Ted Trainer on the simpler way

The full length interview with Ted Trainer from the upcoming documentary A Simpler Way: Crisis as Opportunity

http://facebook.com/asimplerway

COP21 Climate Change Summit Reaches Deal In Paris

Mark Cochrane on COPOUT21

The climate pact in Paris has been agreed to and there are reasons to not only be relieved but impressed with the rhetoric that got into the final agreement. Specifically,

Emphasizing with serious concern the urgent need to address the significant gap between the aggregate effect of Parties’ mitigation pledges in terms of global annual  emissions of greenhouse gases by 2020 and aggregate emission pathways consistent with  holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 °C above preindustrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature  increase to 1.5 °C

This is positive because it acknowledges that 2C isn’t a panacea and 1.5C would be a lot safer though far from optimal too. I am surprised that this got into the agreement since Saudi Arabia was dead set against this potential accelerant to improving the current agreement and encouraging countries to exceed their current commitments.

That said, the devil is in the details and none of those details are encouraging. At present this is where we stand.

If countries do what they have pledged to do we will still vastly exceed 2C, never mind holding at 1.5C. This leads to the obvious question as to what is the likelihood that countries will live up to their pledges? Although the climate pact was agreed to, the only thing binding in it is for countries to make voluntary commitments (Intended Nationally Determined Contributions – INDCs) that will be reviewed (and updated?) every five years. So each country is committed to choosing their own targets for emissions reduction (or reduction in growth of emissions) but there is nothing binding them to actually achieving those goals… In other words, this is a best of intentions agreement.

Furthermore, the signing of this Paris Agreement means next to nothing at this point as it is only the agreement to try to agree to actually do this. From Article 21

This Agreement shall enter into force on the thirtieth day after the date on which at least 55 Parties to the Convention accounting in total for at least an estimated 55 percent of the total global greenhouse gas emissions have deposited their instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession.

This was roughly the same convention used for ratifying the Kyoto Protocol which was agreed to in 1997. However because of U.S. intransigence the actual ratification process was stymied until Russia ratified it in late 2004, allowing the Kyoto Protocol to go into force at long last in 2005.

So, there is now a toothless agreement with voluntary commitments that may eventually be ratified. Once it is ratified, a country can withdraw from the agreement three years after it goes into force if they send a written request to do so….

In short, this is far from a perfect document and it certainly does not ‘save the planet’. That said, getting 192 countries to agree to anything is almost impossible. My personal hope is that what this document does is put every country on the planet on record as agreeing that Global Climate Change is a serious problem for all of us. Doing so shifts negotiations from denial of the predicament we face to the bargaining phase of trying to deal with it with as little real sacrifice as possible. However, as the mindset shifts, more and more can be accomplished and perhaps we will finally allow human ingenuity to be applied to generating more positive outcomes. Right now the fear exists that we can’t possibly afford to do anything about reducing carbon emissions without collapsing the economy but this was the same nonsense peddled when the Montreal Protocol on substances that deplete the ozone layer was put into place. In the end, the agreement was not economically catastrophic or even disruptive. Change does not have to destroy the economy it just shifts where the money goes within it.

Without this agreement the world was effectively dead in the water, with it, we are still in the water but not yet dead.

Raul Ilargi on COPOUT21

I hope Raul doesn’t mind me reproducing this brilliant piece which I simply don’t have time or internet facilities right now to write myself… now that the Paris talks have agreed to a 1.5C warming limit, I’m really dying to know what date they will set to turn the economy off to achieve this!

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius just announced, in Paris, a “legally binding agreement” that no-one has agreed the financing for. We can hear a couple thousand lawyers across the globe snicker. But it’s all the COP21 ‘oh-so-important’ climate conference managed to come up with. No surprises there. They couldn’t make the 2ºC former goal stick, so they go for 1.5ºC this time. All on red, double or nothing. Because who really cares among the leadership, just as long as the ‘targets’ are far enough away that they can’t be held accountable.

