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

Get rid of the rogue EPA and pointless “climate” policies. Governments can’t change the weather.

One day people will marvel that turn of the century governments thought they could control the climate, and needed to issue decrees about how much “change” in the weather they would allow.

From different continents come two articles with a similar theme. It’s time to dump the EPA and pointless “Climate” policies.

The US should get rid of the federal EPA

Alan Caruba and Jay Lehr tell us how it is. The EPA is a rogue tool of liberal activitists.

For years now I have been saying that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must be eliminated and its powers given to the fifty states, all of which, have their own departments of environmental protection. Until now, however, there has been no plan put forth to do so.

Dr. Jay Lehr has done just that and his plan no doubt will be sent to the members of Congress and the state governors. Titled “Replacing the Environmental Protection Agency” it should be read by everyone who, like Dr. Lehr, has concluded that the EPA was a good idea when it was introduced in 1971, but has since evolved into a rogue agency threatening the U.S. economy, attacking the fundamental concept of private property, and the lives of all Americans in countless and costly ways.

Years ago Lehr called for the EPA to be established.  For him now, it’s beyond saving.

 “The takeover of EPA and all of its activities by liberal activists was slow and methodical over the past 30 years. Today, EPA is all but a wholly owned subsidiary of liberal activist groups. Its rules account for about half of the nearly $2 trillion a year cost of complying with all national regulations in the U.S. President Barack Obama is using it to circumvent Congress to impose regulations on the energy sector that will cause prices to ‘skyrocket.’ It is a rogue agency.”

Dr. Lehr says that “Incremental reform of EPA is simply not an option.”  He’s right.

Lehr is very specific — he wants an 80% chop:

Eliminating the EPA would provide a major savings by eliminating 80% of its budget. The remaining 20% could be used to run its research labs and administer the Committee of the Whole of the 50 state environmental agencies. “The Committee would determine which regulations are actually mandated in law by Congress and which were established by EPA without congressional approval.”

Dr. Lehr estimates the EPA’s federal budget would be reduced from $8.2 billion to $2 billion. Staffing would be reduced from more than 15,000 to 300 and that staff would serve in a new national EPA headquarters he recommends be “located centrally in Topeka, Kansas, to allow the closest contact with the individual states.” The staff would consist of six delegate-employees from each of the 50 states.”

Does Australia need a ‘climate policy’ at all?

Don Aitkin gives us six reasons we don’t:

First, no country can have a sensible policy on climate by itself, because climate is not governed by national boundaries. Second, not even the UN can have a sensible policy, because climate is not governed by laws and regulations. Third, we can do something about the effects of weather, which is much more concern to everyone because weather is local, and affects our daily life. Fourth, but we can’t stop weather, or even predict it with any great success, because we lack deep knowledge about the basic components of weather (and climate). Fifth, it may be that we will never possess such knowledge. Sixth, the evidence continues to mount that carbon dioxide is not, after all, the control knob of the planet’s temperature, and if it is not, then the preceding reasons become overwhelming.

But we all know we aren’t spending billions to change the weather, and this was never about the environment.

Aitkin puts his finger on the real reason:

The radio news bulletin I heard soon after the [carbon tax repeal] bill had passed yesterday included a Labor woman politico’s claiming that ‘Australia will be the laughing stock of the world!’ That too was said in an exasperated tone.

There you have it. We have a climate policy because “we’d be  laughing stock” without one. We spend billions because it’s a national status symbol among the global cafe-latte set.

Aitkin reminds us how little most of the world cares about our place in the pecking order:

I get puzzled by statements of this kind, for Australia plays a tiny place in the thoughts and actions of ‘the world’. Novice Australian travellers learn quickly that there is no Australian news in any of the world’s major papers, or on any nation’s radio or television networks. When I lived and worked in the UK, before the days of the Internet, one needed a quick trip to Australia House in London to find out what had happened, and who had won what. Many, many Australians abroad needed to make such trips.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.6/10 (81 votes cast)
Get rid of the rogue EPA and pointless "climate" policies. Governments can't change the weather., 9.6 out of 10 based on 81 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/odbozgx

108 comments to Get rid of the rogue EPA and pointless “climate” policies. Governments can’t change the weather.

  • #
    warcroft

    OT. . .

    BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

    “Wind farms are built offshore to take advantage of strong coastal winds. But scientists have learned that there is an unexpected environmental price to pay for these environmentally-friendly energy generators: the farms are causing havoc for the ocean’s food chain.”

    http://io9.com/offshore-wind-farms-are-turning-into-artificial-reefs-1609694661

    Sorry, I found it amusing.
    Not only are they killing birds, but wind farms are now killing sea life.

    262

    • #
      warcroft

      Sorry Jo, I didnt mean to go off topic with the first comment.

      91

    • #
      Truthseeker

      Not to mention affecting weather patterns. After all the energy can only be in one place. If it is the power cables, it is not in the wind …

      141

  • #
    Truthseeker

    Culling 80% of the EPA? Not going to happen without a seismic shift to the right in US politics …

    201

    • #
      john karajas

      While they are thinking of culling their EPA, why don’t we do likewise here in Australia. And let’s not stop there, root and branch culling of the commentariat at the ABC would cut out a lot of the verbal pollution on our airwaves.

      321

      • #
        Ian

        Because at the moment and for the foreseeable future if the Abbott government tried to introduce appropriate legislation the ALP/Greens and PUP would oppose it. The ALP because it opposes Abbott on everything (even voting against its own legislation) to pay Abbott back for opposing Rudd and Gillard. Doesn’t matter that this might damage Australia, pay back is of paramount importance. The Greens oppose because they want to destroy Western society and get us all back to some mythical halcyon era where mankind had no discernible impact on the planet. This of course does not apply to the Greens themselves as they need to fly to conferences and meetings to find out new and better ways to keep the rest of us in our proper peasant place. PUP because Clive is a populist seemingly with no incentive other than to get re-elected with an ever increasing majority eventually becoming PM. I’m wary of saying more as Clive is notoriously litigious. In addition to opposing everything Abbott proposes the ALP want to return to an ETS so Australia gets a tick from the global community. That the global community knows little and cares less about what Australia does or doesn’t do is either not understood by supporters of an ETS or the supporters are delusional.

        261

      • #
        Bulldust

        We have two main areas of overlap for environmental legislation in Australia. The main one is the Fed and the States – each state will have an EPA equivalent, and it overlaps with the Federal Department of Environment. Then there are State Departments of Environment and they also often delegate authority over minor issues to other departments such as mining and agriculture for the associated land clearing. Heck, there may even be local government laws to deal with as well /shrug. I am no expert in this area, but I know enough to know it is a mess.

        50

      • #
        gesta non verba

        To cull those entities you would also need to cull large sections of the government and associated bureaucracy ,the main problem will be with the mandarins and the politicians none of which will voluntarily give up any power,but yes a very good idea.

        30

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    Not only the internet but the rise of global broadcasting have reduced the isolation of ex-pats. It’s even possible to watch Footie live in the UK nowadays, and i could watch and exchange comments via email with my Oz friends during the last 2 Ashes series and the Lions tour. First thing in the morning I can check with the Sydney exchange and see if there have been any movements which affect my Anglo-Australian holdings and make any adjustments if required. The fortunes of the redoubtable Mr. Abbott are followed quite closely by the UK MSM, as is the progress of the unintelligent intelligentsia of the Australian Left. Oz is a lot more important in the world than some would believe.

    211

    • #
      Carbon500

      Also, you Aussies have got Ian Plimer and Bob Carter as two highly important voices of reason.
      After reading the rubbish in Al Gore’s book when it first appeared, I came across the books by Drs. Plimer and Carter here in a UK bookshop shortly afterwards. What a contrast! Proper scientific writing, extensively referenced,and a true breath of fresh air.

      371

      • #
        Peter C

        Did you read “Heaven and Earth” by Plimer. He asked a lot of searching questions and gave good answers. Huge numbers of references.

