Climate Change Impacts in New Zealand

The observed impacts said to be caused by climate change falls into three categories: physical systems, biological systems, human and managed systems. The major observed impacts with a confidence rating of very high on biological systems are wildfire, marine and terrestrial ecosystems. For physical systems impacts are on glaciers, snow, ice, and/or permafrost (IPCC, 2013). Human and managed systems include food production, livelihoods, health and/or economics but only with a lower confidence rating of medium. For the IPCC New Zealand is thrown under a region called Australasia for climate change analysis. In the report, one key risk described for new Zealand is an increase in rates and magnitudes of damages to cities and infrastructures due to flooding. The other risk affecting New Zealand damage to coastal infrastructure and ecosystems that is lower in elevation (IPCC, 2013).

On a seasonal scale New Zealand’s precipitation is affected by the Southern Annual mode (SAM) which is region of westerly winds near Antarctica that when said to be positive when it move towards Antarctica and negative when it moves towards equator. Rain fall is typically increased in western new Zealand when SAM is negative and/or during el Niño events. When SAM is positive and/or during la Nina events rainfall is increased in the north and east.  In the last century New Zealand temperature has just shy of 1C. A subtropical high-pressure belt is expected to move pole ward causing dry conditions in part of the country. With this combo of drying in some part and increased precipitation in others, it is suspected that flooding and droughts will increase twofold (IPCC, 2013).

One thing is for sure, the regional climate is changing. Warming will not stop, it is expected to keep increasing even into the 21^st century when currently were all dead (hopefully). There are issues in predicting changes in rainfall for Australia and new Zealand which presents a large challenge in preparation. Recent extreme climatic events such as bleaching of coral reefs in northeastern and western Australia, flooding, and heat waves mercing people show that ecosystems are vulnerable like a man admitting that enjoys the show “Friends”. If something isn’t done to adapt to these changes GHG’s and ocean acidity will have wreak havoc on water resources, coastal ecosystems, infrastructure, agriculture and human health. Though things look shivvy, some locations may reap benefits of fewer deaths in the winter and heating bills. When it comes to adaptation everything’s fine a dandy but action is taken more in a conceptual sense then one of implementation. The indigenous people of Australia and new Zealand feel strongly connected to the land and highly rely on industries that sensitive to climate change leaving them more vulnerable to climate change (IPCC, 2013). Studies have much limitation leaving out important socioeconomic dimensions such as getting old, current or changing societal values, richness of richy rich people, and labor stuffs. Bottoms line is that we don’t know enough, were not doing enough, and we may be screwed.

Australia’s gets 2.6 to 4% of its GDP from tourism with the great barrier reef to have an estimated worth of about $51.4 billion over the next century. Tourism for Australia will be quite challenged by climate change as the reason to visit Australia is mostly is environmental (IPCC, 2013). No one goes to Australia to visit McDonalds or watch movie. Extreme events such as floods and tropical cyclone Yasi in 2011 caused a loss of AU $590 million! Just due to cancellations and damage to the Great Barrier Reef. See, told ya environmental ish. While shit is hitting the fan in Australia, people are starting to consider visiting New Zealand instead (IPCC, 2013). While Australia and new Zealand are losing snow cover, new Zealand is losing at a slower rate than Australia. In new Zealand snow making days will be reduced but amount of snow making needing to meet minimum ski conditions are said to be feasible into the 21^st century. Why I chose tourism as an interesting issue is that I kind of hate tourism. Even though I’ve played tourist before I associate tourism with people who don’t give two shits about the environmental. Rich dicks that just come to trash everything I love and hold dear. Living in Hawaii I’ve seen how the ocean is a brothel and the islands are prostituted with Uncle Sam as the mamasan. Tourism is so important to place like Hawaii yet they are slowly destroying that which attracts people with development. Argh…

 

Drought in March 2013

1) evaluate efficiency of water washing and acid base extractions on deashing biochars; 2) determine the effect of deashed biochars on soil properties and plant growth, and 3) compare biochars with varying ash content on soil properties and plant growth. For objective 1 we hypothesize that 1) increasing treatment time of biochars in the hot water bath will increase ash removal, and 2) that acid base extraction will results in higher ash removal than water washing.  Addressing objective 2 we hypothesize that deashed biochars produces no benefits to plant growth. For objective 3, our hypothesis is that biochars with ash contentment will increase plant growth more than those with low ash.