The trucks hauling the generosity of strangers into a green drought
Empty paddocks stretch away. Hard-pressed farmers have de-stocked, unable to afford to feed their animals.
But where sheep still graze, their noses are pressed to the ground, their jaws working hard at drawing poor sustenance from the skimpy new growth.
Cattle can't get their tongues around the mirage of grass.
They stand defeated, waiting to rush the next expensive delivery of hay or grain.
Here is a paradox: a green drought.
As winter came and rain fell, satisfaction at dams filling was curbed by farmers' knowledge that the weather's long-awaited turn was a hoax.
After crushing months of the familiar form of dry – the gasping paddocks turning to dusty parchment – the rains came too late, too far into winter's chill to stimulate anything but phantom growth.
Venture out into these sham green plains of pain and you might come across convoys of trucks loaded with hay – great rolls of it, or big square bales stacked high.
Loading
The convoys haul from far away to try to help farmers battle through to spring, when that counterfeit green pick might transform into useful sustenance and debt-wearied land-holders might find the confidence to start rebuilding their flocks of sheep and herds of cattle.
The momentousness of the convoys is that as the cost of hay and grain reaches to the moon, leaving many farmers despairing of making it to tomorrow or ever recovering, the trucks are supplying their loads of hay for free.
The trucks that ground their way to Camperdown last Saturday night brought loads from as far distant as northern NSW worth half a million dollars.
All of it, including the cost of running the trucks and fuel, was at no cost to farmers.
The gift was arranged by the charity Need for Feed Australia, a project of Lions Clubs.
It was established during southern Australia's worst big dry on record, the millennium drought from late 1996 to 2010.
About halfway through that long agony, a fellow named Graham Cockerell was rocked to read that three farmers a week were taking their own lives.
When he was just 11 years old, he suffered the pain of his own father's suicide on the family's farm. His father, like many others, had simply found himself in circumstances he couldn't control, and couldn't see a way out.
Cockrell decided he wanted to try to save other families from experiencing his family's depths of anguish.
And so he arranged to fill a small truck with hay, and he sent it to East Gippsland farmers burnt out in the drought-fuelled fires of 2006-2007.
Since then, with the support of Lions Clubs all over the place, Cockrell's idea grew into Need for Feed, which became well-known for providing aid following the Black Saturday bushfires of 2009.
Since then, Need for Feed, run totally by volunteers who give their time, trucks, fuel and fodder, has turned up regularly to help communities brought low by Australia's most familiar catastrophes: droughts, floods and fires.
It estimates it has provided more than $45 million of assistance so far.
Other organisations, like Aussie Hay Runners, do the same sort of thing. Only a couple of weeks ago the Hay Runners ran a convoy of donated hay from East Gippsland to areas around Colac and Hamilton in south-west Victoria.
The motive behind this generosity?
Five years ago, when Western Victoria's farmers were having a good season, they arranged to send truckloads of hay to help out East Gippsland farmers burnt out in devastating bushfires.
Knowing about suffering, East Gippsland's farmers decided last month it was time to return the help they had received. In just three weeks, they gathered trucks and hundreds of donated hay bales and set out in convoy from Orbost.
Elsewhere, another disaster relief charity, BlazeAid, raised enough money to cover the freight costs of hay coming from Queensland to western Victoria.
Governments, of course, provide disaster relief, too.
But in a drought, the Victorian government doesn't hand out money for fodder, arguing such a subsidy would send the price of hay and grain spiralling out of reach of farmers everywhere.
And so, good-hearted people of the land, who know firsthand the torment of seeing their animals starving and families falling into despondency and worse, have taken the weight upon themselves to try to alleviate some of the suffering.
It will never be enough, of course.
As climate change forges on, the need for both immediate assistance and long-term innovation towards resilient, sustainable farming can only become more urgent.