        He said himself that he was trying to use a sledgehammer to crack a nut. Unfortunately the sledgehammer bounced off. Seven Print runs so far but the book has not been read widely enough!

        Michael Ashley, himself an Astronomer and hence peripherally engaged in the Climate Science wrote a review in the Australian in 2009, shortly after the books publication titled “No Science in Plimer’s Primer”
        http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/books/ian-plimer-heaven-and-earth/story-e6frg8nf-1225710387147?nk=9dfe63d214b45abe8d3320f509dba35b

        Read it to see if he made any valid criticism.

        56

        • #
          Carbon500

          Thanks for the link, Peter. Yes, I’ve read the book (quite a while ago), so here from memory are my comments on Michael Ashley’s criticisms. He may well be a professor of Astrophysics, but his review reeks more of that written by a propagandist than a scientist, lacking courtesy and highly biased. I for one don’t read a book such as Plimer’s without checking on points that interest me. Plimer tells us for example that CO2 measurement didn’t begin with Mauna Loa in 1959. So-called ‘wet chemical methods’ have been in use since Victorian times, yet the results from both techniques have never been compared with one another. It’s therefore premature for Ashley to sneer that the theory that CO2 concentrations have fallen since 1942 is absurd.
          On page 200 of ‘Heaven and Earth’ Plimer talks about malaria, a disease touted as spreading northwards due to man-made global warming. He refers to a paper by epidemiologist Professor Paul Reiter published in the Lancet in 2004. Reiter’s comments on the true situation regarding Malaria (it’s a disease which is found as far as the Arctic circle) are easily found on the internet.
          Ashley states that ‘the document’ (presumably Plimer’s book) ‘arrived last week’. Ashley is indeed a remarkable character if he’s assimilated this book in about a week. I’ve given examples of just two comments by Plimer which I’ve checked and found to be correct.
          Ashley also states that ‘the Mauna Loa data shows a smoothly rising concentration’ – but this is not the case, as pointed by climatologist W. J. Burroughs on p227 in his 2001 book ‘Climate Change’. He points out that ‘closer examination of the Mauna Loa data shows that the rate has fluctuated dramatically with rapid growth rates in the late 1980s and a marked slow down in the early 1990s. These fluctuations have not been explained but suggest complicated feedback mechanisms between short-term climatic variations (eg the ENSO) and the uptake of carbon in the biosphere.’
          To suggest as Michael Ashley has done that Plimer’s book is an example of writings that are ‘earnest, often involve conspiracy theories and are scientifically worthless’ is ludicrous and untrue.
          What Plimer has done is to offer the reader many points to ponder, check, and examine more deeply. In this he has in my view succeeded admirably.

          271

      • #
        Ron Cook

        Carbon500

        AMEN!!!!!!!!

        Ron Cook
        R-COO- K+

        91

      • #
        gesta non verba

        The likes of Pilmer Carter and Jo Nova are neither here nor there they are voices crying in the wilderness what we need is a good dose of common sense amongst the citizenry,and then it is just a matter of the voting pen ridding us of those politicians who are pushing the vested interests and that could include our present PM and a number of Ministers.Though I am not dumb enough to not know that if the rest of the world follow through on carbon-trading then we will need to be part of it unfortunately.

        00

        • #
          Carbon500

          Gesta non verba: To use the well-worn saying, the longest journey begins with the first step. What Plimer, Carter, Jo Nova and many others are doing is making information available which contrasts with the doom-monger predictions, and which the alarmists of course would prefer not be available.
          When I showed the Central England Temperature Record (CET) to a friend, he looked with surprise at the lack of a disastrous temperature rise and commmented ‘Well, I’ve never seen this before!’
          People lead busy lives – family, jobs, etc. and don’t have the time to poke around in the murky recesses of the great climate scare.
          That’s why need people like the individuals I mention above. They’re doing a lot, and aren’t ‘crying in the wilderness’ – but there’s a long way to go I think!

          10

  • #
    Kevin Lohse

    Not only the internet but the rise of global broadcasting have reduced the isolation of ex-pats. It’s even possible to watch Footie live in the UK nowadays, and i could watch and exchange comments via email with my Oz friends during the last 2 Ashes series and the Lions tour. First thing in the morning I can check with the Sydney exchange and see if there have been any movements which affect my Anglo-Australian holdings and make any adjustments if required. The fortunes of the redoubtable Mr. Abbott are followed quite closely by the UK MSM, as is the progress of the unintelligent intelligentsia of the Australian Left. Oz is a lot more important in the world than some would believe.

    51

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    Its certainly pointless for any country to have an independent position on global climate policy. At the same time having for example a “UN Climate Security Council” would be acceptable mainly because it would be a global forum and like all UN initiatives, it would achieve precisely nothing, so its a win win.

    41

  • #
    Yonniestone

    A policy on climate, is this the equivalent of a policy on urinating in the ocean to change any rise in sea levels?

    For all the claims of Labor/Greens that Australia is being left behind the global community on climate/carbon etc..never is there reports of the collapsed European carbon markets or countries scrapping their renewable energy plans and building more coal fired plants, or even a counter argument given exposure.

    On behalf of the sane, free thinking people of Australia I’d like to give a big SCREW YOU and thanks for bloody nothing to the MSM in this country, I hope Fairfax goes down hard!

    401

    • #
      the Griss

      Actually, I hope that Gina buys them out and changes it back into a investigative balanced NEWSpaper, rather than a far-left green propaganda rag.

      253

      • #
        pattoh

        Yep Australia need at least on major outlet with continuous reporting of the Unions Royal Commission.

        It should be getting the sort of coverage which Fitzgerald & Costigan had, but most people ( voters in Victoria) would not even know it is going on.

        Sadly it is being ignored.

        102

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Griss if Gina could or would do this then great, our local paper is Fairfax and the amount of left leaning UN sucking up drivel is simply intolerable, I only peruse it to get information on what the enemy are thinking and trying to pass off as news.

        182

        • #
          Peter C

          Why would Gina buy Fairfax? She can’t do anything with the editorial staff or opinion writers. She will be able to buy the printing presses at liquidation prices quite soon and maybe re-employ some of the printing and technical staff.

          She could start again with all the rest.

          51

          • #
            scaper...

            Why would Gina buy Fairfax?

            Because she can and will! Gina does nothing half heartedly. Not all reporters at Fairfax are of the left persuasion. I feed Amy Remeikis at the Brisbane Times, leads.

            In fact, Amy is writing an article now that will shock LNP supporters.

            I see our swimmers are performing well at the Games. Gina gifted the underfunded Swimming Australia, $10M after their shocking performance at the last Olympics.

            50

        • #
          Yonniestone

          This is the sort of propaganda I’m talking about http://www.thecourier.com.au/story/2439053/worst-of-winter-likely-over-as-warming-trend-begins/?cs=7
          Without any alternate viewpoint on these claims by this article what chance is there for the average person not to be influenced?

          Recently I saw people stopped by Greenpeace activists, they listened while nodding politely to their lies, seconds later I asked these people if they believed what they’d been told, 9 out of 10 said yes because they were Greenpeace and experts on the environmental issues, sometimes words fail me.

          Australians used to have a reputation for punching well above their weight, this reputation was not achieved by giving in to someone just because they sound important and scary, everyone who wants a strong optimistic country to return need to get some mongrel back into them and tell all the useless freeloaders to shut up and shove off.

          20

    • #
      John Of Cloverdale WA

      I remember John Singleton said early this year, “I’m going to watch it(Fairfax) die slowly”…..
      “I’ll wait til they are absolutely F**** and buy it off the receivers.”

      71

    • #
      warcroft

      +1 for your urinating analogy. Love it!

      30

    • #
      Robert

      Yonnie it is similar to posters I see at work talking about our “fight against climate change” which is to me the same as talking about a “battle against sunrise”. It’s intended to be politically correct and pacify the increasingly vocal and demanding environmentalists. It really has no other purpose.

      10

  • #
    Phillip Bratby

    The UK also has the view that our lunatic climate policy is necessary to set an example to the world, which, lemming-like, will follow us over the cliff to economic ruin.

    http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2014/4/5/ed-davey-leads-the-charge-to-nowhere-josh-269.html

    171

    • #
      Joe V.

