JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Canberra (the ACT) will cut emissions by 40% (!) by… 2020

File this one under: Experiments in Green Government. Watch this box.

There’s a spot in Australia called The Australian Capital Territory, where our National Capital, Canberra, sits and which has it’s own anachronistic government: a kind of glorified local council and  junior “state” government at the same time*.

In 2008 they were lucky enough to elect a Labor minority government with a Green coalition. Now it seems they’re going to showcase the ACT in a grand symbolic experiment by enacting the strictest carbon reduction scheme in Australia.

ACT environment minister Simon Corbell tabled the new target in a Bill in the Legislative Assembly today. (Aug 26, 2010)

“Governments have a responsibility to act on this issue, and the ACT Labor Government is leading Australia on reducing our carbon footprint,” Mr Corbell said in a statement.

The ACT has also pledged to have its emissions peak by 2013, decline by 80 per cent by 2050, and for the ACT to be carbon neutral by 2060.

Forty percent cuts (from 1990 levels) in just ten years?

Samuel J at Catallaxy Files calculates that as the mother of all emissions cuts translating to a 62% per capita reduction in a decade.

The ACT Government today announced a target of CO2 emissions reduction of 40 per cent by 2020 (compared to 1990 levels). That is, in 2008 CO2 emissions were estimated at 1.2 Mt in the ACT. The “business as usual” estimate is 1.62 Mt in 2020 (a 40 per cent increase over 1990 levels). The ACT Government’s target is now 0.695 Mt in 2020 (a 40 per cent reduction on 1990 levels).

Compared to “business as usual” this means a reduction of 58 per cent in 2020.

Using ABS statistics he estimates the population growth at 1.08% pa.

Therefore the projected population in 2020 is 390,600.

And that’s a 62 per cent reduction in per capita emissions in the ACT to 2020.

This is one carbon reduction scheme that might actually help the country. Why? Because the main industry of Canberra is government and wishfully speaking, that ought to mean less of it. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t think there are many factories to close down. (It’s a shame the local territory government can’t do much about emissions from say, The Federal Department of Climate Change.)

But being realistic, it might just mean Queanbeyan will suddenly bloom. (It’s a satellite suburb of Canberra that’s “interstate” and under NSW law).

On ABC radio the Greens admitted it was ambitious, and in the land-of-big-wishes, were preempting failure already, making it sound more like an optimistic ambit claim, rather than a carefully designed policy:

…I think that one has to have these targets if you’re going to drive serious change.

“It may be that by 2020 we’ve only reduced our emissions by 33 per cent, that would still be a massive turn around.”

Wouldn’t it be better to legislate things that were realistic in the first place?

Some listeners to Ross Solly’s Breakfast on 666 ABC Canberra were critical of the ambitious target, reminding the Minister of Canberra’s failure to reach its no waste to land fill goal 2010 which was downgraded to an aspirational target earlier this year.

But what were the Business Council thinking?

Canberra Business Council chief executive officer Chris Faulks cautiously welcomed the targets for providing a level of certainty for the business community.

“It’s ambitious and it will be a challenge to reach the targets, but business would rather have some sort of clarity as to what the expectations are rather than have the uncertainty occurring at the federal level.

They’d prefer the certainty of knowing they’ll need to move interstate?

*To be fair on the ACT government, it serves 350,000 people, and isn’t that much smaller than Tasmania at 500,000 people, which in contrast, qualifies as a whole state and gets 12 senators, to the ACT’s 2.

I also used to live in the Bush Capital, know it very well, and I must say enjoyed it thoroughly  (and if someone could move Mt Majura to Perth it would make my day.)

Thanks to Climate Madness for finding this story.  Herald Sun original.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 4.0/10 (3 votes cast)
Canberra (the ACT) will cut emissions by 40% (!) by... 2020, 4.0 out of 10 based on 3 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/3xhpzhf

No comments yet to Canberra (the ACT) will cut emissions by 40% (!) by… 2020

  • #
    Brian G Valentine

    It’s one thing for people to pledge to torture themselves for whatever penance or penalty for merely existing they feel they deserve; it is quite another matter to offer involuntary pledges on behalf of others

    00

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    Witha population in 2020 of 390,600, they should be able to do it with one nuclear power station and transport by a fleet of electric milk-floats. All those bureaucrats and politicians would look good travelling around on milk-floats. PS, do you have milk-floats down-under?

