TAG - Geological Society of Australia

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Letters to the EditorI was surprised to read Phil Playford’s letterto the editor (TAG 159, p 13) bemoaning thefact that members of the GSA were not askedwhether they “support the hypothesis ofanthropogenic global warming (AGW)”. Sincewhen has climate science become a matter ofagreement between members of the GSA?I would have thought that just as particlephysics should be decided by physicists andcosmology decided by cosmologists, thatclimate science should be decided by climatologists.From memory, the GSA did not askmembers whether they agreed with the‘hypothesis’ (I am being generous here) ofintelligent design before they came up withtheir policy on ‘science education andcreationism’. It is not difficult to discern thatintelligent design is non-science as well asbeing nonsense and that those who espousesuch beliefs are simply denying reality.Similarly, it is not difficult to discern thatclimate change ‘sceptics’ (I am being verygenerous here) are also denying reality. Nodoubt they will bridle at such a suggestion,but as I stated in a previous letter to theeditor, the logical conclusion of their railingagainst the reality of AGW is either that,although they are geologists, they have veryquickly become far superior climatologiststo all those party to the IPCC reports or,conversely, they believe that all thoseclimatologists are part of a massiveconspiracy. Which form of denier are you?JOHN LAURIEI agree with Phillip Playford who, in hisletter in the June issue of TAG, proposes that“a poll...be commissioned...that includes thequestion of whether or not members agreethat significant global warming has resultedfrom increasing levels of human-inducedCO 2 .” A poll such as this would be anopportunity to delve more deeply intomembers’ views and could help GSA todevelop a more authoritative statement onglobal warming. It might pose questionsalong the following lines.Do you believe that:● the Earth is warming, largely because ofincreasing amounts of greenhouse gases inthe atmosphere?● greenhouse gas emissions from humanactivity make a significant contribution tothis increase?● ignoring the political difficulties, we havethe technical ability to reduce these emissionsglobally, to a level which will ameliorate theadverse effects of the warming?● the economic, social, and environmentalcosts to the global community of doing nothingabout the emissions will be greater in thelong term than the costs of reducing them?Options to respond could be “Highlyunlikely”, “Unlikely”, “Neither likely norunlikely”, “Likely”, and “Highly likely”If a member answers “Unlikely” or “Highlyunlikely” to a question, he or she needanswer no further questions.I think that geologists’ views are particularlyrelevant, given their understanding of thechanges over geological time in thecomposition of the atmosphere and itsimpact on the earth.DON NICHOLSONLarge quantities of CO 2 are tied upin sediments and buried every yearIn Special Report: “The geological dimensionof climate change” (TAG June 2011 p 28-30),Andrew Glickson provided a review ofgeological aspects of climate change, withfocus on CO 2 . He provided estimates for CO 2contents in some geological periods. Forexample in Mid-Miocene the CO 2 content inatmosphere was higher than at present, whilein glacial periods the levels were less thanhalf the present level.What were the processes that resulted in amajor reduction of CO 2 from Mid-Miocene tothe glacial periods?Increased activity of organisms whichremove CO 2 and Ca from sea water to formshells or skeletons, resulting in sedimentationof limestone (for example Mid-MioceneNullarbor Limestone or Darai Limestone inPNG) must have been a contributing factor.In some geological periods thick units ofpure limestone were deposited while in otherperiods the carbonate component in sedimentarypackage is modest, depending onlevels of CO 2 in sea water and other factors.Limestone (= carbonate) sedimentation is justone of the natural processes resulting inremoval of CO 2 from sea water. All sedimentscontain CO 2 in organic matter, which aftermaturation becomes hydrocarbon or coalymatter.Research is needed to provide estimates ofquantities of CO 2 that are being tied up insediments and buried every year.The key questions are whether, due toincrease in CO 2 observed in last 100 years:● more organic matter is accumulatingon lake and sea floor and buried in newsediments?