      Why hasn’t Cameron reshuffled Energy & Climate Change ?
      Because he can’t.
      Energy was too important to be left to the marginal Lib Dims.

      That’s due to the fashion of the time for tagging Energy onto the back of Climate Change, with the result that we’re now running out of both.
      .

      101

  • #

    100% of existing staff should go. They should strip the EPA out completely and start the 300 from scratch. It’s an enemy of the USA.

    I would like to see all such authorities taken down – everywhere. The world over. These misguided groups are not only the death of healthy civilization but of the planet as well. They destroy everything they touch!

    In my local town, the greens who WERE on the Council cut down a whole row of mature willow trees because it was considered that they drank too much water from the river they grew along! If big business tried that, the greens would have a fit!

    It’s disgusting what these thugs are getting away with. They destroy deliberately to hurt people, to punish people. Strip ‘em out, I say. Get rid of them everywhere.

    311

    • #
      Joe V.

      Willows are known for having a drinking problem.
      When I learned of it the one within ten yards of my house had to go.

      31

      • #
        Sceptical Sam

        I signed mine up to AA instead. It worked a treat.

        142

      • #
        Dave

        The amazing Weeping Willow story

        In the past 15 years Governments have been removing millions of them from waterways, creeks and rivers. Because they use water, clog the water & cause flooding?

        In the 1950′s farmers, pastoralists etc were paid to plant willows and now they receive subsidies to remove them?

        My guess is that they will receive subsidies again to replant willows.

        Willows in fact prevented soil erosion, slowed water runoff and preserved fertility. Now the sediments simply wash into the oceans.

        Maybe I’m wrong.

        But some cattle stations in NQ that have retained the dreaded tree, are in 100% better condition than those that did not. The cattle feeding in creek & river beds with willows are virtually undisturbed by the massive root coverage of the Willow. Those without, have eroded and collapsed banks, with tonnes of sediment washed away every rain.

        The areas around the willows on the low flats are full of grass because the fertility & ground moisture is being retained. The flood plains need refilling, not good drainage.

        Just my opinion.
        Plants look after the land, not governments, NGO’s, Greenpeace, Landcare etc.
        Common sense and observations will bring the return of the Willow?

        80

        • #
          Annie

          Thanks for that Dave. We have been told willows are the big no no (which they are near houses) but we have some very soggy areas in our paddocks which could do with them; also an eroding gully. I was thinking they would help us, especially as our drains lead to council drains that are poorly maintained.

          30

          • #
            Dave

            Thanks Annie,

            I find that the willows very rapidly stop erosion and stabilise the gullies and eroded ditches. Then slowly the local natives take up the slack and after 10 to 20 years, the willows are virtually non-existant

            They have a great short term ability to correct the hydrology, fertility & erosion, then enabling the other vegetation to establish.

            It’s simply that they are Not a Native Plant, that the Greenies pull them out everywhere, when in reality they are helping restore the balance.

            30

        • #
          gesta non verba

          Willows also make excellent stock feed my late grandfather used the trees during drought for his stock.

          20

    • #
      Tim

      It would be difficult to dislodge green sociopaths. They think that life should be great for themselves, but should be a life of hardship for the unannointed masses in order to fulfill their misguided clean green plans.

      They make lots of these ambitious plans, political and economic, but behind the goody-goody rhetoric, it’s all about greed and power-grabbing or power-keeping. They dig in like ticks and also network with likeminded narcissists with common goals.

      “We know that no one ever seizes power with the intention of relinquishing it.” -George Orwell, 1984

      161

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      All of DC, including Congress and the 9 Supreme Court Justices should go. Any ideas?

      I thought not.

      And there’s the problem. Complaints are easy. Doing something is hard. And worse, doing something is risky and becoming more so with nearly every passing day.

      20

      • #
        Peter C

        A D Everard did not say he wanted to get rid of the whole of Washington, just the whole of the EPA (and other like organisations elsewhere).
        That might have some political risk, but the economic risk would be less than zero.

        20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          A D Everard did not say he wanted to get rid of the whole of Washington, just the whole of the EPA (and other like organisations elsewhere).
          That might have some political risk, but the economic risk would be less than zero.

          True. He said exactly that. The problem is that the corruption in the EPA is just the tip of the iceberg. And the required push-back against the Federal Government necessary to clean up the mess carries not just political risk but the risk of being hauled off in chains if not worse. Remember, there is good evidence that Obama’s Homeland Security Department has built itself a domestic army, complete with tanks. Put that together with stolen elections (there is evidence to support this this) and you have a job that looks more like a revolution than politics.

          If you cut off the arm without cutting off the head, the beast survives and you’ve done nothing. And I’m not exaggerating.

          I hope we never see a revolution. But it’s not as easy as saying scrap this or that. It’s going to be an uphill battle all the way.

          10

  • #
    crakar24

    Antarctic sea ice sets a new record

    http://sunshinehours.wordpress.com/

    But of course the latest excuse is a busted algorithm, its just like the dodgy ACORN system showing invented temp trends.

    Departments like the EPA and its subsidiary companies will never be shut down whilst this type of fraudulent science is allowed in an attempt to maintain its (the EPA) false legitimacy.

    172

  • #
    Joe V.

    Aussie’s standing in the World isnt defined by their politics. The World just loves having them around.

    Maybe that’s why the bleating Left whingers managed to gain such a hold at home. Most Aussies are just too laid back for their own good.

    111

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    Joanne:
    Slightly off topic as I am off-shore but the Financial Times this morning claims that a report to be issued this morning will say that burning wood in power station e.g. Drax will not reduce emissions below those from a coal fired plant.

    The report results from a 2 year study for the Energy Dept. Co-authored by Prof. David MacKay ( whose name will be familiar to some) and concludes that using plantation timber doesn’t reduce emissions. Further letting dead or felled timber to rot on the forest floor can produce as much emissions as a gas-fired power station. It does say that by using waste product normally burnt as useless, you can reduce emissions, but no comment was made on the cost of doing so.

    111

    • #
      Annie

      We remember that there was a chap in the Bristol area who had worked out a way to use waste cardboard as fuel. It goes without saying that he was prevented from developing his ideas by EU regulations.

      10

  • #
    Ceetee

    Love the piece quoting Don Aitkin. So rational. If you think about it in the context of his words the whole rationale of an EPA assumes global cooperation of like empowered agencies which speaks to where these people expected to be by now. It’s like we’re dealing with a high prestige advertising agency rather than intellectually motivated individuals making considered judgements.
    We’re a million miles away from the the concept of ‘public service’. It should be called the ‘servile public administration’.

    101

  • #
    ROM

    Kevin Lohse
    July 24, 2014 at 4:48 pm

    Like you Kevin, when reading the international news and events I am often a little nonplussed at the regular mentions and the considerable apparent impact Australia, demographically a very small nation, has in global politics, industry and economic news.
    _______________________

    On getting rid of EPA’S and etc,

    It is quite interesting to take a look at the cultures that exist within the two main versions of bureaucracies.

    There are the re-active type of bureaucracies such as the various types of Emergency Services which is are very good examples of reactive bureaucracy. A reactive bureaucracy will generally react to some situation that arises within the community and / or society. It will generally endeavour, within some limits, to to educate the populace rather than use draconian methods to enforce their rules and regulations.

    The pro-active bureaucracies take the line of often harsh enforcement of their always very onerous and ever expanding set of rules , regulations and unclear interpretations which often have to be sorted out in the legal system at considerable expense sometimes to the point of bankruptcy for the unfortunate business or individual that some self inflated inspector / enforcer might take a dislike to and can and often does.
    The enforcer of course never has to use his own money to prosecute the case.

    The inspectors / enforcers of these pro-active bureaucracies often act in an arbitrary, high handed, highly interpretive and dictatorial manner and will go to considerable lengths to dig up and apply every tittle and dottle of some long forgotten obscure regulation to force a business or operator he has taken a dislike to to go to considerable expense or to the point of wiping out a what was a quite viable business.
    And there is never any recourse or penalties ever applied to the inspector / enforcer for his nefarious actions.