    00

  • #
    Jaymez

    Since the ACT has little industry to speak of, and they get most of their electricity needs from the NSW power grid, (they have a small mini-hydro plant running off the Mt Stromlo Reservoir producing 200MwH per month), you can bet most of the carbon emission reductions will be paid for by their biggest industry – The Federal Government.

    As it is unlikely they could operate an ETS alone, the only way they will be able to reduce carbon emissions would be by applying an emissions tax in the ACT. As Jo points out, that would simply see whatever industry the ACT have move over the border. Another way will be to introduce carbon levies on electricity, gas and water. Another means is to legislate that only hybrid or bio-diesel or diesel vehicles be allowed to be registered in the ACT. That may simply shift vehicle registrations outside the territory.The ACT could also require sprinkler systems to be banned, along with swimming pools and spas, fertilising lawns, making home insulation compulsorily, including double glazing.So if the ACT introduces a special tax/levies or demands on cars or planes, or hotel rooms or whatever, that simply means the largest sector effected are Federal Government Servants including politicians and their staff. That cost will simply be passed on to all Australian tax payers. All the tax payers around Australia will be paying for their carbon reduction measures. Is that what we have to look forward to in our Greens controlled Federal Government as well? The only problem is it will be real industry and a real economy which will pay for the folly.

    00

  • #
    L Nettles

    If the Australian Federal Government has to shut down for lack of electricity, would that be a good or bad thing?

    00

  • #
    Adolf Balik

    The most consequent environmental party that has been every in power used to be the Red Khmers led by Pol Pot. They were also the best in curbing carbon dioxide emissions. Australia probably wants to catch up with Pol Potists in the noteworthy achievements.

    00

  • #
    John Coochey

    One thing seriously proposed is that householders will have to opt out of the Green Tax to avoid paying and extra $500 a year for electricity at the moment you have to opt into it. I can see the
    ACT Labor Government rolling over this

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    They can start by closing down the department of climate change for a start.

    00

  • #
    JaniePo

    All the Politicians and Public Servants in the ACT can start by setting an example!

    They should be the first cabs off the rank!

    Let’s then gather some feedback from them and see how they like living in the stone age like the FLINTSTONES!!

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    I think this is a real indictment on the Australian education system.

    What sort of maths do they teach in the schools, if the people putting this together could not see just how the stats would interact to produce a “duh” number.

    “It may be that by 2020 we’ve only reduced our emissions by 33 per cent, that would still be a massive turn around.”

    Is that 33% of 40%, or 33% of 58%, or 33% of 62%, or 33% of today’s emissions, or 33% of the number I thought up in the bath last night?

    And the problem with using aspirations as targets, is that you start off by admitting that you can’t hit the target, so it comes down to seeing by how much you are going to miss.

    Unless, of course, you shoot yourself in the foot.

    00

  • #
    Bob Malloy

    Aah the A.C.T. where the inmates run the asylum.

    00

  • #
    Ross

    The guys advocating this should immediately be challenged to list what things would be required to be done to achieve this. Politicians and activists make these sort of proposterous announcements all the time , but in this case with a very small area and a small population involved in a relatively small number of activities they should be able to easily list what needs to be done to achieve their figures. If not it is what we know it to be — just fanciful bluster.

    Also , something that has been bothering me lately. Everyone talks of reductions to 1990 levels — how do most countries know what the 1990 levels were ?? ( When I look at the relevant website for NZ I see them saying that when Kyoto was signed we had very little data and that data bases have had to be built since. So if we did not know much in the early 2000′s how do we know about 1990 ? )

    00

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    My friends, be glad it isn’t nation-wide. Even small blessings are blessings. And if your government is stalled on the ETS by lack of a majority mandate, it may well be a away to show everyone exactly what this kind of nonsense will do.

    And now I’ve done what I shouldn’t do and commented on Australian politics where I have no business. But I wish you well, always.

