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

Innovative taxes needed to “find” $300 billion pa for climate damage

In socialistspeak people don’t produce goods to make money, they “find” money lying around the crysanthymums or something, because $300,000,000,000 dollars didn’t have anywhere else to be.

Innovative finance needed to find $300 billion a year for climate losses

And what if the solar dynamo drives climate change instead?

Tax the Sun.

My climate prediction: Global climate reparations are going to employ 100 million accountants.

By Laurie Goering

LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) – With money for action on climate change already in short supply, an estimated $300 billion a year needed to help countries deal with unavoidable climate losses will have to come from innovative new sources, such as a financial transaction tax or carbon tax, researchers say.

Funding for such climate “loss and damage” aims to assist people who lose their land to sea level rise, for instance, or are forced to migrate as drought makes growing crops impossible in some regions.

“What stands out most clearly is that there isn’t currently enough funding to even begin thinking about financing loss and damage, with available climate, development, risk reduction and disaster recovery financing all falling short by an order of magnitude,” said researchers at the Berlin-based Heinrich Böll Foundation.

In a report released at the U.N. climate negotiations in Bonn, now heading into their second week, researchers said about $50 billion a year would be needed by 2020 to help people who lose their land and culture or are forced to migrate as a result of climate-related problems.

As Eric Worrall notes, the UN has such an obscene amount of money they need $300 Billion per Year to Alleviate the Tedium

Harjeet Singh, who heads climate change policy for charity ActionAid, also said that setting up a new loss and damage funding body made no sense.

“It’s so tedious to set up an institution and get it going, and make sure the money reaches the intended people. It does make sense to use the existing mechanisms to transfer the money,” he told the Thomson Reuters Foundation in a telephone interview from Bonn.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (54 votes cast)
Innovative taxes needed to "find" $300 billion pa for climate damage, 9.5 out of 10 based on 54 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/lu9jkyr

194 comments to Innovative taxes needed to “find” $300 billion pa for climate damage

  • #
    Oliver K. Manuel

    What an incredible load of doublespeak!

    140

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Not really.

      The REAL game here is using stealth ( CAGW ) to create ongoing direct funding for the occult Christian-hating humanity-hating UN.

      A govt cant function unless it has a formal tax base.

      If the carbon tax is set up and flows directly to the UN, it says it has the ability to tax, ergo it is a govt.

      This needs to be stopped in its tracks, and fast.

      250

      • #
        Oliver K. Manuel

        An outline of Orwell’s entire novel is available here free on-line:
        http://www.george-orwell.org/1984

        30

        • #
          PeterS

          Downloadable and Kindle versions if it and other novels available here: http://www.openculture.com/free_ebooks

          10

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          As it happens, I read the first three chapters yesterday. Won’t be able to get back.to it for a while, but it’s surreal to be reading it almost the same time after the event as the book was before it, particularly as 1984 marks such a significant period in the history.

          I always knew that the system of government in the Soviet Union could not last beyond the mid 1980s, because by that time all of the people who could remember first hand how bad things were before the revolution would have faded from influence. The excesses of the Soviet years depended on that memory first hand to hide the memory of how bad things were after the revolution. Once the first hand memories were gone, events after 1917 would come under intelligent scrutiny.

          When the change did come I was disappointed to see the US, for whom I had considerable respect, rushing the Russians into a market economy, because without anybody in those countries with any expertise in running a market economy, the first experience of the market economy would be the worst of a market economy. They should have left the Communists to sort it out themselves, which should have brought a quicker solution. Under the circumstances they haven’t done as badly as they might have. Trump might improve things.

          10

          • #
            Ted O'Brien

            I have wondered since the tumultuous days when Gorbachev was displaced if the Australian journalist Monica Attard might have saved the Russians from civil war. I would be interested if anybody had any memories of those events.

            10

  • #
    Phantor48

    And just who specifically has lost their land due to sea level rise?

    260

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Anybody who lives on the beach, or who has rural land that abuts a cliff, and has witnessed coastal erosion.

      Sea levels don’t rise relative to the coastal margin. It is the land that goes away, relative to the high-tide line.

      This is a difficult concept for the self-appointed “Guardians Of The Climate”(TM) to get to grips with.

      But seeing that a lot of them seem to live on the Californian coastline, their perspective might be somewhat different to those of us who count as Deplorable’s in an urban environment.

      172

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        Careful! We’ve got the “rising sea level” scare but we don’t want them to claim a “sinking land level”. I don’t know how that could be blamed on Climate Change but I am sure they will.

        160

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          I live on top of a volcanic fault line. We get shaking land reasonably frequently, and sometimes it sinks as well.