    The very nature of a pro-active bureaucracy always means that as soon as one set of rules are enforced and met and finally adhered to by the sector of the society under the jurisdiction of that pro-active bureaucracy, then a new set of even more onerous and impractical rules, regulations and demands will be drawn up so as to continue to justify the existence of the bureaucracy.

    And even more important from the pro-active bureaucrats point or view, to make damn sure they have some legal cases against some businesses going so as to point to if questioned by their political overseers or the media. It is all to do with justifying and expanding their power base and all for nothing more than justifying their existence and ever increasing numbers of employees.
    All of which further severely stresses those out there in private business who are actually trying to create something and are not hell bent on destroying everything in the quest to promote their own power and authority such as most of the pro-active bureaucracies seem to be doing.

    Emergency services, the health care bureaucracies, some sections of the police force which is a mix of both re-active and proactive but at least they don’t both draw up the regulations and laws and then get the chance to enforce them as do almost every pro-active bureaucracies , all of those plus many, many more of a similar nature are far more re-active than pro-active.

    On the proactive dictatorial enforcer culture bureaucracies we see the EPA, the OH&S which are particularly bad, CASA, [ Civil Aviation≥Safety Authority another bad one ] plus innumerable others who try to go down the enforcers path to further their influence and power base.

    The other characteristic of the pro-active bureaucracies is that there is usually little in the way of a strong oversight from an independent, responsible to parliament, overseer group who are the go to’s when a pro-active, enforcer orientated bureaucracy oversteps the bounds.

    They just keep right on tightening the screws to justify themselves until it all comes very seriously undone when sheer arrogance and moral turpitude and corruption becomes close to epidemic within the internal realms of the bureaucracy.
    Then the clean out happens but it is far too late for many of those whose lives and income have been destroyed by an arrogant over bearing, non responsible, dictatorial bureacrat and the bureaucracy he / she resides in.

    Been there ! Done that with the enforcers from Vic Roads a couple of decades ago which eventually led to a major, media free internal upheaval and a major crack down and a couple of resignations for those enforcers directly as a result of actions by their political bosses [ Labor ]

    Locally we are now going through something similar with CASA and the influence of a couple of CASA employees operating outside of their area of responsibility and their influence on the local council re our aerodrome at the moment, all because they don’t happen to like a particular sector of non business aviation and they have admitted it.

    Comeback ? None! No responsibility, No oversight. No appeal except through the courts which many pilots have had to resort to after arbitrary cancellations of licenses and imposition of unreasonable rules interpreted widely beyond their original intent to enable a CASA employee to exercise his dictatorial power over an individual.
    And I have been there before with CASA more than once as the Operations Director for what for many years was one of Australia’s largest annual gliding competitions
    Unlike the American CASa equivalent, the FAA in the USA which has as the second clause of it’s charter, that the FAA must also promote aviation in the USA, no such requirement is written into CASA’s charter.
    They are a safety enforcer only or so they believe and act which also draws up the aviation rules and regulations they enforce, a sure path to ensuring ever increasing power. And they use the safety issue pretext as the only real justification for just about every single item they are challenged on.

    And when it comes to the EPA, well the “Clean Up Australia” campaign was never started by any bureaucracy that would in normal life have been regarded as being responsible for such a clean up of Australia.
    It was started by just one ordinary individual, an Australian builder and solo yachtsman, Ian Kiernan. in 1987 when he saw the appalling state and rubbish littering Sydney Harbour ,a state of one of Australia’s icons about which not a single bureaucracy did a damn thing about until Ian Kiernan kicked their asses and shamed them when thousands turned out to clean up the Harbour on that day in 1987.

    So much for dictatorial bureaucracies and some but definitely not all of the personnel who infest them.

    -

    153

  • #
    cedarhill

    It takes political will and a political campaign. In the US, the GOP could simply declare “Mission Accomplished” and congratulate the EPA for completing their original mission. Then eliminate the agence by creating a new “watchdog” that just monitors – even let it be part of a Memorial Agency called the Hansen-Mann (as in He-Man) Envrionmental Monitoring Agency. And that all they do. Then state “we need the funds for the borders, health care screening of communicable disease”, etc., etc. I.E., simply recognize the EPA and Clean Air and Endangered Species acts have won and use the money to “help women and children”. Put the Greens and Obama in the corner of defending not protecting women, children.

    41

    • #

      Ha. The Republicans are hopeless and more dangerous than the Democrats.

      We know the Democrats are out to get us while the Republicans pretend they are for small government and individual rights. The truth is, both parties compete on how much and how fast they can grow government. They merely have a public disagreement over who to sacrifice to whom, how fast, how much, and for what purpose. However, it is the sacrifice of the individual 24/7/365.25 no matter what.

      It makes no difference if it is a fox or a coyote guarding the hen house. You will soon have no hens nor hen house.

      41

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        The trick is to grow chickens with balls enough to take on the fox or the coyote as necessary. But of course that requires the chickens to pay attention. Good luck getting that to happen.

        30

      • #
        James the Elder

        What is the difference between a democrat and a republican (lower case intentional)?

        The democrat will stab you in the chest.

        11

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          I’ve seen some good and bad among both. And we still need to make changes in the nature and character of DC. So, while you’re right, neither party is exactly sterling, we have to get a big change in DC, starting with this upcoming election.

          10

  • #

    “This method of stealth legislation using regulation, has become rampant over the last two decades. All around the world, sleepy little regulatory bodies have grown into all-powerful beasts stifling growth, with absolutely no regard to any economic consequences. The Environmental Protection Agency in America has been effectively introducing the Cap and Trade measures that were rejected on the floor of Congress and indeed, see it as part of their remit to “crucify” heavy industry.”

    http://thepointman.wordpress.com/2012/08/03/legislation-by-regulation/

    Pointman

    181

  • #
    pat

    getting rid of rogue Maurice Newman!

    24 July: SMMH: Peter Hannam: Wind farm operator expels Maurice Newman from committee
    Prominent businessman Maurice Newman says he has been “disinvited” from a community consultative committee for a proposed wind farm in the state’s southern highlands because of his objections to government support for the project.
    Thomas Mitchell, legal manager for Union Fenosa, developer of the $100 million project, said Mr Newman had “engaged in activities outside the committee to influence decisions”, in particular contacting then premier Barry O’Farrell to bar Office of Environment and Heritage staff from attending committee meetings.
    Mr Newman denied he had sought to conceal his connections with Mr O’Farrell and then Environment Minister Robyn Parker, which included contact in person and by letter.
    “I didn’t see why, as taxpayers, we should be funding the cost of staff from the Office of Environment and Heritage to travel to Goulburn…and (act) as advocates of the wind industry.”…
    The company removed Mr Newman from the consultative group on July 9, days after Fairfax Media reported Mr O’Farrell had intervened in the process following lobbying by Mr Newman.
    “The decision to step Maurice down was prompted by the recent SMH article, but it was the last straw in a pattern of behaviour that includes his threatening legal letters to our project stakeholders, and his ongoing involvement with an anti-wind lobby that seeds conflict and division in communities that have this wind energy opportunity,” Mr Mitchell said…READ ON
    http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/wind-farm-operator-expels-maurice-newman-from-committee-20140724-zw2ae.html

    71

  • #
    Andrew McRae

    The effect of EPA on SETI?

    Alien pollution in space may reveal existence of other life in universe, astrophysicists say

    Under certain conditions, astronomers in the next decade might be able to detect the presence of an industrialised alien society, according to a study by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.
    [...]an extraterrestrial civilisation might also spew chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) into the atmosphere, much the same way we do on Earth, the study said. … Astronomers may be able to detect evidence of these CFCs on faraway planets using the James Webb Space Telescope, an $US8.7 billion project that NASA is scheduled to launch in 2018.