    00

  • #
    Olaf Koenders

    Greenies are the sand in the gears of modern civilization – and they intend to be. Most Greenie causes are at best distractions from real environmental concerns (such as land degradation) and are more motivated by a hatred of people than by any care for the environment.

    For centuries there was a scientific consensus which said that fire was explained by the release of an invisible element called phlogiston. That theory is universally ridiculed today. Global warming is the new phlogiston. Though, now that we know how deliberate the hoax has been, it might be more accurate to call global warming the New Piltdown Man. The Piltdown hoax took 40 years to unravel.

    Seeing that we’re all made of carbon, the time will come when people will look back on the carbon phobia of the early 21st century as too incredible to be believed, and that should happen long before their 2020 targets.

    00

  • #
    Tel

    I think it’s a great idea. The whole of Canberra should be converted to run only on solar cells and windmills. No dirty coal power from New South Wales or Victoria. Early bedtime for the public servants would help them think clearly in the morning.

    BTW Canberra has wickedly cold winters and most of their houses depend on central heating to stay comfortable, but they probably just need a few more pink batts to snuggle under — they’ll be fine.

    Hmmm, now about all the jet fuel being burnt on flights in and out of Canberra, sorry but that’s gonna have to stop as well. I guess they can bicycle to the border then catch a diesel train back home, except for Bob Katter who would no doubt prefer to ride his horse.

    00

  • #
    janama

    I did some brief calculations last night based on the offer I received for a 1.5kW solar panel system for my roof. The total cost before government subsidies was $9,425.00. So if we added a 1.5kW system to every house in NSW (there are roughly 2,728,719 of them) the total cost would be $25.7 Billion – In return we’d get 4.0931 GW of power for 6 hours (when and if the sun shines) or 1.0233GW based over 24 hours. That’s $25 million per Megawatt.

    On the other hand the 750MW Kogan Creek coal power station puts out 750MW 24/7 at an establishment cost of $1.1 billion or $1.5 million per Megawatt.

    That’s 25 million/MW v 1.5 million/MW!!

    The solar panels when operating would supply 6.7% of the total NSW load!!!

    00

  • #
    george

    I wonder – will that actually be physical reductions, or “notional” reductions via the vehicle of an ETS or carbon tax?
    The notional option otherwise being known as a feelgood exercise in “paying to pollute”…and I`m standing by for the caveats and exemptions to come oozing out of the walls over the next little while.

    Now, about China and India et al…BTW Mr Bratby, wash your mouth out with soap, for you utilised the “N” word! Know what the Greens want to do with the Lucas Heights research facility? – just have a guess.

    00

  • #
    Bulldust

    Part of the reason why we have the problem we will have in 9 months (a Green balance of power in the Senate) is because Tasmania has the same number of senators as other states. But it is what it is…

    I see the Libs overtook Labour on the 2PP vote since yesterday:
    http://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/-/newshome/7852622/labor-loses-two-party-vote-lead/

    See the latest here:
    http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Default.htm

    Here’s betting Labor will push harder and harder and bend over backwards to try and get the independents onside.

    It is as I predicted last week… Labor has Buckley’s chance now, and it has no moral high ground whatsoever to justify them as a priority to form Government (Gillard was the one pushing the 2PP vote angle last week).

    Basically we have two options right now… a Lib-Independent coalition government or we are back to the polls. If we go back to the polls expect more of a swing to the Libs. As a consequence the independents will be marginalised again because the Libs will get closer to an absolute majority in their own right.

    So rejoice because Gillard is gone, and along with her the mining tax, carbon tax and wasted expenditure.

    00

  • #
    Puablo

    YOU HAVE MUCHUS TO WORRY

    if you can do without gases and the nighttime then the whales can swim freely again!

    00

  • #
    MadJak

    When those greens senators fly into Canberra or don’t take public transport at any time, their hypocrisy should be public knowledge and they should have to explain themselves -every single time.

    00

  • #
    crakar24

    Thanks Janama,

    This info will come in handy as i am trying to shoot down a greeny as we speak.