I’ve been writing the following through the past days, and wondering if I should post it, because I know so many readers of the Automatic Earth have so much emotion invested in these things, and they’re good and fine emotions. But some things must still be said regardless of consequences. Precisely because of that kind of reaction. No contract is legally binding if there’s no agreement on payment. Nobody has a legal claim on your home without it being specified that, if, when and how they’re going to pay for it.

I understand some people may get offended by some of the things I have to say about this – though not all for the same reasons either-, but please try and understand that and why the entire CON21 conference has offended me. After watching the horse and pony show just now, I thought I’d let ‘er rip:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don’t know what makes me lose faith in mankind faster, the way we destroy our habitat through wanton random killing of everything alive, plants, animals and people, through pollution and climate change and blood-thirsty sheer stupidity, or if it is the way these things are being ‘protested’.

I’m certainly not a climate denier or anything like that, though I do think there are questions people gloss over very easily. And one of those questions has to be that of priorities. Is there anyone who has thought over whether the COP21 stage in Paris is the right one to target in protest, whatever shape it takes? Is there anyone who doesn’t think the ‘leaders’ are laughing out loud in -plush, fine wine and gourmet filled- private about the protests?

Protesters and other well-intended folk, from what I can see, are falling into the trap set for them: they are the frame to the picture in a political photo-op. They allow the ‘leaders’ to emanate the image that yes, there are protests and disagreements as everyone would expect, but that’s just a sign that people’s interests are properly presented, so all’s well.

COP21 is not a major event, that’s only what politicians and media make of it. In reality, it’s a mere showcase in which the protesters have been co-opted. They’re not in the director’s chair, they’re not even actors, they’re just extras.

I fully agree, and more than fully sympathize, with the notion of saving this planet before it’s too late. But I wouldn’t want to rely on a bunch of sociopaths to make it happen. There are children drowning every single day in the sea between Turkey and Greece, and the very same world leaders who are gathered in Paris are letting that happen. They have for a long time, without lifting a finger. And they’ve done worse -if that is possible-.

The only thing standing between the refugees and even greater and more lethal carnage are a wide, even confusingly so, array of volunteers, and the people of the Greek coastguard, who by now must be so traumatized from picking up little wide-eyed lifeless bodies from the water and the beaches, they’ll live the rest of their lives through sleepless nightmares.

Neither Obama nor Merkel nor Hollande will have those same nightmares. And let’s be honest, will you? You weren’t even there. And still, you guys are targeting a conference in Paris on climate change that features the exact same leaders that let babies drown with impunity. Drowned babies, climate change and warfare, these things all come from the same source. And you’re appealing to that very same source to stop climate change.

What on earth makes you think the leaders you appeal to would care about the climate when they can’t be bothered for a minute with people, and the conditions they live in, if they’re lucky enough to live at all? Why are you not instead protesting the preventable drownings of innocent children? Or is it that you think the climate is more important than human life? That perhaps one is a bigger issue than the other?

Moreover, the very same leaders that you for some reason expect to save the planet -which they won’t- don’t just let babies drown, they also, in the lands the refugees are fleeing, kill children and their parents on a daily basis with bombs and drones. Dozens, hundreds, if not thousands, every single day. That’s how much they care for a ‘healthy’ planet (how about we discuss what that actually is?).

And in the hallways of the CON21 conference they’ve been actively discussing plans to do more of the same, more killing, more war. Save the world, bombs away! That’s their view of the planet. And they’re supposed to save ‘the climate’?

There are a number of reasons why the CON21 conference will not move us one inch towards saving this planet. One of the biggest is outlined in just a few quoted words from a senior member of India’s delegation -nothing new, but a useful reminder.

India Opposes Deal To Phase Out Fossil Fuels By 2100

India would reject a deal to combat climate change that includes a pledge for the world to wean itself off fossil fuels this century, a senior official said, underlying the difficulties countries face in agreeing how to slow global warming.

