Damn strange logic
I'm not sure how bad your On The Wallaby column has to be before you ditch it, but surely you must be close to that point. The last offering from columnist David Everest raises one of his pet topics, dams. He says "the overall concept of capturing and storing excess rainfall to control flooding and then for productive use, is "sound". He then adds "Old mate Barnaby Joyce may be on the outer in certain circles, however he's right on the money when it comes to dam building."
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Except he isn't. If dams were such a great idea why didn't Barnaby build any when he was Minister for Agriculture and Deputy Prime Minister? Probably because his advisors told him that it wasn't such a great idea, and across the world there are now more dams being demolished than there are being built. All the best dam sites in Australia have been used, with the possible exception of some sites in Tasmania. Putting dams on the world's flattest island is not a good idea. It wastes a lot of water and that's something we don't have a surplus of at the moment. Dams on flat land are large, shallow and hot, causing enormous amounts of evaporation and they use up land that is better used for other purposes.
David Everest's logic is also dodgy when he argues dams are good for flood control and water storage. Actually they can do one or the other but not both. A full dam is no good for flood control because the flood will overflow it. An empty dam is no good for storage. The best you can get is a half full dam that is only half as good at both roles.
Graham Parton, Beechworth
Running out of time
In 2008 Professor Ross Garnaut gave a detailed report to the federal government on the economics of climate change. In it he said the changes initiated by humankind are on a scale large enough to affect the metabolism of the biosphere. The problem is the result of the effects of over-population.
There are too many people competing for too many resources, contributing to extreme poverty across the world. In 2015 a United Nations report showed inequality is increasing.
Then there is a study by Johan Rocksrom, Director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre who says two degrees may be the threshold at which self-reinforcing climate feedbacks will see very large quantities of greenhouse gases trapped in permafrost and undersea sediments. This additional warming could be enough to shift the world's climate until it stabilises in a hothouse state. This would render parts of the world uninhabitable. Sea levels up to 60 metres and global temperatures by 4-5 degrees. This is something we cannot ignore. Scientists have told us this horror scenario will be the outcome if our current inadequate response continues.
It is evident that climate change is not only the most serious problem, it is also the most urgent. Moreover, we know its cause and, if we act in time, its solution. But time is not on our side. We must stop pussy-footing around and get serious.
Stewart Eiseman, Baranduda
Letters to the editor
You can submit a letter to the editor via the comments section of our website at www.bordermail.com.au, or by emailing letters@bordermail.com.au. Your letter must contain your full name (for publication), as well as an address and contact phone number (not for publication).