    In regards to ACT’s green revolution, this is one of the side effects of the Copenhagen flop. If the snake oil salesmen were successful we would have a nation wide……no a global scheme/scam to reduce CO2. However as the leaders of this scam have failed the gullible and the bewildered are making it up as they go along. So we end up with half arsed plans like this one.

    Of course the snake oil salesmen wont get rich this way but it will make it easier for them to push through their agenda in the future. Our only hope is that people in places like Canberra who get exposed to this type of government learn a bitter lesson and fight back when they try and implement the real deal after the Cancun Mexico summit.

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Crakar @ 20, Jamama

    We are blessed with some solar cells at home and the fact that they are installed and have a rating of 1 kW doesn’t mean you get 1kWh per hour of daylight! We average 4.2 kWh per day per kW installed. So your numbers are, if anything, wildly optimistic.

    A sting in the tail for these little beauties is that they don’t like hot weather – eg when the sun is shining. The efficiency drops by about 0.2% per degree C. So it can be midday on a blazing summer’s day and the panels can be putting out 60% of their rated capacity.

    Typical greenie stuff – sounds good but they only tell you half the story – if that!

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    00

  • #
    cohenite

    Janama’s analysis is a good start but the Canberra syndrone whereby moral stands can be made and paid for by others has already occurred in California which bans fossil fuel production within its borders but imports the majority of its energy from other states which use fossil fuels.

    The solar panel scam is worse than Janama describes. A recent analysis of home solar power by investigative reporter Mark Davis shows that it is prohibitively expensive. Currently a typical NSW family spends about $1200 a year buying 8000 kilowatt hours [kWh] of electricity which produces about 7.5 tonnes of carbon dioxide. By comparison, installing a one kW photovoltaic system costs about $12000, most which is subsidised by the federal government. Over its twenty year working life the $2000 [at today's prices; with the sort of energy replacement in the ACT everything will cost more] inverter will need replacement at least once.

    The one kW system generates 1400kWh a year, less than a fifth of the household’s electricity consumption. This would reduce the family’s carbon dioxide emissions by 1.3 tonnes per annum and its power bill by $250.

    Over twenty years, twenty six tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions will have been avoided at a net cost of $9000 [$12000 plus $2000 less twenty times $250 per year].

    This puts a price on the carbon dioxide saved of $350 per tonne. The proposed CPRS puts a price per tonne of $20-25. The cost of the home solar solution is fifteen times more expensive than the maligned CPRS solution!

    In addition most of the solar panels are imported from China. China is still expanding its fossil fuel energy network so coal power from Australia will be used to build the Chinese solar panels. There will therefore be no net saving of carbon dioxide emissions from the greater use of solar panels in Australia because China will increase emissions in the manufacture of the panels used in Australia.

    Great, eh?

    00

  • #
    Joe Lalonde

    I love these political claims that can be achieved when the technology has not been created to support this claim.
    Lets kill the economy by cutting these emissions without anything to take it’s place to keep the markets moving.

    00

  • #
    pattoh

    Perhaps it will make a nice test tube to assess the fallout from an exercise in selfrighteous stupidity.

    Personally, I have a theory that this is a symptom of the psychological fallout from driving around in circles.

    If there is a God, & he/she decides to get rid of blockages by tried & tested medical procedures, all those concentric roads make for a pretty good bullseye.

    00

  • #
    pat

    any political party waiting for the US to put a price on carbon may be waiting a very long while:

    29 Aug:Washington Post:David A. Fahrenthold: Environmental groups face their future in climate-change debate
    At two events last week in Wisconsin, environmental groups seemed to be trying two strategies: defiance and pleading for sympathy.
    Neither one drew enough people to fill a high school gym…
    On Wednesday, a coalition of environmental and labor groups called the “Blue Green Alliance” came to Green Bay during a tour of 30-plus cities. They arrived in a blue bus painted with a windmill, smiling workers – and a painted message that was resilience bordering on denial…
    But only about 30 people attended the midafternoon event. A half-hour after it began, the speakers were back on the bus and the parking lot was almost empty….
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/08/29/AR2010082903699.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010082903726

    00

  • #
    Binny

    Given that the main industry of the ACT this taking money off people that work hard for it. And then basically just wasting it, is this sort of rot should fit right in.