India, the world’s third largest carbon emitter, is dependent on coal for most of its energy needs, and despite a pledge to expand solar and wind power has said its economy is too small and its people too poor to end use of the fossil fuel anytime soon. “It’s problematic for us to make that commitment at this point in time. It’s certainly a stumbling block (to a deal),” Ajay Mathur, a senior member of India’s negotiating team for Paris, told Reuters in an interview this week.

“The entire prosperity of the world has been built on cheap energy. And suddenly we are being forced into higher cost energy. That’s grossly unfair,” he said.

This means the ‘poorer’ countries, -by no means just India; China has 155 more coal plants in the pipeline despite their pollution levels moving ‘beyond index’-, the poorer counties won’t volunteer to lower their emissions unless richer nations lower theirs even a lot more. US per capita emissions are over 10 times higher than India’s, those of the EU six times. Ergo: Step 1: lower US emissions by 90%. It also means that richer nations won’t do this, because it would kill their economies.

Which, in case you haven’t noticed, are already doing very poorly, much worse than the media -let alone politicians- will tell you. In fact, the chances that the richer countries will ‘recover’ from the effects of their debt binge are about on par with those of renewable energy sources becoming cheaper than fossil fuels -barring subsidies. If only because producing them depends entirely on those same fossil fuels. All the rest of what you hear is just con.

The people of India obviously know it, and you might as well. It’s going to cost many trillions of dollars to replace even a halfway substantial part of our fossil energy use with renewables, and we already don’t have that kind of money today. We will have much less tomorrow.

Besides, despite all the talk of Big Oil turning into Big Energy, Shell et al are not energy companies, they’re oil -and gas- companies, and they’ll defend their (near) monopolies tooth and claw. Especially now that their market caps are sinking like so many stones. They have no money left to invest in anything, let alone an industry that’s not theirs. They lost some $250 billion in ‘value’ this week alone. They’re getting killed.

In the same vein, China can’t close more than a token few of its most polluting plants. China’s getting killed economically. And for all nations and corporations there’s one principle that trumps all: competitive advantage. If going ‘green’ means losing that, or even some of it, forget it. We won’t volunteer to go green if it makes us less rich.

And who do you think represents big oil -and the bankers that finance them- more than anyone else? Right, your same leaders again, who make you pay for the by now very extensive and expensive security details that keep them from having to face you. Just like they’re planning to make you pay dearly for the illusion of a world running on renewables.

Because that’s where the profit is: in the illusion.

Whatever makes most money is what will drive people’s, corporations’, and nations’ actions going forward. Saving energy and/or substituting energy sources is not what makes most money, and it will therefore not happen. Not on any meaningful scale, that is.

There will be attempts to force people to pay through the nose to soothe their consciences -which will be very profitable for those on the receiving end-, but people’s ability to pay for this is shrinking fast, so that won’t go anywhere.

The only thing that could help save this planet is for all westerners to reduce their energy use by 90%+, but, though it is theoretically and technically feasible, it won’t happen because the majority of us won’t give up even a part of our wealth, and the powers that be in today’s economies refuse to see their profits (re: power) and those of their backers go up in -ever hotter- air.

The current economic model depends on our profligate use of energy. A new economic model, then, you say? Good luck with that. The current one has left all political power with those who profit most from it. And besides, that’s a whole other problem, and a whole other issue to protest.

If you’re serious about wanting to save the planet, and I have no doubt you are, then I think you need to refocus. COP21 is not your thing, it’s not your stage. It’s your leaders’ stage, and your leaders are not your friends. They don’t even represent you either. The decisions that you want made will not be made there.

There will be lofty declarations loaded with targets for 2030, 2050 and 2100, and none of it will have any real value. Because none of the ‘leaders’ will be around to be held accountable when any of those dates will come to pass.

An imploding global economy may be your best shot at lowering emissions. But then again, it will lead to people burning anything they can get their hands on just to keep warm. Not a pretty prospect either. To be successful, we would need to abandon our current political and economic organizational structures, national governments and ‘up’, which select for the sociopaths that gather behind their heavy security details to decide on your future while gloating with glee in their power positions.