          It is all part of the fun, and it all comes for free. If we get to much fun, all at the same time, the Government pays us for the privilege. What is not to like?

          50

        • #
          Allen Ford

          The rising of the seas is not the only problem, Gra, but the seas which do the rising will be acid, thus dissolving everything in sight.

          It’s a lot worse than we thought!

          110

        • #
          ian hilliar

          The FALLING sea levels over the last 30 years in the Maldives, repeatedly confirmed by Nils Axel-Morner of the Karolinska Institute, have led to a heck of a lot of coral bleaching, in spite of the governments tax on foreigners which was supposed to help prevent sea level rising!

          50

          • #
            toorightmate

            Same as Australia’s Great Barrier Reef “bleaching”.
            No one wants to believe that North East Australia is rising while the Australian continent moves in a North-East direction.
            The movement is surprisingly fast – in geological time.

            30

      • #
        Ted O'Brien

        Rereke, I checked out the Californian coastline. 17 tide gauges show an average rise of 0.155 mm/year, six inches a century. The range is from a fall of 0.80 mm to a rise of 4.78 mm. Surprisingly stable for a bit of ground with such a shaky reputation.

        20

      • #
        Egor the One

        1 + 1 = 2 is a difficult concept for the CAGW true b’lver gang !

        10

    • #
      Spetzer86

      Like Canopus? http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/africa/sunken-cities-exhibition-egypt-greece-london/

      Guess things like this happen from time to time with coastal cities. Nothing like being on an interface to bring some excitement into living.

      40

  • #
    Dave in the States

    With money for action on climate change already in short supply, an estimated $300 billion a year needed to help countries deal with unavoidable climate losses will have to come from innovative new sources, such as a financial transaction tax or carbon tax, researchers say.

    They sure want a tax don’t they? The possibilities for graft and corruption would be endless. It is so enticing for politicians of all stripes, everywhere. When looking for motive for all the corrupt science, all the lies, and all the propaganda, all the dogma, look no further.

    170

  • #
    Curious George

    Is there a list of climate damages for years 2010 – 2016? How much is the total?

    70

    • #
      Dennis

      Prices have fallen a little due to crop yields increasing?

      60

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Many Austrian fruit farmers face total crop failure – 100 million Euro damage

      ‘The cold snap of last week has led to massive damage in large parts of Styria. According to a preliminary estimation 80% of the fruit harvest has been destroyed and the damage is estimated at about 100 million Euro. ‘

      Global cooling is a disaster waiting to happen, with insurmountable costs.

      30

    • #
      Ted O'Brien.

      Start with the Brisbane floods.

      20

      • #
        toorightmate

        Ted,
        Are you referring to the floods this century or any particular preceding century?
        Isn’t it strange that towns and cities constructed on river flood plains occasionally get flooded?

        10

        • #
          Ted O'Brien

          2010 was mentioned.

          As a farmer I always saw it as disappointing that so many towns were built on the best soils, because that saved on water cartage. If only polythene had been invented 150 years earlier.

          20

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    What I want to know is at what point do we become insolvent and declare bankruptcy? They will take the whole goss world product if we let them and still not be happy.

    Oh!. Maybe not the whole world. There are those whiners who will get a share of that money as reparations for sea level rise that isn’t happening, melting ice which is natural, not manmade and crop damage that if it is happening is from a myriad of causes all not having anything to do with climate change. They’ll be the only ones left standing, at least until they discover they depended on those they drove into the ground with this nonsense.

    80

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      The money is only worth what it gets in exchange for real goods and services. Each dollar today buys a whole lot less, than it did ten or twenty years ago.

      When I retired from active service I bought a cattle farm (ranch to you) to breed Angus beef. Every year we send the same number, and approximate weight, of animals off to the sales, and every year we get more dollars, per animal, in return.

      The problem is that the dollars buy less than they used to.

      All climate change scam does, is add to the rate of inflation of the currency. If you have tangible assets that increase in value, you are fireproof, which is why those in the know buy properties overlooking the ocean, and complain when the tourist boats go past.

      90

    • #
      Dennis

      The frightening truth is that many of these strange people really do believe that governments have money, and many complain that governments hold back money that we should be entitled to have.

      During the ABC series about the Whitlam Labor Government years PM Whitlam’s wife Margaret commented that her husband and his cabinet ministers had that impression. And Gough was a lawyer. He/they, she said, were shocked when they discovered that it was not true, that tax revenue and debt is what governments have to spend.

      20

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Corect – govt can only spend what its taken off somebody else, or borrowed….