    00

  • #

    janama, cohenite,

    We all know the solar thing doesn’t make any sense for the country as a whole. However a $250 return on a say $2000 investment(cost to buyer – rest is subsidy) for a 1Kw system is 12.5% on your money. As power prices rise this will only improve. Even when you amortise the cost over twenty years it is still 7.5% on your money at today’s power rates. That’s before we even talk about feed in tariffs.

    I having a 1.5 Kw system put in next month. This is a totally cynical and self interested action on my part based purely on the economic return to me. Screw the voters of Australia. If they want to elect stupid governments which waste money, listen to green lunatics and won’t build more efficient larger and cheaper power stations they can help pay my power bills.

    This system will deliver about half my electricity use and should return at least 15% on my $2000 investment. I can’t get that in the bank or stock market. I’m still thinking I’m going to shut down all the electric appliances for a couple of hours after lunch and have a siesta to maximise the feed in tariff returns. If we end up with rolling blackouts in future (likely with the lunacy that passes for policy)I’ll add a couple of deep cycle sealed batteries. They’ll run a PC, my evaporative A/C, the fridge and some lights for a few hours.

    00

  • #
    Jim Reedy

    Oh No…

    We ARE going to be over run by eco refugees
    not as predicted by the CAGW alarmists from inundated pacific islands but from inland, driven out by the insane policies of the CAGW alarmist government to the bordering “not so mad” areas.
    Ludicrous policies of the left.

    00

  • #
    Mia Nony

    Only one way this emissions target game could “work”, really.
    Less people, less emissions. Better yet? No people, no emissions. Many greens say this openly now.
    It’s that or the interim “solution”, the backpack thingy used in SA already, meant for cow. And now there is one for humans, too….you know the one where you wear the backpack and you keep a tube in your mouth for exhaling into, for carbon capture, and the other one, the cow has a larger backpack and a tube inserted, um, …uh, …into its rear portal, for methane capture. (Sorry, this is truly NOT a JOKE. Go to google images and put in “cow methane capture” to literally “get” the picture. It is for real.)
    I keep pinching myself, thinking I will wake up from all of this “down the rabbit hole” madness, but it is not working, not so far, anyway.
    So far, science and evidence notwithstanding, globalization and the communitarian quasi communistic underpinnings of globalisation, where trade is the pretext and dictatorship is the agenda, seems to be full steam ahead, everywhere – or should I say full hot air ahead?
    Anyway, by extrapolating on ANY emissions reduction “logic” here is what must follow, as night follows day:
    For this town’s target plan to “work”? Dissolve the town altogether and “relocate” the residents, as they used to say back in the good old relocation internment camp days.
    Besides, this would be right on track for the mind boggling Stack-And-Pack radical depopulation, private property elimination, consumption reduction and remainder of reduced population’s relocation, as described in detail in the 40 chapter about documented step by step globalisation & one world government, all laid out as plans written about in the infamous United Nations Agenda 21, authored by that heart warming (oops, I used the “w” word!) war criminal Kissinger.
    Wish I was joking about that last bit, too!!

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Mike

    I can tell you don’t have kids! We have 3 of them and they don’t know how to turn off a light or a computer and one gets very weary reminding them that they need to save the planet – or at least Dad’s fragile budget!

    The 1.5 kW system will give you about 6 – 6.5 kWh per day of power, equivalent to about $1.20 per day. Unless there’s a “green” tariff you can get – but that mostly applies to power you export to the grid.

    If you can run a house on 12 kWh per day, then you clearly don’t have kids! By comparison, the Gore household runs on about 900 kWh per day, and there’s only the two of them!

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    00

  • #
    Graham r

    Please ensure that someone in the A.C.T. keeps a very very close score of the goings on.
    This can serve as a profound diary of what these crazy policies will do to the territory.

    A bi-annual update would be good!!

    00

  • #
    pat

    ABC has had nearly a week to get this headline in synch with the story!