Better still, we should make it impossible for any single one of them to ever be elected to any important position ever again. For now, though, our political systems don’t select for those who care most for the world, or its children. We select for those who promise us the most wealth. And we’re willing to turn a blind eye to very many things to acquire that wealth and hold on to it.

The entire conference is just an exercise in “feel good”, on all sides. Is there anyone out there who really thinks the likes of Bill Gates and Richard Branson will do anything at all to stop this world from burning to the ground? You have any idea what their ecological footprints are?

Sometimes I think it’s the very ignorance of the protesting side that dooms this planet. There’s a huge profit-seeking sociopathic part of the equation, which has caused the problems in the first place, and there’s no serious counterweight in sight.

Having these oversized walking talking ego’s sign petitions and declarations they know they will never have to live up to is completely useless. Branson will still fly his planes, Gates will keep running his ultra-cooled server parks, and Obama and Merkel will make sure their economies churn out growth ahead of anything else. Every single country still demands growth. Whatever gains you make in terms of lower emissions will be nullified by that growth.

And in the hallways, ‘smart’ entrepreneurs stand ready to pocket a ‘smart’ profit from the alleged switch to clean energy. At the cost of you, the taxpayer. And you believe them, because you want to, and because it makes you feel good. And you don’t have the knowledge available to dispute their claims (hint: try thermodynamics).

You’re seeking the cooperation of people who let babies drown and who incessantly bomb the countries these babies and their families were seeking to escape.

I’m sorry, I know a lot of you have a lot of emotion invested in this, and it’s a good emotion, and you’re thinking this conference is really important and all, and our ‘last chance’ to save the planet. But you’ve been had, it’s as simple as that. And co-opted. And conned.

And it’s not the first time, either. All these conferences go the same way. To halt the demise of the planet, you can’t rely on the same people who cause it. Never works.

Big Antarctic Ice Melt Scenarios ‘Not Plausible’

Mark Cochrane

More on Climate Change from Mark Cochrane….

There, a title that should be red meat to those who want this issue of AGW to be minimized. What does it mean though?

In the last few years we have been treated to a series of alarming findings that basically indicate that the entire Western Antarctic ice sheet is now doomed to fall into the ocean and melt (Rignot et al. 2014, Joughlin et al. 2014). A recipe for 4.8m of sea level rise or so. The big question is, just how fast will this process occur, decades, centuries, millennia?

Scientists gravitate to such questions quickly and try to answer them. So, this month we get Ritz et al 2015 trying to do just that. To do so they basically took ice flow simulation models, running them many times and in many ways, to test the sensitivity of various parameters. In this case, they compiled 3,000 model simulations. That gave them a distribution of possible ice outflow rates. What they then did that was clever; they used 20 years of satellite data to try to constrain the model simulations to weight the ones that performed most realistically more highly than the ones that performed poorly. Models meet reality. The paper was in Nature so it got a lot of press and we got stories like this:

Scientists say the contribution of a melting Antarctica to sea-level rise this century will be significant and challenging, but that some nightmare scenarios are just not realistic.

Their new study models how the polar south will react if greenhouse gases rise at a medium to high rate.

The most likely outcome is an input of about 10cm to global waters by 2100.

But the prospect of a 30cm-or-more contribution – claimed by some previous research – has just a one-in-20 chance.

Ok, what most of the public sees is, ‘sea level rise of 10 cm by 2100’ and they infer that more than that is not likely to happen. Almost no one who reads the BBC article will ever bother to dig up and read Ritz et al 2015 (conveniently linked here for the second time…). Alas, many of those who do try to read it will either give up in frustration or misinterpret it. From the quote above, we see that the 30cm or more amount of potential sea level rise still has a 1 in 20 (aka 5%) chance of occurring. Not exactly trivial. Do you feel lucky? From figure 2 in the actual Nature paper you can learn that although 10cm is the most likely amount of sea level rise that there is a 50+% chance it will be exceeded. There is also a 20% chance that 20cm will be exceeded. Again I ask, do you feel lucky?