● numbers of organisms removing CO 2 fromsea water are increasing?A lot more research is needed before themain questions of climate science can be‘settled’.JACOB REBEKThe Forgotten Explorers: PioneerGeologists of Western Australia1826-1926. By John Glover andJenny BevanI thank Dr Playfordfor his kindintroductoryremarks (TAGMarch 2011 p 7)about the book TheForgotten Explorers:Pioneer Geologistsof Western Australia1826-1926 byGlover and Bevan(2010). He goes on to say that we were notcorrect in our account of the founding of theGeological Survey of Western Australia, when“stating that it was founded by Andrew GibbMaitland in 1896, whereas it should haveacknowledged Harry Page Woodward to be thefounder, in 1888.” We did not make thestatement attributed to us.We make it clear that Woodward, in 1888,was the first permanent GovernmentGeologist (Glover and Bevan, 2010, p 27,p 40, p 83, p 174), and that he gained twoassistants (p 27, p 83), and that GibbMaitland succeeded him (p 85, p 87). Weemphasise that the Survey achieved its basic,long-lived organisational structure in 1896under Gibb Maitland (Glover and Bevan,2010, p 27, p 87): which is different fromsaying that Gibb Maitland founded theSurvey in 1896. What does Gibb Maitlandhimself say? In a tribute to his predecessorhe observed that “with a very limited staff,and still more limited appropriation, and inspite of the difficulties presented by the vastareas of the State, the Survey under MrWoodward issued 21 reports and six geologicalmaps” (Maitland, AG, 1919). In doing so,he thus indicated the profound differencebetween the operating conditions under hispredecessor and under himself. The influenceand infrastructure of the Survey were rapidlyenhanced and transformed under GibbMaitland and we emphasise that fact.Dr Playford, more than most prominentgeologists, has displayed commendableinterest in the history of geology in thisTAG September 2011|7
State, and has enlightened us with severalpapers on the subject. The outline of thehistory of the Survey in his letter will edifymany readers, but does not support his claimthat we stated that the Survey was foundedby Gibb Maitland in 1896.JOHN GLOVERREFERENCESMaitland, AG 1919. A summary of the geology ofWestern Australia. Geological Survey of WesternAustralia Memoir 1, Chap 1, p 4.Glover, JJE with Bevan, JC 2010. The ForgottenExplorers: Pioneer Geologists of Western Australia.Hesperian Press, Victoria Park.Playford, PE 2011. Founding of the Geological Surveyof Western Australia. TAG, 158, p 7.Response by John Veevers(Macquarie University) to BradPillans’ topic for discussionBrad Pillans (TAG June 2011) asks why weare not prepared to take responsibility for theresultant waste of the uranium exported fromAustralia.I discussed this issue in TAG 112, September1999 (www.eps.mq.edu.au/media/veevers1.htm) when Pangea Resources Australia (aliasBritish Nuclear Fuels) sought permission todump high-level RADwaste in the Australianoutback. My counter-arguments focussed onthe risks of exposing the biosphere to nuclearcontamination over the next 10 000 years.1. Risk to the oceans from transport ofnuclear waste. Misadventure at sea, thoughwith a very small but real risk, could lead toglobal catastrophe.2. Earthquakes. The risk from earthquakescannot be ruled out, a topic detailed by MikeSandiford (www.choosenuclearfree.net/australia-as-the-worlds-nuclear-waste-dump): “Some places in Australia are surprisinglygeologically active. We occasionally getbig earthquakes in Australia (up to aboutmagnitude 7) and the big ones have tendedto occur in somewhat unexpected places likeTennant Creek...The occurrences of suchearthquakes imply that we still have much tolearn about our earthquake activity. From thepoint of view of long-term waste disposalthis is very important, since prior to the 1988(M 6.8) quake, Tennant Creek might havebeen viewed as one of the most appropriateparts of the continent for a storage facility.”Perversely, this is in the very region, atMuckaty, 120 km N of Tennant Creek, thatthe Commonwealth government has fingeredfor a national low- to middle-level RADwastestore against the wishes of the NorthernTerritory government and many of thetraditional owners.3. Movement of groundwater. This isunknowable over the next 10 000 years ofthe Anthropocene.4. Do not concentrate. Since 1982, the UScongress has voted US$13.5 billion onresearching the Yucca Mountain (Nevada)site; the project money was discontinued thisyear. In describing what went wrong, Ewingand von Hippel (2009, Science, 325, 151-152)identified (1) a geologically complex sitechosen because it is arid and remote(cf Tennant Creek). (2) changing performancestandard: in 2008 the new standard extendedthe proposed regulatory period from 10 000years to 1 000 000 years. (3) an unreliablefunding source: annual congressionalappropriations. (4) management failures bythe Department of Energy. (5) attempt tooverride local public and political opposition(cf Tennant Creek). “For projects that willtake decades to complete, sustained localopposition has every chance of prevailing.The