    First Contact works both ways though, doesn’t it?
    So there you have it. Not only do Greens hate humans, they don’t even want to talk to E.T.

    Oh how different that famous movie could have been.
    Eeeee teee… phonne hooommme
    “Not without a permit from the EPA you don’t buddy!”

    92

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Or it may simply reveal more foolishness.

      If anyone reading this actually expects that humans will see even one alien species within the lifetime of the human race, please speak up. I would like to see your reasoning.

      I’ve no hidden agenda, I simply don’t expect even recognizable evidence of such a species because of the totally impossible distance involved, even to the nearest star, which isn’t a candidate for anything living by the way.

      So please let me know.

      10

      • #
        Tanner

        Roy

        “There are more things in heaven and earth Horatio than are dreamt of in you philosophy” – Shakespeare!

        It depends on whether you mean the small greys, the tall greys, the Nordics, the ones George Adamski met, the ones Elizabeth Klarer met or the ones others have met?

        You may be surprised ;)

        20

      • #
        James the Elder

        With the present staff of looney tunes at NASA, you have a winning stance. However, if quantum entanglement can be harnessed, communications could be possible. Let the physicists have at it. I would rather fund them than jihadists in space. We will be long gone if and when it is possible to make wormholes and fold space to make the weekend jaunt to Sirius. But, the possibility that another civilization with a few billion years head start has done so is intriguing. One day they’ll find us; if they haven’t already.

        20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Hey guys. I never said there’s no possibility of another intelligent species somewhere in this universe. I just look at the problem of detecting them, much less the more difficult problem of meeting them and I see what an effort has already been made in the search without the slightest clue and I make a judgment based on the evidence (there’s that E-word again).

          As for folding space and things like it that have no evidence to support even the thought that it’s possible if we only knew how — well I leave those things to you without any prejudice on my part. Who knows what the future may bring?

          And maybe someday aliens will show up. But given the rather extreme effort such a visit would require, they are most likely to want something. And what they want may not be good for us. I also remember the result of past culture clashes such as the arrival of Europeans in the Americas and Australia, with the more technological culture simply taking over.

          Whether that was right or wrong isn’t my point, it always happened. And could turn out to be the inevitable result of space aliens coming here. So be careful what you wish for. :-)

          10

          • #
            Tanner

            Hey Roy,

            I assume you are classing “humans” as an intelligent species? The Aliens might have a different view ;)

            00

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              The definition of intelligence gets complicated but definition one from Merriam-Webster Online seems to fit the human race. So I think we’re intelligent.

              Now if we want to debate degrees of intelligence that’s a different matter.

              How an alien species capable of making the trip here would view us is not something I can guess at. To them we might be no more than a good meal. They would not necessarily even need to be more intelligent but simply would have been working longer on the problem and learning from the work of those who came before. That’s the way things happen among humans with the moon landings being a good illustration.

              What I get angered about is the wild dream that they would come here to save us from ourselves; the wild dream that they would have eliminated want, violence and war; and other equally absurd assumptions. If I had done the work necessary to make the trip to some distant star, I would want something from whatever species I found there or they would be irelevent to my purpose but they would suffer either way and even if I didn’t intend them harm.

              It’s a hell of an investment in time and resources just to say hello, much less to save some other species from its mistakes when our own house isn’t even close to being in order. I doubt that any other species, one that managed to reach a point where it could make the trip here, would be free of all the same problems we have. And they would want something. Star Trek was a lot of fun but it’s not reality.

              Maybe the relevant term is wisdom. And I hope they have the wisdom to not come here. :-)

              00

  • #
    pat

    another take:

    23 July: Goulburn Post: Louise Thrower: Resident sacked from wind farm committee
    A COMMUNITY member’s removal from a committee overseeing the Crookwell Three wind farm has sparked anger.
    Businessman and Woodhouselee resident Maurice Newman’s dismissal has also prompted debate about the effectiveness of community consultative committees (CCC).
    NSW and Crookwell Landscape Guardians president Humphrey Price-Jones has branded them “a farce.”…
    http://www.goulburnpost.com.au/story/2434588/resident-sacked-from-wind-farm-committee/?cs=12

    91

  • #
    ROM

    And once again and lots lots more still to come for wind and solar investors!

    NoTricksZone blog

    75,000 See Their Investments Shrivel…Spectacular $1.9 BIllion German Wind Energy Company Insolvency!
    &
    Spiegel also wrote that the woes were not only unique to Prokon, but to many windpark developers all over Germany. “In courts around the country, complaints are mounting from wind park investors who haven’t received a dividend disbursement in years or whose parks went belly up. Consumer protection activists are complaining that many projects are poorly structured and lack transparency.”

    111

  • #
    PhilJourdan

    The EPA was originally tasked with controlling POLLUTION, not weather. They have been corrupted to think that weather is now a pollution. I do not necessarily agree we need to get rid of the function (but due to government waste and overlap, the agency can be done away with), but they have to be retasked. They no longer are dealing with their mission statement. Instead, they are dealing with the fulcrum for the implementation of Big Brother.

    101

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      The EPA was corrupted a long time ago. Their findings on Tobacco smoke are proof of that. When you create something and tell it to protect you from yourself you have made the worst type of mistake you can make. It’s always downhill from there.

      That is why the Constitution limits the powers of the Federal Government. And that’s why the Constitution is so unpopular in DC and elsewhere.

      30

      • #
        PhilJourdan

        Alas the “majority rule” appears to be in place so that as long as one branch of the government agrees with the courts, then it is no longer the Constitution, but some foreign “intent” that rules. And thus there are no limits on the government.

        00

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Phil,

          I’m not exactly sure what you mean by foreign “intent”, but we certainly are no longer governed by the Constitution. And we need to fix that.

          Unfortunately there are a whole lot of pigs in the unconstitutional pigsty at the moment. Getting them out again will take getting rid of the pigsty and I don’t believe that will be easy. Nevertheless we need to try. Even setting them back significantly will help if we can do it.

          00

  • #

    Let’s have a look at just how clever and tricky the U.S. EPA really is here.

    They recently passed a regulation limiting CO2 emissions from all forms of electrical power generation.

    They selected a figure that the, well, average person, might find quite reasonable. The average person, clueless as to electrical power generation would probably say that was even a relatively high figure.

    That figure was 1,100 Pounds of CO2 per MWh (MegaWattHour), and hey how reasonable is that?

    So then let’s look at the two main forms of power generation which emit CO2, coal fired power and Natural Gas fired power.

    Existing technology power plants, those constructed back in the 70′s through until relatively recent times have a burn rate that is similar for the coal burned resulting in the power generated.

    That comes in at 339 grams of coal per KWh. (KiloWattHour) That equates, working up the Maths, to 2137 Pounds of CO2 emitted per MWH, almost double the new EPA regulated amount.

    So then, let’s look at the latest USC coal fired power generation, now being constructed at a very large rate in China, Germany, and also in a number of other places.

    The burn rate for these plants is 282 grams of coal per KWh, and that comes in at 1778 Pounds of CO2 emitted per MWh, considerably lower than existing technology plants, and yet, again, this is well over the new EPA limit.

    But hey, the EPA is being fairly reasonable here, adding the rider that these new USC plants could still gain approval with the incorporation of CCS technology. Again, the average person would think that this is a fair thing, as they are not asking them to sequester all the CO2, just enough to get them below the limit.

    Without ever explaining what this would require in the way of including CCS in the construction, they say that this is quite reasonable.

    So, to fall below that limit, a new tech USC plant of 2 units and a 2400MW Nameplate would need to capture and sequester underground, forever, an amount of, and wait for this …..

    ONE TON OF CO2 EVERY 5.3 SECONDS

    Now perhaps you can see how tricky the EPA has been on this.

    There’s no way they can even do that let alone install full and total CCS.

    However, that’s not the end of the EPA trickiness.

    Let’s then look at the other form of CO2 emitting power generation, Natural Gas Fired Power.