For the moment, however, it seems worth knowing that in a world as grim as ours, the old urge in country Australia to help out strangers in need – and let's call it loving your neighbours – has not surrendered.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sydney Morning Herald
7 days ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The trucks hauling the generosity of strangers into a green drought
Look closely and you'll see the green is no more than a thin shroud laid upon what, just a few weeks ago, was bare earth. Empty paddocks stretch away. Hard-pressed farmers have de-stocked, unable to afford to feed their animals. But where sheep still graze, their noses are pressed to the ground, their jaws working hard at drawing poor sustenance from the skimpy new growth. Cattle can't get their tongues around the mirage of grass. They stand defeated, waiting to rush the next expensive delivery of hay or grain. Here is a paradox: a green drought. As winter came and rain fell, satisfaction at dams filling was curbed by farmers' knowledge that the weather's long-awaited turn was a hoax. After crushing months of the familiar form of dry – the gasping paddocks turning to dusty parchment – the rains came too late, too far into winter's chill to stimulate anything but phantom growth. Venture out into these sham green plains of pain and you might come across convoys of trucks loaded with hay – great rolls of it, or big square bales stacked high. Loading The convoys haul from far away to try to help farmers battle through to spring, when that counterfeit green pick might transform into useful sustenance and debt-wearied land-holders might find the confidence to start rebuilding their flocks of sheep and herds of cattle. The momentousness of the convoys is that as the cost of hay and grain reaches to the moon, leaving many farmers despairing of making it to tomorrow or ever recovering, the trucks are supplying their loads of hay for free. The trucks that ground their way to Camperdown last Saturday night brought loads from as far distant as northern NSW worth half a million dollars. All of it, including the cost of running the trucks and fuel, was at no cost to farmers. The gift was arranged by the charity Need for Feed Australia, a project of Lions Clubs. It was established during southern Australia's worst big dry on record, the millennium drought from late 1996 to 2010. About halfway through that long agony, a fellow named Graham Cockerell was rocked to read that three farmers a week were taking their own lives. When he was just 11 years old, he suffered the pain of his own father's suicide on the family's farm. His father, like many others, had simply found himself in circumstances he couldn't control, and couldn't see a way out. Cockrell decided he wanted to try to save other families from experiencing his family's depths of anguish. And so he arranged to fill a small truck with hay, and he sent it to East Gippsland farmers burnt out in the drought-fuelled fires of 2006-2007. Since then, with the support of Lions Clubs all over the place, Cockrell's idea grew into Need for Feed, which became well-known for providing aid following the Black Saturday bushfires of 2009. Since then, Need for Feed, run totally by volunteers who give their time, trucks, fuel and fodder, has turned up regularly to help communities brought low by Australia's most familiar catastrophes: droughts, floods and fires. It estimates it has provided more than $45 million of assistance so far. Other organisations, like Aussie Hay Runners, do the same sort of thing. Only a couple of weeks ago the Hay Runners ran a convoy of donated hay from East Gippsland to areas around Colac and Hamilton in south-west Victoria. The motive behind this generosity? Five years ago, when Western Victoria's farmers were having a good season, they arranged to send truckloads of hay to help out East Gippsland farmers burnt out in devastating bushfires. Knowing about suffering, East Gippsland's farmers decided last month it was time to return the help they had received. In just three weeks, they gathered trucks and hundreds of donated hay bales and set out in convoy from Orbost. Elsewhere, another disaster relief charity, BlazeAid, raised enough money to cover the freight costs of hay coming from Queensland to western Victoria. Governments, of course, provide disaster relief, too. But in a drought, the Victorian government doesn't hand out money for fodder, arguing such a subsidy would send the price of hay and grain spiralling out of reach of farmers everywhere. And so, good-hearted people of the land, who know firsthand the torment of seeing their animals starving and families falling into despondency and worse, have taken the weight upon themselves to try to alleviate some of the suffering. It will never be enough, of course. As climate change forges on, the need for both immediate assistance and long-term innovation towards resilient, sustainable farming can only become more urgent. For the moment, however, it seems worth knowing that in a world as grim as ours, the old urge in country Australia to help out strangers in need – and let's call it loving your neighbours – has not surrendered.