I don’t say these things to belittle what looks to be a nice piece of scientific work. I am simply showing you that science is a process in work and that it doesn’t lend itself to simple conclusions. From the BBC article above “The most likely outcome is an input of about 10cm to global waters by 2100” what they don’t provide is the qualifier that this is true only — IF(!) the last 20 years of observations are a good proxy for what the next 85 years of ice sheet movement are going to be like. Who is it that says that the next 20 years are not going to be like the last 20? [in case any DTM reader doesn’t know, it’s Chris Martenson] It is also dependent on the models getting the physics and processes right. There is also this little detail.

There would of course be separate and additional inputs from Greenland and other ice stores, and from the general expansion of waters in the warming oceans.

That is a BIG caveat. All of that additional melting will act to lift the ice sheets of Antarctica where they pour into the ocean, speeding up the decay process further. So ultimately that statement “The most likely outcome is an input of about 10cm to global waters by 2100” should probably be understood as saying ‘The most likely outcome is an input ofat least 10cm to global waters by 2100′. Please note that in the actual scientific paper that the authors do not try to spin their findings as being conclusive. In the conclusion of the Nature paper they say “But, given current understanding, our results indicate that plausible predictions of Antarctic ice-sheet instability leading to greater than around half a meter of sea level rise by 2100 or twice that by 2200 would require new physical mechanisms” Note the parts I emphasized.

In any case, you can rest assured that several other scientists are even now working up ways to test these findings. In science, publishing is only the start of the process. Your work has to stand up to every criticism and test that other scientists can devise. Only when exhaustion takes over will your ideas be accepted. It took about 100 years of this for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW aka Global Climate Change) to be accepted by just about every scientist in the field. The last serious attempt to test it was by Berkeley Earth (link) who despite great hopes and funding from Koch brothers and their ‘skeptical’ company ended up proving AGW to be all too real, yet again…

More deflationary signs……

Among mainstream media news that unemployment fell in Australia (by a mere 0.1%) there remains some very bad economic signs, mostly ignored by above mentioned media. Though Alan Kohler did mention the collapsing Baltic dry Index the other day on TV. And some other dude was quoted as saying he was very skeptical of the unemployment numbers, describing them as wild guesses…..

The Automatic Earth (Nicole Foss’ website which Raul Ilargi has seemingly taken over…) has been debt rattling like crazy lately.

Anglo American, a British company, and one of the world’s biggest miners, and a ‘producer’ (actually just a miner, how did those two terms ever get mixed up?!) of platinum (world no. 1), diamonds, copper, nickel, iron ore and coal, said today it would scrap dividends AND fire 85,000 of it 135,000 global workforce (that’s 63%!).

Anglo is just the first in a long litany line we’ll see going forward. Commodities ‘producers’ are being completely wiped out, hammered, killed, murdered. They’ve been able to hedge their downside risks so far, but now find they can’t even afford the price of the hedges (insurance) anymore. And then there’s all the banks and funds that financed them.

And they’ve all been gearing up for production increases too, with grandiose plans and -leveraged- investments aiming for infinity and beyond. You know, it’s the business model. 2016 will be a year for the record books.

Just check this Bloomberg graph for copper supply and demand as an example. How ugly would you like it today?

And what’s true for copper goes for the whole range of raw materials. Because China went from double-digit growth to shrinking imports and exports in pretty much no time flat. And China was all they had left.

Iron ore is dropping below $40, and that’s about the break-even point. Of course, oil has done that quite a while ago already. It’s just that we like to think oil’s some kind of stand-alone freak incident. It is not. With oil today plunging below $37 (down some 15% since the OPEC meeting last week), it doesn’t matter anymore how much more efficient shale companies can get.