    The turbine (a general simplification of this is that the turbine is similar to a large aircraft jet engine, very simplified) drives the generator via a shaft. (OCGT) A secondary form of power generation uses the heat from the exhaust to boil water to steam to drive a second smaller turbine/generator unit. (CCGT)

    The burn rate per power generated is around, and wait for this, an average of 940 Pounds per MWh.

    Hey, how lucky was that?

    That takes in CCGT plants, around 800 Pounds per MWh to 1050 Pounds per MWh for OCGT plants, so virtually all (existing and new) NG plants fall (just) under that new EPA regulated amount.

    Now, as I have mentioned at length that all those ancient and small to tiny coal fired plants, nearly all of them older than 50 years, some up to 80+ years, (and wouldn’t wind power love to be able to say that) have converted across to new NG burning plants, now that NG has boomed across the U.S. In fact, the new amount of NG generated power is considerably more than the Coal fired power they have replaced.

    Now consider this. Those new plants have gone in, literally hundreds of them, many hundreds of new plants. They all have an average life of around 40 years, and nearly all of them are now less that 4 or five years old.

    Dear, dear, dear! Imagine now if the EPA had set that emitted CO2 per MWh level just that bit lower.

    Many, mostly new NG plants, having spent Millions to upgrade to the NG technology, and now needing many years to recover that outlay with the cost of the electricity generated and sold into the market. Imagine if they were, umm, forced to close, as a result of the level being set lower.

    That’s hundreds of Billions of dollars lost.

    Do not ever tell me that the EPA was not, umm, influenced here.

    Pure as the driven snow.

    Yeah! Right!

    Tony.

    232

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Not to fear, Tony. When the generators begin to stop there will be rioting in the streets and worse. I don’t know the outcome of that with any certainty. But in the end it won’t be good for the EPA. And not good for anyone else either.

      You can’t move anything in this country (meaning food and water) without fuel and you can’t pump fuel without electricity. There is no way to protect yourself from even a near collapse of modern civilization. So it has the roots of its own destruction built right in. And as I said below, it will likely take us all down with it.

      But cheer up. After all, the wackos who run everything will probably have a way to keep their lights on… …at least until a large angry mob sees those lights.

      90

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      As usual Tony you make a lot of sense.

      However we have to keep in mind, we are battling against people who sincerely believe things like this…

      “wideEyedPupil > Zvyozdochka • 8 hours ago
      Or by-pass the market mechanisms so beloved of the neo-liberal dominated economics profession and just make a “war economy” type ruling (or what in other command control states a couple of five year plans) that this much renewable energy and utility scale storage will be built every year until we hit 95-100%. Then we can think about exporting renewable liquid carbon fuels to Asia using solar power and become an energy superpower as opposed to a climate change supervillain.”

      http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/abbotts-ret-curse-pm-can-cripple-renewables-by-doing-nothing-37774

      I mean what do you say to that logic? Other than I guess we ride our unicorns to work at the solar plant huh?

      30

      • #
        Angry

        These “people” are quite INSANE…..

        11

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        “wideEyedPupil > Zvyozdochka • 8 hours ago
        Or by-pass the market mechanisms so beloved of the neo-liberal dominated economics profession and just make a “war economy” type ruling (or what in other command control states a couple of five year plans) that this much renewable energy and utility scale storage will be built every year until we hit 95-100%. Then we can think about exporting renewable liquid carbon fuels to Asia using solar power and become an energy superpower as opposed to a climate change supervillain.”

        California’s AB (Assembly originated Bill)-32 is aimed at more or less exactly that. And the noose is tightening, little by little while many people believe and support the drivel on which it’s all based. I’m now seeing TV commercials pushing the great success and future benefit of wind power. It’s like a Greek Tragedy unfolding right in front of me. Only it isn’t theater, it’s daily reality.

        00

  • #
    oeman50

    Tim is correct about the power. Once the environmental compliance legal and regulatory mechanisms have been set up, why should they ever be dismantled? The low hanging fruit of large emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter have been picked. Now EPA is going after the trace amounts of emissions that are more and more difficult and expensive to remove. And CO2 is the magic emission that allows them to control all energy production and use. They will never voluntarily give up that power.

    51

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    Years ago Lehr called for the EPA to be established. For him now, it’s beyond saving.

    Unfortunately much of our Federal Government is beyond saving, not just the EPA. The whole of Washington DC has become a cesspool of corruption. And the power to do anything about it resides in the hands of the bad guys. Also unfortunately, when it does finally collapse because enough Americans don’t care or care about the wrong things, it will take down the rest of us with it.

    I see some hope for change but it doesn’t look good. At least Obama is being recognized as a failure by more and more people.

    112

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Hi there, Little Red Thumb. It looks like you’re having a bad day. I’m so very sorry.

      What is it something I said? Or is the Big Bad Wolf after you again?

      If it will help I can try to find your mommy for you. I can’t shoot the wolf because they’ve taken all our guns away. I can’t imagine why.

      30

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Roy the closer you are over the target the more flak you attract :)

        I’d say we’re flying right over 50°51′0″N 4°21′0″E ;)

        21

        • #
          James Bradley

          Fortunately the alarmists are quickly running out of ammunition.

          10

        • #
          James Bradley

          What’s happening in Brussels?

          20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          I couldn’t resist, Yonni. But I know it’s fruitless to comment about the disapproval. And the problem is that just flying over the right place isn’t enough. We need a way to drop the right kind of bombs on them once overhead, bombs in the form of win after win at the polls.

          It’s an uphill fight at the very best.

          10

      • #
        The Backslider

        The red thumb bandits have been hard at work. Such a pity they are too mindless and gutless to actually post anything here…. they are no fun anymore.

        31

      • #
        the Griss

        Roy, its probably because they know that in their world…… green is red.

        72

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Griss,

          I thought that in their world all colors are green. They certainly don’t recognize that red means stop, they go ahead anyway, so at least red is green to them for sure. ;-)

          00

      • #
        PhilJourdan

        I am just wondering who are the Obama fans in oz.

        00

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          I would bet they’re some of the same ones who thought Julia Gillard was such a great deal.

          00

  • #
    Neville

    Another new study shows the climate models are a disaster.

    http://climateaudit.org/2014/07/24/new-paper-by-mckitrick-and-vogelsang-comparing-models-and-observations-in-the-tropical-troposphere/

    This McKitrick et al study looks at the tropical troposphere from 1958 to 2012 and finds ZIP evidence of CAGW at all.
    All those hundreds of wasted billions $ should have been spent on more R&D and adaptation and health, medical research and education etc. Let’s hope Jo and David have a chance to look at this new study.

    71

  • #
    TdeF

    Governments can’t change the weather? They certainly cannot change the sun or wind or tides. Canute would agree. These macro things are on a scale beyond humans like the movement of the tectonic plates as whole continents vanish and are created. Meteors too.

    However Governments can affect rainfall, water distribution, plant species. Concrete, taking the most fertile ground for cities, providing mechanisms for transfer of plant seeds, animals, birds, bacteria, fungus. Governments can change a great deal which affects our lives or prevent change or control change with good planning.

    Unfortunately it is all the childish STWIGO, Stop the World I Want to Get Off approach pushed by the alleged Greens who hate edible grasses, prefer inedible trees, money, political power and detest Israel. Though when the IPCC was set up by the Meteorologists, it had a vision. That has been betrayed by the desire to make money, gain power and influence world governments.

    Consider though what has happened in Australia. 50,000 years ago man came here. The Megafauna died after a hundred million years. Mammals arrived too, wiping out local species. Most importantly, rainfall halved suddenly. We could have that back.

    We could also pipe water South from the huge Ord river system, flood lake Eyre from the gulf and change rainfall in the East, build black strips to create artificial mountains through rising hot thermals and we could make the place wetter, more livable for water and salt desperate carbon lifeforms. The ideas are endless but what do we do? Build useless votive offerings to the Gods, especially windmills across a pristine landscape. Not ugly in themselves, it is the corruption of the landscape. Strangely, not a single aborigine objects.