    26 Aug: ABC: Diver poisoned by carbon dioxide, taken to hospital
    By Andree Withey
    The Cairns man was suffering from carbon monoxide poisoning and had memory problems and a severe headache…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/08/26/2994020.htm

    00

  • #
    Brian G Valentine

    When will it all end? Not until people have been pushed farther by the State than they will tolerate, such as conscripting children to report their parent’s “carbon profligacy.”

    Unfortunately it usually takes something desperate to happen before backlash against zealotry quells it

    00

  • #
    G/Machine

    They ACT is to cut emissions by 40% by 2020.
    This is wonderful news.
    We are talking about B.S. emissions, right ?

    00

  • #
    janama

    The 1.5 kW system will give you about 6 – 6.5 kWh per day of power, equivalent to about $1.20 per day.

    yes – 6kWh/day – the Power Company would charge you 20c/kWh if you consumed it. $1.20

    But the Power Company are forced to pay you 60c/kWh by the government, that’s $3.60.

    My 1.5kW system would cost $3,452 and it’s expected to produce an average 5.48kWh per day – $3.29/day or $1200.12/year which is a 35% return on your money!!

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Janama

    You just need to check whether that 60 cent tariff applies to all the power you make or to the power you export.

    Over here in Western Australia the feedback tariff is 44 cents/kWh but it only applies to the power that goes back into the grid. Your government must be more stupid than ours!

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    00

  • #
    Rereke Whaakaro

    Speedy: #30

    The most (only) efficient solar heating I have seen was a supplemental roof water heating system. This system heated water during the day (even if overcast) and then stored it in a regular electric water cylinder. The water cylinder element was on a timer/thermostat, so it only cut in if and when the draw-of at night caused the overall water temperature to drop.

    By showering in the mornings, when the water was still warm enough, the system cost nothing to run. The majority of the owners power bills were related to water heating, so he was very happy.

    Unfortunately, the Greens don’t consider these systems to be “solar generation”, so they attract no subsidy even though they save electricity. Further more, they want the electrical supply (which is only used at night, remember) to be from solar panels – go figure.

    00

  • #
    Speedy

    Rareke

    I think the most efficient form of hot water heating are the instantaneous gas heaters – these don’t waste heat lost from the hot water tank. I’m not sure how they compare with the system you’re describing but it would be close.

    If you’d like to revisit your last paragraph it is obvious that you have fallen for one of the classic blunders. The first – Never get involved in a land war in Asia. The second – don’t assume green policies have a logical foundation!

    Cheers,

    Speedy

    00

  • #
    Gaz

    Power it all with a hot air turbine inthe apex of parliament house under the flag

    00

  • #
    observa

    Here’s the big picture by the way-
    http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/solar-PV-AGL-fuel-cell-carbon-abatement-pd20100830-8T5VK?OpenDocument&src=sph
    Slowly after Copenghagen they are starting to ask the hard questions
    As for my 2.1KW system in Adelaide on a wet rainy day it was putting out 47watts at 11am which wouldn’t run a 50watt downlight

    00

  • #
    DougS

    They’ve got more chance of being struck by lightning than achieving such an enormous reduction.

    I suspect that they’ll just keep putting back the date for achieving the target so that it falls on future generations. Worse, they might use tax payers wonga to buy traded emissions and send the money to China or India.

    Eventually though, the whole AGW scam will be exposed and people will be able to get back to common sense.

    00

  • #
    Lawrie

    We considered a 10kw system and based on the expected generation and the NSW feed in rate of 60cents per kwh we would repay the capital cost in 4.1 years. My problem is that there was a letter in our local paper from a pensioner couple complaining about the 20% hike in electricity costs since July 1. The writer stated that they can no longer afford to run a heater so they go to bed about 6pm. In order for me to receive a 60 cent feed in tarriff some old pensioner has to go without heating.I fail to see the justice in such action. Even Martin Ferguson, Labor mines and energy minister, says electricity will double in price in the next five years if a carbon tax is introduced. How on earth are the fixed income people going to afford even basic power? Are the Greens advocating death by freezing of the pensioners? Maybe the press should be asking Bob Brown and these half wits in Canberra about the consequences of their ridiculous proposals. Lee Rianhon is still talking of all the wonderful green jobs completely ignoring the Spanish experience. Idiots all.