successful siting efforts in Scandinaviahave involved local communities in thedecision-making process and given them aveto at each stage. Also, the communitiesthat have finally volunteered to hostrepositories already have nuclear powerplants, are comfortable with nucleartechnology, and have an interest in helpingto find a path forward from surface storageto underground disposal...The states thathave spent nuclear fuel should be providedwith the means and motivation fordeveloping acceptable interim storage sites orgeological repositories.” The British NuclearDecommissioning Authority has the samepolicy: “Development of a GeologicalDisposal Facility requires both a willinglocal community and a suitable geology.”(www.nda.gov.uk).Australia’s nuclear destiny is not to be adump but to lead the world in exploitingnatural nuclear-powered geothermalresources (eg www.agea.org.au;www.geodynamics.com.au; newworldenergy.com.au; petratherm.com.au).JOHN VEEVERSAndrew Glikson's Special Report [TAG 159]is an interesting document. Its thesis may becorrect, that because of our misdeeds we areall fated to simmer in a carbonic stew.Be that as it may, there is a touch of "theend justifies the means" about the article.His use of language is interesting. He uses‘climate change’ when he means ‘globalwarming’."Climate change can be geologically regardedas a global oxygenation event…"No it can't because climate change meansjust that, a change in climate whether thatchange is towards a warmer, cooler, wetter,drier or windier climate.In fact he means an increase in carbondioxide levels which could well be regardedas an oxidation event and which may, ormay not, be related to a change in globalclimate in some direction.He might also buy himself some argumentswith his suggestion that carbon dioxide hasa atmospheric residence time of “centuriesto millenia”.There are more than several researchers whosuggest five to 15 years is more likely, forinstance Essenhigh (2009). We can thereforeconclude that the question of residence timeis not yet settled [see also http://www.co2science.org/articles/V12/N31/EDIT.php].However it is his Figure 2 that I would liketo examine more closely.Mr. Glikson quotes its source ashttp://www.extremeweatherheroes.org/science-of-extreme-weather/globalevidence.aspxand indeed it can be foundthere. It is an unrefereed climate doomistsite backed by Green Cross Australia.Its backers may have their hearts in theright place but it's probably not a reputablesource of climate data. Monckton gets pilloriedfor obtaining data from similar sources.Extremeweatherheroes claims that thefigure was obtained from a WHO-relatedorganisation, CRED [the Centre for Researchon the Epidemiology of Disasters;http://www.cred.be/].I had a poke around in CRED's website andfound articles with similar figures but noneexactly the same as Figure 2. It could be inthere though.Anyway, back to Figure 2.It purports to show that between 1980and 2000 there was a slight increase inearthquakes but a massive increase incyclones and floods.I'll deal with earthquakes first. Accordingto the USGS there are several millionearthquakes a year of which approximately20 000/year are located.The number of earthquakes located eachyear is rising due to the increasing numberof seismograph stations around the world[http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/increase_in_earthquakes.php].So the slight rise in earthquakes from 1980to 2000 can be attributed to our increasingability to locate them.8 | TAG September 2011
Page 1 and 2: The Geological Societyof Australia
Page 3 and 4: From the PresidentAt the time of wr
Page 5 and 6: New membersThe GSA welcomes the fol
Page 7: 2013Joint 0N/A 0N/A $175 0N/A 0N/A
Page 11 and 12: [10] Solomon, 2009. PNAS. 106, 6, 1
Page 13 and 14: SocietyUpdateEducation&Outreach2011
Page 15 and 16: SocietyUpdateHeritage MattersCurren
Page 17 and 18: Hunter ValleyTime-scales of magma e
Page 19 and 20: Newsfrom the Specialist GroupsSGTSG
Page 21 and 22: NEWSIn the news this issue:■ Nati
Page 23 and 24: IUGG Melbourne makingmedia wavesThe
Page 25 and 26: 100 years of Australian Antarctic E
Page 27 and 28: 100 years of AustralianAntarctic Ex
Page 29: Young Earth Science NewsIn the news
Page 32 and 33: Response in Mulga foliageand litter
Page 34 and 35: Distribution of gold concentrations
Page 36 and 37: FIGURE 1 Trend in Equivalent Full T
Page 38 and 39: A special issue of the Australian J
Page 40 and 41: ABOVE: Ernienickelite. The mineral
Page 42 and 43: Books for reviewPlease contact the
Page 44 and 45: and another four represent anothers
Page 46 and 47: After completing an honours thesisi
Page 48 and 49: Geological Society of Australia Inc

TAG - Geological Society of Australia

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?