    No, governments can and do affect climate, that purely local phenomenon which is what everyone experiences. However what do the IPPC talk about? The temperature of the whole planet? It has always been like the ants on the golf course talking about controlling the sprinklers. We can control our local climates by controlling the water, but the Greens hate it, that water should be able to run freely to the ocean and man should not attempt to have any power over his own destiny and quality of life. However once a government department has been created to look after your welfare, they start to plan for their own. Now all those hundreds of thousands of people who want to make a living from Global Warming and fly to conferences in their tens of thousands to discuss the evils of flying.

    101

  • #
    Streetcred

    I saw in the Courier Mail this morning, 25/7/2014 Business p.73 “Wave Powered Future”, the CSIRO banging on about wave generation in Far North Queensland, …

    [...] shown through computer modelling that waves … could supply 10 percent of Australia’s energy needs

    [...] the CSIRO said. “More research needs to be done [...] “

    Translated to, “we are short on budget to pay our faux scientists, please send money.”

    Seems that they can’t even do the basic research to discover the recent wave generation failures by Oceanlinx.

    40

    • #
      James Bradley

      And the key phrase-alert for imminent failure “…shown through computer modelling…”

      10

    • #
      Ron Cook

      Streetcred,

      Turn the clock back 59 years, as a 10 year old I saw a program on telly called “Panorama” there was an item about a project called the “Zeta Project” (If my memory serves me right). It was suppose to generate electricity from the huge tides off the coast of England. Never heard any more of it in 50+ years. Perhaps they weren’t taxpayer funded back then.

      Ron Cook
      R-COO- K+

      30

    • #
      TdeF

      For those in Melbourne, down at Sorrento in the Nepean Museum (it used to be in the street?) there is a riveted steel ball on a chain which was floated off the coast on a chain and used to generate electricity as it rose and fell with the waves. People have been trying to harness wave and tide energy for a very long time.

      00

      • #
        Yonniestone

        I had a ball and chain that successfully generated many years of misery.

        Engineers to this day cannot explain how this generator’s misery capacity factor consistently made more misery than it’s misery nameplate.

        00

    • #
      TdeF

      There was however a simple technology tested in the 1970s which would work, even most of the night. It was an ammonia driven reverse refrigerator which worked on the small temperature differential in the ocean between the surface temperature at say 15C and the deep water temperature at say 5C.

      These devices could generate 1mw each and you could have many of them anchored off the coast. Insanely the biggest problem was that molluscs would attack the warm flowing intakes and clog them, so they were more threatened by the environment than a threat. The great value is that they are really solar collectors as cooling the water would mean adjacent heat moves, so unlike single tide machines or wave machine or wind machine or solar cells, you could harmlessly harvest from a great area. This idea died from lack of funding, like so many while the politicians seem to understand windmills.

      00

  • #
    Wally

    Re Australian abroad:

    Its not just that (pre internet) one had to go to Australia House.

    It is still thus, its just the internet means one can seek out the news.

    But if travelling in the the UK or Europe, believe me, there is NO NEWS AT ALL about Australia in the mainstream news – not in newspapers, not on the TV, not on the BBC.

    Oz don’t rate.

    21

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    Check outside your window to see if pigs are flying past because the ABC has published an article that’s not pro AGW alarmism (although they did their best to subtly discredit the report). RET to increase power bills and cost jobs?? No $hit Sherlock? You think ??

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-24/ret-target-to-increase-power-prices-cost-jobs-research/5622232

    About time for the Greens to call for a media enquiry Id say. Clearly the ducks are falling out of their assigned rows.

    30

  • #
    pat

    speaking of Australians abroad!

    utterly ridiculous. what would NYT readers make of this?

    24 July: NYT: Julia Baird: A Carbon Tax’s Ignoble End
    Why Tony Abbott Axed Australia’s Carbon Tax
    (Julia Baird is a journalist and a television presenter with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and an author who is working on a biography of Queen Victoria.)
    (A version of this op-ed appears in print on July 25, 2014, in The International New York Times)
    SYDNEY, Australia — It will be remembered as one of the most ignoble moments in our history: On July 17, Australia became the first country to repeal a carbon tax.
    The deputy leader of the Greens Party, Adam Bandt, said it was “the Australian Parliament’s asbestos moment, our tobacco moment — when we knew what we were doing was harmful, but went ahead and did it anyway.”…
    Mr. Abbott is famous for his fitness and muscular approach…
    In 2010, the Labor prime minister, Julia Gillard, said she would look at carbon-pricing proposals, but also promised, “There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead.” …
    The heat, anger and vitriol directed at her as a leader — and as Australia’s first woman to be prime minister — coalesced around the promise and the tax. It grew strangely nasty: She was branded by a right-wing shockjock as “Ju-Liar,” a moniker she struggled to shake…
    Business leaders opposed what Mr. Abbott called a “useless, destructive tax,” even though just 0.02 percent of Australia’s three million businesses were affected (the top 500 polluters)…
    A study found that 82 percent of articles on the carbon tax in News Corporation’s Australian papers were negative.
    Ms. Gillard now believes she made a crucial error in framing…
    (Gillard): “… I feared the media would end up playing constant silly word games with me, trying to get me to say the word ‘tax.”’
    George Lakoff, a professor of linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley, agreed that “was a disaster.” It wasn’t just the T-word; even the term “carbon price” was a problem, too abstract and technical: “It does not evoke in the minds of the public the real human horrors and economic costs of climate disasters.”…
    Opposition to the carbon tax trailed away after Ms. Gillard’s ouster, and public concern about climate change has only grown. A recent poll found that almost two-thirds of Australians believe there should be carbon pricing for major emitters, but 42 percent agreed with the repeal of the tax (against 36 percent who did not). We did, after all, elect a government that promised to ax it. So we’re a hot mess of contradictions…
    What’s clear is that Australia has proved again that politicians rarely choose to take the lead on tackling climate change. When the public is conflicted, our leaders too often whip up fear, and reason and evidence go out the window. The shame is that when the tax was axed, so were the facts.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/opinion/julia-baird-why-tony-abbott-axed-australias-carbon-tax.html?_r=0

    check out Julia’s headlines for ABC The Drum! yet NYT considers her qualified to write about CAGW matters, even in their print edition? no wonder the MSM is dying.

    ABC: Julia Baird
    Portraits of the gender revolutionaries
    Thatcher paved the way for one woman alone
    Voice of feminism a force for change
    A toast to Joan Child and the fight for equality
    Powerful women held up as examples of limitations
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/julia-baird/4512348

    u have to laugh.

    10

  • #
    pat

    Tianjin’s carbon prices hit record low this week, over-allocation worries grow
    BEIJING, July 24 (Reuters) – Carbon prices in China’s Tianjin crumbled to the lowest level recorded in any of the seven pilot emission markets launched by the country, ahead of Friday’s compliance deadline, sparking calls for the government to cut the amount of permits…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/reutersnews/1.6092074

    EU carbon sinks 1.6 pct as industrial firms seen selling
    LONDON, July 24 (Reuters) – European carbon prices fell 1.6 percent on Thursday as industrial companies took advantage of recent price gains to offload surplus permits, increasing supply…
    http://www.pointcarbon.com/news/reutersnews/1.6107533

    10

  • #
    pat

    South Korea (and its journalists?) see opportunities where our MSM see doom. but will the Melt oblige?

    24 July: Bloomberg: Arctic Ice Melt Seen Freeing Way for South Korean Oil Hub
    By Ann Koh and Heesu Lee
    The country, whose proximity to China, Russia and Japan makes it an ideal conduit for oil arriving via the Arctic, plans to add tanks for storing almost 60 million barrels of crude and refined products by 2020, about the same as Singapore’s current capacity. The nation also seeks to leverage its energy infrastructure, which includes five refineries, to become Northeast Asia’s oil hub, said Kim Jun Dong, the deputy minister of energy and resources policy.
    Global temperatures are rising, breaking up polar ice and opening the Northern Sea Route to tanker traffic for a longer period each year than from July to October. It’s forecast to be ice-free for six months by 2020, boosting South Korea’s appeal as the destination for European cargoes that traders could potentially ship again to other Asian countries.
    “We’ve noticed a huge difference in trading routes,” Erik Hanell, the chief executive officer of Stena Bulk AB in Gothenburg, Sweden, which controls a fleet of 110 tankers, said by phone on July 9. “China is importing more and all the countries in the Far East are importing a lot more. South Korea has a very strong geographic position in today’s development of both Arctic oil and China’s growing demand.” …
    It’s (South Korea) seeking to lure energy traders, having designated 12 oil-storage facilities as free-trade zones…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-22/arctic-ice-melt-seen-freeing-way-for-south-korean-oil-hub.html

    00

  • #
  • #
    pat

    for Maurice Newman. LOL.