The Age
7 days ago
- The Age
The trucks hauling the generosity of strangers into a green drought
Look closely and you'll see the green is no more than a thin shroud laid upon what, just a few weeks ago, was bare earth. Empty paddocks stretch away. Hard-pressed farmers have de-stocked, unable to afford to feed their animals. But where sheep still graze, their noses are pressed to the ground, their jaws working hard at drawing poor sustenance from the skimpy new growth. Cattle can't get their tongues around the mirage of grass. They stand defeated, waiting to rush the next expensive delivery of hay or grain. Here is a paradox: a green drought. As winter came and rain fell, satisfaction at dams filling was curbed by farmers' knowledge that the weather's long-awaited turn was a hoax. After crushing months of the familiar form of dry – the gasping paddocks turning to dusty parchment – the rains came too late, too far into winter's chill to stimulate anything but phantom growth. Venture out into these sham green plains of pain and you might come across convoys of trucks loaded with hay – great rolls of it, or big square bales stacked high. Loading The convoys haul from far away to try to help farmers battle through to spring, when that counterfeit green pick might transform into useful sustenance and debt-wearied land-holders might find the confidence to start rebuilding their flocks of sheep and herds of cattle. The momentousness of the convoys is that as the cost of hay and grain reaches to the moon, leaving many farmers despairing of making it to tomorrow or ever recovering, the trucks are supplying their loads of hay for free. The trucks that ground their way to Camperdown last Saturday night brought loads from as far distant as northern NSW worth half a million dollars. All of it, including the cost of running the trucks and fuel, was at no cost to farmers. The gift was arranged by the charity Need for Feed Australia, a project of Lions Clubs. It was established during southern Australia's worst big dry on record, the millennium drought from late 1996 to 2010. About halfway through that long agony, a fellow named Graham Cockerell was rocked to read that three farmers a week were taking their own lives. When he was just 11 years old, he suffered the pain of his own father's suicide on the family's farm. His father, like many others, had simply found himself in circumstances he couldn't control, and couldn't see a way out. Cockrell decided he wanted to try to save other families from experiencing his family's depths of anguish. And so he arranged to fill a small truck with hay, and he sent it to East Gippsland farmers burnt out in the drought-fuelled fires of 2006-2007. Since then, with the support of Lions Clubs all over the place, Cockrell's idea grew into Need for Feed, which became well-known for providing aid following the Black Saturday bushfires of 2009. Since then, Need for Feed, run totally by volunteers who give their time, trucks, fuel and fodder, has turned up regularly to help communities brought low by Australia's most familiar catastrophes: droughts, floods and fires. It estimates it has provided more than $45 million of assistance so far. Other organisations, like Aussie Hay Runners, do the same sort of thing. Only a couple of weeks ago the Hay Runners ran a convoy of donated hay from East Gippsland to areas around Colac and Hamilton in south-west Victoria. The motive behind this generosity? Five years ago, when Western Victoria's farmers were having a good season, they arranged to send truckloads of hay to help out East Gippsland farmers burnt out in devastating bushfires. Knowing about suffering, East Gippsland's farmers decided last month it was time to return the help they had received. In just three weeks, they gathered trucks and hundreds of donated hay bales and set out in convoy from Orbost. Elsewhere, another disaster relief charity, BlazeAid, raised enough money to cover the freight costs of hay coming from Queensland to western Victoria. Governments, of course, provide disaster relief, too. But in a drought, the Victorian government doesn't hand out money for fodder, arguing such a subsidy would send the price of hay and grain spiralling out of reach of farmers everywhere. And so, good-hearted people of the land, who know firsthand the torment of seeing their animals starving and families falling into despondency and worse, have taken the weight upon themselves to try to alleviate some of the suffering. It will never be enough, of course. As climate change forges on, the need for both immediate assistance and long-term innovation towards resilient, sustainable farming can only become more urgent. For the moment, however, it seems worth knowing that in a world as grim as ours, the old urge in country Australia to help out strangers in need – and let's call it loving your neighbours – has not surrendered.
