Conversation,  Creative self-destruction: the climate crisis and the myth of ‘green’ capitalism. The upcoming Paris climate talks in December this year have been characterised as humanity’s last chance to respond to climate change. Many hope that this time some form of international agreement will be reached, committing the world to significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. And yet there are clear signs that the much-touted “solutions” of emissions reduction targets and market mechanisms are insufficient for what is required. In our new book, Climate Change, Capitalism and Corporations: Processes of Creative Self-Destruction, we look at reasons why this has come about. We argue that businesses are locked in a cycle of exploiting the world’s resources in ever more creative ways. Innovating environmental destruction. The disconnect between business and climate action was symbolised by the announcement earlier this year that a significant portion of funding for the Paris meeting comes from major fossil fuel companies and carbon emitters; a situation French climate officials admitted was financially unavoidable. While perhaps unsurprising, this announcement hints at a deeper problem we now face — the global economic system of corporate capitalism appears incapable of achieving the levels of decarbonisation necessary to avoid dangerous climate change. Humanity is locked into a process of “creative self-destruction”. Our economies are now reliant upon ever-more ingenious ways of exploiting the Earth’s fossil fuel reserves and consuming the very life-support systems we rely on for our survival. This is evident in the rush by some of the world’s largest companies to embrace deep-water and Arctic oil drilling, tar-sands processing, new mega-coalmines, and the “fracking” of shale and coal-seam gas. These examples highlight both the inventive genius of corporate capitalism, and the blindness of industry and government to the ecological catastrophe they are fashioning. Read More here

PLEA Network

19 September 2015, Climate News Network, The global warming slowdown is an illusion. Researchers say the world is continuing to warm, and evidence shows claims of a slowdown are unequivocally illusory.  Global warming has not slowed. The so-called hiatus remains just that – so-called. The world is warming as predicted and any apparent evidence that it is not doing so is a statistical illusion, according to US scientists. They report in the journal Climatic Change that they applied “rigorous, comprehensive, statistical analysis” to the global temperature data and came up with this unequivocal conclusion. And although normally scientists like to spell out the caveats, the margins of error and the uncertainties in their conclusions, the team get to the point with unprecedented firmness. “We find compelling evidence that recent claims of a ‘hiatus’ in global warming lack sound scientific basis. Our analysis reveals that there is no hiatus in the increase in the global mean temperature, no statistically significant difference in trends, no stalling of the global mean temperature, and no change in year-to-year temperature increases,” they write. The very-much discussed and so-called pause, hiatus or slowdown in global warming has puzzled climate scientists for years. During the 1990s, annual global temperatures increased palpably, and at a measurable rate. In the early years of this century, the rate of increase began to slow. Read More here

PLEA Network

18 September 2015, The Guardian, Is new Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull already a climate change turncoat? Malcolm Turnbull once endorsed common sense positions on climate change. Then he became prime minister. During the first few days of being prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull seems to be doing his best to argue about climate change with a former version of himself. I know I might have already given the game away here, but who do you think said this only five years ago? “We are as humans conducting a massive science experiment with this planet. It’s the only planet we’ve got…. We know that the consequences of unchecked global warming would be catastrophic. We know that extreme weather events are occurring with greater and greater frequency and while it is never possible to point to one drought or one storm or one flood and say that particular incident is caused by global warming, we know that these trends are entirely consistent with the climate change forecasts with the climate models that the scientists are relying on…. We as a human species have a deep and abiding obligation to this planet and to the generations that will come after us.” Stirring stuff eh? That was Turnbull in August 2010, speaking at the launch of a report demonstrating the technical feasibility of moving Australia to a 100% renewable energy nation. During his first question time as PM earlier this week, Turnbull was asked if he would join Labor in its aspiration (and that’s about the extent of Labor’s policy on this right now) that Australia should be generating 50% of its electricity from renewables by 2030. Turnbull’s response? “[Opposition leader Bill Shorten] is highlighting one of the most reckless proposals the Labor party has made. Fancy proposing, without any idea of the cost of the abatement, the cost of proposing that 50% of energy had to come from renewables! What if that reduction in emissions you needed could come more cost-effectively from carbon storage, by planting trees, by soil carbon, by using gas, by using clean coal, by energy efficiency?” What did the Turnbull of 2010 make of a plan to move away from fossil fuels that was twice as ambitious as Labor’s, that actually explained how it could be done and that proposed doing it faster? Read More here