    23 July: UK Herald Express: Killer wind turbines decimating bats claim
    WIND turbines could be killing tens of thousands of bats — by giving them “the bends”…
    And rather than being killed by flying into the blades, new research has claimed that bats suffer from an airborne version of the diver’s condition known as “the bends” when they fly too near wind turbines — making their lungs burst.
    Concerns for the welfare of the creatures has already prompted dozens of challenges to schemes in the Westcountry…
    Now Queen’s University Belfast has unearthed another potential problem, namely that pressure from the turbine blades causes a similar condition as that experienced by divers when the surface too quickly…
    Dr Richard Holland claims that bats suffer from “barotrauma” when the approach the structures which can pop their lungs from inside their bodies.
    He said energy companies should consider turning off turbines when bats are migrating…
    http://www.torquayheraldexpress.co.uk/Killer-wind-turbines-decimating-bats-claim/story-21747417-detail/story.html

    30

    • #
      Mike Jowsey

      That would be pneumothorax rather than the bends, which is nitrogen bubbles forming in the blood stream causing cramps, joint pains and circulation blockages, particularly in the brain. One would think that UK Herald journalists should be more educated.

      10

  • #
    Neville

    Another excuse for the pause in warming is the cool phase of the PDO.
    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/new-excuse-for-pause-negative-phase-of.html

    But as Roy Spencer points out, if the pause is caused by a cool phase PDO why isn’t the previous warming also caused by the warm phase of the PDO? Of course that would stuff up their BS about co2 increases causing CAGW.

    31

  • #
    pat

    24 July: Guardian: Fiona Harvey: UK renewable energy subsidies capped at £200m a year
    Solar industry says contracts for difference budget represents a large reduction in the support they receive
    A ceiling of £200m a year will be placed on subsidies to some of the major forms of renewable energy from this autumn, affecting the funding of large-scale low-carbon installations from wind and solar farms to biomass-burning power plants…
    For instance, under the scheme, about £50m a year will be made available to companies ranging from large-scale solar farms to landfill gas operations and hydro-electric plants. This would translate into a cut in large-scale solar installations of about 65% to 80% next year, according to the Solar Trade Association.
    RenewableUK, the trade body for the renewable energy industry, said the level of funding was disappointing…
    The new rules were also slammed for being too complex for small companies, which will have to compete with multinationals for the funds available…
    ***Leonie Green, head of external affairs at the Solar Trade Association, said the amounts to be devoted to renewable energy were dwarfed by the £80bn guaranteed to the nuclear industry under a similar contract struck by the government…
    The solar industry is likely to be particularly affected by the changes, because the old subsidy system – known as the renewable obligation, by which generators are obliged to produce a certain amount of power from renewable sources, and are paid above the market price of electricity for doing so – is set to end in 2017 for most operators, but for large solar farms will end in 2016 instead…
    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jul/24/uk-renewable-energy-subsidies-capped-at-200m-a-year

    00

  • #
    pat

    24 July: Bloomberg: by Bloomberg News: Datang Renewables Estimates Loss as Wind Resources Worsen
    China Datang Corp. Renewable Power Co. (1798), a wind project developer, said it may report a loss in the first half because it was less windy in most regions.
    The company’s total electricity generation declined as a result, the Beijing-based company said today in a regulatory filing in Hong Kong…
    Datang Renewables said July 15 that wind power generation declined 9 percent from a year ago to 5.05 million megawatt-hours as at the end of June.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-07-24/datang-renewables-estimates-loss-as-wind-resources-worsen.html

    00

  • #
    King Geo

    “The takeover of EPA and all of its activities by liberal activists was slow and methodical over the past 30 years. Today, EPA is all but a wholly owned subsidiary of liberal activist groups. Its rules account for about half of the nearly $2 trillion a year cost of complying with all national regulations in the U.S. President Barack Obama is using it to circumvent Congress to impose regulations on the energy sector that will cause prices to ‘skyrocket.’ It is a rogue agency.”

    Very scary scenario described by Dr Lehr above – Oz for the time being will escape this cataclysmic scenario – in the USA on the one hand we have sunny California on the path to destruction with its obsession with RE and on the other hand we have states like Texas finding many TCF of “shale gas” & billions of barrels of “shale oil”, the discoveries of which are in reality “cushioning the USA” from potential economic collapse. I think only a Republican win in “2016 Presidential Election” can save the USA now from further Economic pain. A 3rd term for the “Democrats” I believe will be very detrimental to the USA’s well being, that is unless they limit the EPA’s control on the USA’s energy sector.

    10

  • #
    pat

    24 July: Mondaq: Thomas Berg: Germany: German Renewable Energy Act—Changes In 2014
    The amended German Renewable Energy Act (“REA”) takes effect on August 1, 2014 and will cause significant changes to Germany’s renewable energy landscape, including increased electric generation production targets from renewable energy sources, increased plant capacity, replacement of feed-in tariffs for a market premium system, and the implementation of a surcharge to aid utilities…
    Direct Marketing
    Currently, operators of photovoltaic plants, for example, receive a statutory feed-in tariff of 13.5 cents per kilowatts per hour (“KW/h”). This fixed tariff will be replaced by a direct marketing system. From August 1, 2014, the owners and operators of renewable energy power plants with an output of more than 500 kilowatt peak (“kWp”) (100 kWp starting in 2016) will be obliged to directly market the energy generated by their plants. They have the choice between independent direct marketing or via a direct marketer…
    The feed-in tariff for photovoltaic plants in operation as of August 1, 2014 will not change…
    REA Surcharge
    Industries with a significant consumption of electricity are released from this REA Surcharge or pay a lower REA.
    The same was true for users who produced energy for their own consumption. This will change: Starting as of August 1, 2014, end users that generate the power they use by themselves will have to pay the REA Surcharge, which is initially 30 percent, 35 percent in 2016, and 40 percent starting as of January 1, 2017.
    Bidding Process
    Beginning in 2017, the financial support for renewable energy projects will no longer be determined by law but will become subject to a bidding process.
    http://www.mondaq.com/x/329922/Renewables/German+Renewable+Energy+ActChanges+In+2014

    9 July: Mondaq: Neil Budd: Is This The End For Large-Scale Solar In The UK?
    The Renewables Obligation (RO) will close to new projects above 5 MW from 1 April 2015 and this will apply to extensions to existing plants as well as where the aggregate capacity would exceed 5 MW. Therefore, any new project above 5 MW which commissions after 31 March 2015 will not be eligible for ROCs. This is subject to a grace period for projects currently being developed which fulfil certain criteria. The criteria are as follows:…
    Projects of 5 MW and below will continue to be eligible for ROCs and feed-in tariffs (FiTs) as they are now…
    Whilst the industry was braced for bad news, the proposal to remove ROCs entirely from projects above 5 MW has come as a shock…
    The provisions on grace periods will also be of concern. The criteria are so restrictive that the only projects likely to be eligible for the grace period are those which don’t need it…
    http://www.mondaq.com/x/319018/Renewables/Is+This+The+End+For+LargeScale+Solar+In+The+UK

    00

  • #

    [...] weather or climate. This was a point often made at the conference and made again just last week by Jo Nova quoting Don [...]

    00

  • #

    [...] climate). Fifth, it may be that we will never possess such knowledge…’ JoNova built one of her posts around this one of mine, which made me feel most honoured, since her website is on my [...]

    00