They’re toast. They’re done. And with them are their lenders. Who have hedged their bets too, obviously, but hedging has a price. Or else you could throw money at any losing enterprise.

But wait, there’s more…..

The rout beneath the relative calm of the market surface continues today as another sector has gotten crushed today in reaction to the domestic and global collapse in trade, the spreading domestic manufacturing recession and the bursting of the commodity bubble: truckers, and especially the heaviest, Class 8 trucks, those with a gross weight over 33K pounds,those which make up the backbone of U.S. trade infrastructure and logistics.

Such as this Kenworth W900:

 

The following charts of Wabco and Paccar show just where the pain is most acute today:

What happened? Nothing short of a complete disintegration in the heavy trucking sector.

No wonder demand for liquid fuel is down and oil is below $37 as I type.. but we are constantly told, everything’s just fine, China will come to the rescue yet again. Yeah right….

In China, responsible for about half of global coal demand, use of coal in the power sector fell more than 4 percent in the first three quarters and imports declined 31 percent. Since the end of 2013, the country’s electricity consumption growth has largely been covered by new renewable energy plants.

“The coal industry likes to point to China adding a new coal-fired power plant every week as evidence that coal demand will pick up in the future, but the reality on the ground is rather different,” according to the report. “Capacity utilization of the plants has been plummeting. China is now adding one idle coal-fired power plant per week” according to a report released Monday by Greenpeace.

Emissions are even reported as going down…..  good news for the environment, but a sure sign the economy is in collapse mode now…..

Researchers at the University of East Anglia, UK, and the Global Carbon Project found that carbon emissions could decline by 0.6% in 2015, a departure from a decade of growing 2.4% per year. The research, published in Nature Climate Change, attributes the decline to a reduction in China’s coal consumption as its economy slows and it moves to cleaner, renewable energy sources.

“China is trying to deal massively with its air pollution problem,” says study co-author Corinne Le Quéré, director of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at the University of East Anglia in Norwich. “And its renewables are growing very fast.”

The results are in line with a pair of analyses released earlier this year by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency and the International Energy Agency, which show the rate of global emissions growth slowing significantly in 2014.

 

Interesting times indeed…..

 

I’m a lumberjack and I’m OK…

My better half is graduating with a Masters in Mental Health gong on Monday; as a result, I’m temporarily back in Queensland, and you better believe, I cannot wait to return to Tasmania, this short stay has categorically proven to me beyond any doubt I do not belong here!

Before leaving Geeveston, I got stuck into cutting down those pesky Macrocarpas that would shade the new house if left there. They will also be milled into building materials, some of the remains will be used as kiln firewood, and I’ve decided to have a go at turning the tons of leftover rubbish into biochar. At least I’ll try, watch this space.

After my Big Bertha chainsaw gave up the ghost, in the depths of frustration, I bought a used Stihl from Gumtree. And did I get lucky… A chap from Dover, just 20km away, had a five months old saw complete with carry case and spare tungsten carbide chain to sell, and I got it for barely more than half what he paid for it. It’s a ripper, if you’ll pardon the pun.

I even cut down what is probably the largest of all those trees with it, not without problems I might add, and none caused by the saw.

Because the trees were planted as a windbreak, they are very very close

One of the falling attempts that did not work…!

together, as the photos reveal. The result is that they are reluctant to throw branches against each other, and instead grow in a fan shaped fashion, meaning that their weight is spread unevenly, and in only two directions. This is clearly visible in the photo at right.. there are no branches pointing towards the camera at all.

I was trying to fall the tree away from the dam, but it had other ideas, and got hung up on the much smaller tree beside it, completely bending it against the third tree along. The lumberjack’s worst nightmare really, potentially very dangerous too.

So I called my extremely helpful (and unbelievably understanding) neighbour for assistance. Matt brought a 100m long rope and his 4WD, and 2½ hours later, it was down. In the dam. Well, the tip of the crown was, this monster is over 30m long….. what an epic fail on my part! I guess this is how one gains experience. At least, no one got hurt, always a bonus.