The Advertiser
23-06-2025
- The Advertiser
How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine
How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb. How bad can climate damage get? Worse than you imagine, if Australians' recent experience of more extreme weather and natural disasters - driven by a hotter climate - are an indication, because the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. Civil engineer Alan Hoban says flood maps around Australia drastically underestimate the impact climate change will have on rainfall due to conservative assumptions about how fast rainfall intensity will increase. "Very few flood maps in south-east Queensland, or even Australia, yet account for these changes," he says. Extreme floods and rain events are often oddly described as a "one-in-a-hundred-year" or a "one-in-five hundred-year" event, suggesting they are unlikely to recur. But then they happen again, within a few years. This shows the assessments of future climate risks are too conservative, and so vulnerable communities and governments are under-prepared. Victoria's Black Saturday bushfires were of an intensity not projected to occur till towards the end of the century. And some heat extremes of the early 2020s were at a level projected for the 2030s. It's a problem created in part by over-reliance on the reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which have a track record of being too conservative. The Australian government is late in delivering its first domestically-focused National Climate Risk Assessment, which was due in December, and should be the basis for emergency management, resilience and climate adaptation planning. Will it be up to date, and will it give attention to the plausible worst-case (extreme) possibilities, because they result in the greatest damage to people and property? There is reason to worry that the physical reality of accelerating climate disruption will mug Australia's risk assessment and leave us poorly prepared. One foundation for understanding future climate impacts is how quickly temperatures will rise. And that is now a big issue, because the government's assumption was that warming would be in the range of 1.5 to 2 degrees by 2050. And it is still the basis of most international climate policy formulation. Now it is way out of date. Just seven years ago, IPCC scientists projected global average warming of 1.5 degrees would not occur till 2040. But that warming level has now been reached, 15 years earlier than forecast. Both 2023 and 2024 reached 1.5 degrees, and the running average for the last 24 months has been close to 1.6 degrees. For all practical purposes, the warming trend has reached 1.5 degeres. A new World Meteorological Organization report says that Earth will cross this point in just two years, with a "70 per cent chance that the 2025-29 five-year mean will exceed 1.5 degrees above the 1850-1900 average". Acknowledging that a level of warming not expected till 2040 is here right now in 2025 means facing the bitter reality that 15 years have just been "lost" from the emissions-reduction timetable. What does that practically mean? At the 2015 Paris climate policymaking conference, the goal of holding warming to 1.5-2 degrees was agreed to, together with actions (in theory) to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, based on the now-superseded warming projections. So the "lost" 15 years means that this net-zero-by-2050 goal now needs to be net-zero-by-2035. Most policymakers, including the Australian government, seem not to have recognised this. When the penny drops in Canberra that we are already at 1.5 degrees, will that realisation be reflected in the National Climate Risk Assessment? Australia's climate modelling capacity has been degraded. The biggest problems are lack of independent and expert scientific advice, and the lack of coordination across departments and agencies, and a culture of empire-building. Restoring a climate science advisory group to provide high-level, independent advice to the Australian government is a key task. Scientists have been shocked at the pace of change. The rate of warming has accelerated from less than 0.2 dgrees per decade to 0.3 degrees or more per decade. And tipping points are occurring now, including at both poles. Permafrost, boreal forests and the Amazon are becoming net carbon emitters. This year, new research has reaffirmed that 1.5 degrees is too high to prevent tipping points: there is a significant risk of large Amazon forest dieback if global warming overshoots 1.5 degrees, yet we are there right now. And there is a new scientific warning that "1.5 degrees is too high for polar ice sheets". The evidence grows that the 1.5 degrees target was never a safe target for humanity. All of this leads to one conclusion: we are on the edge of a precipice and humanity now needs to throw everything at the climate threat, literally "all hands on deck". The late professor Will Steffen's call to make climate the primary target of policy and economics is now a survival imperative. The business-as-usual delusion embraced by policymakers that climate is just another issue is laid bare by the 1.5 degrees time-bomb.