    00

  • #
    observa

    Here’s a good roundup of the overarching constrint as to why most of the ACT is hallucinating on drugs with solar- http://brookesnews.com/?p=92
    It has to do with the energy density of solar insolation that no amount of fanciful and wishful, public service, groupthinkinking kumbaya can overcome. These are the same airheaded NIMBYs who place signs in paddocks on the approach to Canberra proudly pronouncing- ‘This is a windmill free zone’. What else would you expect out of such an inbred, sheltered workshop?

    00

  • #
    JPA Knowles

    In my experience many ‘greens’ have a poor grasp of numbers.
    At best photo-voltaics work well on my electric fence in the paddock and on the composting dunny system but for a normal household they are largely inadequate. A friend who is off the grid spent $30,000 (Australian) on a 2.7kW PV plate and battery system but in winter when all the family are home he often has to run a diesel genny or go to bed early.
    This week I was offered a 3kW grid connect system at $18,000 but our daily usage is 11kW hrs domestic rate plus 10kW hrs of off peak which costs us a total of only $3.50/day. We use wood for space heating and gas for cooking (and 30 cpl bio-diesel for cars). Even for my basic rural existence PV is both inadequate and hyper expensive.
    Perhaps I should be careful what I say as I’m from the same ‘green’ demographic but, there must be a lot of middle-class twits in Canberra who can’t add up. They’ve got buckley’s chance of reaching a 20% reduction by 2020.

    00

  • #
    3x2

    This is one carbon reduction scheme that might actually help the country. Why? Because the main industry of Canberra is government and wishfully speaking, that ought to mean less of it.

    Wishful indeed. Here in the UK our beancounters simply use taxpayer money to purchase themselves extra carbon from Goldman Sachs. Can’t accurately count the beans while shivering in the dark can you now?

    00

  • #
    Joe Veragio

    This is one carbon reduction scheme that might actually help the country. Why? Because the main industry of Canberra is government and wishfully speaking, that ought to mean less of it.

    Wishful indeed, as most of the hot air that comes out of government isn’t from burning coal/oil/gas.

    00

  • #
    Joe Veragio

    “It’s ambitious and it will be a challenge to reach the targets, but business would rather have some sort of clarity as to what the expectations are rather than have the uncertainty occurring at the federal level.

    As if ‘clarity’ could trump sanity.

    Setting such ridiculously aspirational targets, just ensures no-one can take them seriously.

    00

  • #
    Joe Veragio

    DougS:
    August 31st, 2010 at 9:20 pm

    They’ve got more chance of being struck by lightning than achieving such an enormous reduction.
    ………
    Eventually though, the whole AGW scam will be exposed and people will be able to get back to common sense.

    Alas, there is now such a large body of tax payer funded idleness, that as soon as one nutty scheme is exposed, they’re already up to other mischief which we’ve yet to discover.

    00

  • #

    MadJak:
    August 31st, 2010 at 10:36 am

    When those greens senators fly into Canberra or don’t take public transport at any time, their hypocrisy should be public knowledge and they should have to explain themselves -every single time.

    Let’s see Adam Bandt on his bicycle for that Melbourne to Canberra journey. Or joining the plebs on the Greyhound bus at the very least.

    00

  • #
    John of Cloverdale WA

    Shut down the Canberra airport. No flights allowed. That would achieve a drop a drastic drop in emissions. NSW then could expand Queanbeyan airport and introduce an electric car shuttle service to satisfy those stupid enough to believe this AGW crap. Let those watermelon Greens and Labor closet Trotskyites believe they are doing the right thing. One thing for sure, it’s not going to happen baby!