The very next day, Big Bertha returned (well, a brand new replacement did), and I used it to cut the bottom 7m off the monster. A couple of days later, Sid and his tractor had pretty well cleaned up the whole area for me, and I now have a stockpile of logs for milling ready to go. Not that I’m finished, there are another 20 or so trees to go. By the time I’m finished, I will hopefully be an expert tree feller. Oh and anyone thinking I’m denuding the area of its trees, once I’m finished there will be some one hundred other Cyprus left!

Stockpile of 12 logs for milling, with all the remaining trees at top right needing to also come down….

The view from where the house will be built is really opening up now, and I can’t wait to get started on that side of the project.

Even our friends who live by the sea liked our water views….!

I’ve been investigating how to turn the crowns of those trees into biochar. There will be tons of the stuff, so it won’t be an easy task, but then what is when you have a proper farm? Here’s a short informative video….

More living on the land…

I’ve been rather crook for the past couple of weeks, a virus I’m certain I caught right here at the Geeveston Community Centre (henceforth recognised as Geco), and whilst I have been getting some things done, it’s been a struggle.

I’ve almost finished building a second insulated bolt hole, initially for the family visiting over Christmas, but mostly to house wwoofers, because there’s no way I can manage the farm on my own…

I’ve been agisting the neighbour’s cattle for the past two or three weeks, a rather large – too large? – mob of thirty or so heads that have taken my grass down to sub fire hazard levels, and left piles of manure I will deal with later when it dries.

Now the grass is down, all the thistles have become clearly visible, and I’ve been hoeing them (in their many hundreds!) rather than spraying as the neighbour was threatening to do…. It’s chop and drop on a large scale. Lots of walking, I just wish I could breathe properly. This morning was the first one I almost felt human again, so I’m on the mend, but it’s so unusual for me to get this sick, it’s knocked my socks off.

Yesterday I attended the Huon Producers Network’s inaugural market in Huonville. Well attended with 600 or so visitors counted, it had a great atmosphere, great food, great music, and it was an opportunity to mix with the locals, most of whom I’ve been avoiding so as not to spread the dreaded lurgy.

The wind dropped off, and the sun came out even; must be a good omen!

The network is one of the main reasons we settled on Geeveston; the
energy for the operation started here and in the surrounding area, and I intend to join as soon as I’m in a position to actually produce some food. Which could be sooner rather than later, because the next season of apples is well underway.

The trees were only just beginning to bloom as Richard and I first arrived two and a half months ago, and now those blooms are turning into fruit which is fast needing thinning out to ensure good size fruit.

Apples produce clusters of six flowers, five outer ones and a central one known as the king blossom. At this stage, there are bees everywhere, and without a word of a lie, you can hear the orchard buzz…..

In no time at all, all those flowers turn into grape sized apples, and the trees are just covered in fruit. If left like this, the apples don’t grow much, and whilst they are still delicious, they look far too small to be salable, though they would make excellent cider. I’m also told that pickers are paid by weight, and for them to pick a tonne (say) requires picking loads more apples, which takes longer, making pickers unhappy.

It feels very strange to literally break of hundreds of potential apples; it seems counter-intuitive, but that’s what all the locals tell me to do, and what do I know about apples?

Clusters should be no more than 2 or 3 apples, and must be at least 10cm apart. In their natural state, they look more like grapes than apples, so closely knit are they on the tree……. so off they have to come.

Some trees would easily have 300 tiny apples on them, and there’s no way a tree less than 2m tall could bring so much fruit to maturity. Last season, nothing was done to the trees because everyone involved was busy selling/buying/moving. Most of the crop went to waste apart from a trailer load that went to Charlotte Cove where my sailor friends recently moved to. This is where they were turned into cider by Werner, who, as it happens, has now decided to retire back in New South Wales…… and kindly decided to leave us his cider making equipment!

No prizes for guessing what I’ll be doing next year, watch this space!