When the Hobart City Council voted down a proposal to place wind turbines on top of the ANZ building in the CBD in late July, with some councillors citing concerns the turbines may spoil the view of Mt Wellington, a number of thoughts passed through my mind. 

When the Hobart City Council voted down a proposal to place wind turbines on top of the ANZ building in the CBD in late July, with some councillors citing concerns the turbines may spoil the view of Mt Wellington, a number of thoughts passed through my mind.

A few more went through my mind when HCC’s Darlene Haigh noted 'safety' concerns in her objection to the turbines that have been approved for the Marine Board Building.

I was mildly surprised that scene-scapes were now a priority after decades of successful attempts to damage the cultural amenity of Hobart with inappropriate development. Visual disasters, such as the proposed eleven-story car parks and the TV tower on the mountain, will, and have, made a much greater impact on Hobart's panoramas.

A quick straw poll of some friends confirmed what I already suspected – that if priorities are thus ordered, we are in big trouble. In a vain attempt to understand the merits of the council's decision, I attempted to place myself in the shoes of those who opposed this development.

This rapidly descended into a synthesised application of the HCC's amenity value criteria and the impacts of CO2 emissions if we don't begin adopting projects like urban wind generation.

In order to avoid rampaging onto the footy field of polemic and bursting through the match day banner, I'll leave Councillor Haigh's comments regarding the potential safety hazards of the Marine Board turbines to go and stand in the corner with Steve Fielding.

With the minor failure of wisdom inherent in the HCC's decision to make the point that despite the bulletproof consensus  within the climate research community, and growing community concern, our policy makers are still ignoring the magnitude of the threat we face. Forget fiddling while Rome burns - most of our elected representatives are looking over at Sumeria and thinking how well things are going.

While Wilson Tuckey goes into apoplexy, the media laps up Barnaby Joyce's guaranteed fatuities  and Martin Ferguson plays footsies under the table with big coal, the rapid disintegration of the climate system and all that depends on it goes on unhindered. I opened my climate news digest this week to the following headline: “Nile Delta: 'We are going underwater. The sea will conquer our lands'.  Around 40 million people live there.

In Tasmania, despite some promising early signs and the fine intentions and hard yakka of some working within existing governmental frameworks (including the Tasmanian Climate Change Office and Associate Professor Kate Crowley), political progress on climate issues appears to have  been relegated to the 'clever, clean and kind' dress-ups cupboard – to be used only in the event of a media opportunity (I think Lisa Singh's moped and David Bartlett's tredley are in there somewhere too).

As long as the government uses climate change as a PR opportunity whilst simultaneously asserting that Tasmania's contribution is so small to be meaningless, it will be difficult to make progress. There is also the in-some-ways-unfortunate fact that the climate change issue, by sheer weight of emissions volume, is intrinsically tied to the forestry debate.

The tendency to jump in the trenches at the first sighting of the 'F' word is sometimes a hindrance to progress on other  issues. An illuminating example is that a cordial meeting I had late last year with Bryan Green to discuss climate issues resulted only in enlightening me as to Bryan's thoughts on where Richard Flanagan had gone wrong.

The sooner it is recognised that climate change will change the way forests are managed, and similarly that forests arn't the only climate change issue, the sooner we can get on with the job of emissions reductions (and the sooner we can be spared the kind of drivel spouted in fora such as that opus of Bernaysian logging porn, Going Bush, regarding how wonderful burning woodchips is for the climate etc.)

Some see the climate change issue as being a bit like some of those partaking in a late night Hobart waterfront session – if you look in their direction, you are asking for a rough time that you could well have avoided. But unlike engaging with those bleary eyed old mateys stumbling home alone, there are things to be gained from knowing the climate issue.

Many good people are already working hard on inspiring and educating the community, and creating concrete solutions. In Tasmania, people such as Margaret Steadman and Nick Towle, and groups such as Climate Action Hobar and the Waterworks Valley community are doing important work in activating the community. And for those who despair at the aforementioned actions of some members of the HCC, an example from my temporary home (Aarhus, Denmark) may prove an encouraging counter point.

In late September the Aarhus municipal council is expected to pass a proposal to make the city (of 300,000) carbon neutral (i.e. reducing emissions by as much as possible and offsetting the balance to zero) by 2030. And the nearby island of Samso has managed to reduce their emissions, by way of strong community action and government assistance, by around two thirds in a decade (to one seventh of the Tasmanian per capita rate).

Denmark is also preparing itself for the COP15 UNFCCC climate conference in Copenhagen in December. There are worrying signs that this conference, seen as crucial in providing a framework for the way-behind-schedule-if-we-want-to-save-the-planet-and-ourselves cuts, may fail in delivering effective outcomes. Examples such as the united front recently unveiled by African leaders, and the combined policy demands between those nations and other large developing countries such as China, India and Brazil, provide some cause for belief in more positive outcomes, however.

And while not ignoring the current hot issue of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, it would be wise to call that debate for what it is – a sop to the public and a firm handshake to big polluting industries. We may end up with a horribly dysfunctional scheme which generates income for polluters, or we may end up with something worse.

Comedian Rod Quantock has just opened a new show entitled “Bugger the Polar Bears – This is Serious”. I'm not sure if we have time for that, however I would be the first to agree with Rod that this is indeed serious.

In the countdown to Copenhagen, we should be hoping like hell that the Danes have had the foresight to install one big begeezus sized wind and people powered panic button, so that the whole world will hear if the climate talks outcomes are rubbish. K. Rudd should hear it. Even Premier Bartlett and Cr. Haigh may get an inkling that there's something big happening

By Warrick Jordan