    00

  • #
    Mia Nony

    BREAKING NEWS: ECO VIOLENCE AS ENCOURAGED BY THOSE IN CHARGE

    Purported Eco-Terrorist Angered Over ‘Immigration Pollution And Anchor Baby Filth’

    James Jay Lee
    This afternoon, a gunman entered the Discovery Communications building in Silver Spring, MD and appears to have taken at least one person hostage. Among his various bizarre, eco-related demands, one relates directly to immigration. The alleged hostage-taker, James Jay Lee, calls for the elimination of “anchor baby filth” and “immigration pollution”:

    Programs must be developed to find solutions to stopping ALL immigration pollution and the anchor baby filth that follows that. Find solutions to stopping it. Call for people in the world to develop solutions to stop it completely and permanently. Find solutions FOR these countries so they stop sending their breeding populations to the US and the world to seek jobs and therefore breed more unwanted pollution babies. FIND SOLUTIONS FOR THEM TO STOP THEIR HUMAN GROWTH AND THE EXPORTATION OF THAT DISGUSTING FILTH! (The first world is feeding the population growth of the Third World and those human families are going to where the food is! They must stop procreating new humans looking for nonexistant jobs!)

    Lee’s immigration screed bears a troubling resemblance to views and policies espoused by anti-immigrant groups such as NumbersUSA, the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), theFederation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR),Progressives for Immigration Reform, and others.

    Just this past month, FAIR released “The Environmentalist’s Guide to a Sensible Immigration Policy.” The report connects immigration to “pollution, sprawl, congestion, and ecological degradation,” complaining that “so-called environmentalists pretend as if this connection does not exist.” As usual, FAIR prescribes an overall reduction in immigration as the solution to the country’s environmental woes (in slightly more diplomatic terms).

    It’s not a coincidence that many of these are amongst the same groups that have always supported changing the 14th amendment to deny “anchor babies,” or the American-born children of undocumented immigrants, citizenship — long before the debate entered the political mainstream this summer. Read more about Lee and the anti-immigrant environmental movement at the Wonk Room.

    http://thinkprogress.org/2010/09/01/discovery-terrorist-immigration/

    00

  • #
    Mia Nony

    P.S.
    There seem to be conflicting reports, and his wild misanthropic, Malthusian manifesto was yanked off the net right fast, in order to the media to reframe him as a disillusioned green instead of a virulently hateful immigrant lathing minority person … but Anthony Watts and others had snagged it already.
    The contradictions include that he was taken into in ‘protective custody’ and that he was shot and killed. Not sure which but suspect the latter, how else to reframe his actions, if he could do it himself?
    This is truly “the greening of hatred”.

    00

  • #
    Mia Nony

    sorry, I meant “in order for” and I meant “immigrant loathing”

    00

  • #
    Brent Hargreaves

    Forty percent? That’s nuthin’! Our government in Britain is committed to 80% reduction. That’s the ‘what’, at least… they’re still working on the ‘how’.

    This is reminiscent of the good old days of rigged elections in commie countries, where 97%, and then 99% of people “voted for the incumbent communist party”. If memory serves, they actually hit 100% in Albania.

    Now, whose government will be the first to commit to 100% reductions? Reality be damned; who cares about the survival of civilization! Madness. Sheer madness…

    00

  • #
    Tel

    We are talking about B.S. emissions, right ?

    Not at all. Canberra’s B.S. should be rightfully be seen as a plentiful natural resource (useful for bio-digester and methane production), along with no shortage of hot air (for heating systems), and vast amounts of spin (can drive turbines and generators).

    00

  • #
    Tim

    Don’t count on the population of ACT being 390,000 by 2020. The IQ level around there is fairly high from residents that I know. The smart ones would have skipped the carbon levies and skipped town by then.

    00

  • #
    Brian H

    And pigs will fly on pink feathery wings.

    The in-your-face inanity of the exercise will maybe serve as a sovereign lesson for the rest of the country.

    Jo: edit note -
    his, hers, its;
    he’s, she’s, it’s.

    You consistently get that wrong.

    00

  • #
    JPA Knowles

    They talk of increasing the cost of the Off-Peak electricity and even phasing it out but what will they do with the coal-fired stations at night? Turning any power station off and then on again causes expansion damage over time. Wallerawang NSW has around 8 enormous water boiling pots which it diverts spare generated power into when the grid load suddenly drops. People who work there say they regularly dump power to the pots as the main turbine cannot be played with. It has to be kept at the 50 Hz speed.

    00

  • #
    Col

    Look on the bright side ; Closing down 40% of Canberra’s computers would be a good thing.

    00