        10

        • #
          Rick Will

          Central banks create money from nothing and loan it into existence as government deficits. When age profiles are static this is inflationary but with ageing populations in developed countries there is a higher savings rate so the governments have to run deficits to balance the funds flow:
          https://datamarket.com/data/set/28m2/bank-deposits-to-gdp#!ds=28m2!2rr3=o&display=line

          This process is the same as commercial banks loaning money into existence, mostly through housing mortgages. That new money also ends up as bank deposits.

          30

    • #
      James Bradley

      What with all the water we could claim ‘a universal insolvent’.

      20

  • #

    “It’s so tedious to set up an institution and get it going, and make sure the money reaches the intended people.”

    The real question is who are these ‘intended’ people?

    100

    • #
      Leonard Lane

      co2isnotevil very good question. Since the Maldives are still with us, and all other “global warming/climate change predictions (i.e. snow will disappear, water will be 10s of meters over the lowest portions of New York by now, the temperature will be 5-10 hotter by 2017 than it actually, etc. etc…), there is no remediation or damages to cost $300 billion now or in the foreseeable future.
      In fact, the effects of increasing CO2 and stable temperatures are greening the world–a dream of people for several centuries.
      Back to the question, since thee are no real climate problems to solve with the $300 billion, it will obviously make the UN and its high paid employees even richer. Imagine the greed and chicanery, theft, and misappropriation if the corrupt UN really had a “free” $300 billion to spend on themselves. There would be a new class of super-rich among the UN big wigs and employees. That is where I think most of the money would go.

      The rest? I don’t know and I doubt if anyone knows as we lack the experience in misappropriating money that the UN’s thousands and thousands of bureaucrats and leaders have gained over the years with other peoples’ money.

      70

      • #

        The most expensive catastrophe that will ever be caused by climate change is assured to occur because the specific change has occurred like clockwork throughout the paleontological record. This change is km’s of ice bearing down on much of Canada, US, Northern Europe and Russia combined with a significant drop in agricultural productivity. The resulting damage will pail to that from a few inches higher ocean levels and slightly warmer temperatures, most of which is more than offset by the increase in agricultural productivity arising from increased atmospheric CO2.

        50

    • #
      Yonniestone

      I agree with Mr Singh, it has been tedious to watch climate action institutions collect trillions of dollars that should’ve gone to innovations that actually help people that really need it, a reliable base load electricity grid for everyone would be an interesting concept in the struggle to break the cycle of civil war among developing nations, not forgetting the benefits to developed nations regaining security in their chosen identity.

      60

  • #
    Pauly

    They’ve convinced me. I recommend we redirect all revenue raised by the RET to the UN.

    That way, we can kill off all fossil fuel power generation, kill off all solar and wind subsidies, kill off our electricity grid, kill all Australian industry, destroy our economy, and still feel good about our virtue signalling!

    90

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      And the problem is that some people will then claim “we aren’t doing enough”.

      50

  • #
  • #
    TdeF

    There was time when charity existed to help people suffering in the regular and long droughts in Africa and even in Australia. Or hurricane damage in places like Haiti or mudslides in China or tsunamis in Asia. Now it is all Climate Damage and Climate Loss and it is not charity, it is a tax on Western democracies.

    It is hard to understand how this demand for cash makes any sense. Global Warming is not happening. Droughts, floods, landslides, storms and tsunamis and wars have always happened. Nothing has changed except the world population has quadrupled thanks to the incredible advances in medicine and agriculture and transport.

    Suddenly everything is supposedly our fault. Scientists say. This includes the overpopulation, unsuitable habitats, storms, floods, pestilence all because of a 50% rise in CO2 in a hundred years, a rise which is doing nothing but good and desperately needed.

    So hand over the cash. This is not science and it has nothing to do with Climates and is due to the disastrous policies of the myriad of military dictatorships which dominate the UN. Even Mugabe turned up in Paris for the cash and parties. The generosity of the democratic West is seen as a huge weakness and it is being ruthlessly exploited. Climate fantasy is now the umbrella cause for Australia’s foreign aid, itself absurd as we borrow $2Bn million a month because our spending far exceeds our incomes. This is even without counting the NBN and other huge schemes which are ‘off budget’.

    I hope the parties at the UN in New York and Paris are worth it. The principle of other peoples’ money is always attractive for professional politicians as both major Australian parties race to maximize our debt. If only we could save the Climates.

    100

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Charitable actions are now used as emotional weapons against the privileged in the form of cultural Marxism, the payments are not voluntary but woven into a plethora of levies, charges, taxes etc.. that have been imposed upon the earning classes to destroy any chance of future wealth creation or retention.

      Sad thing is this social justice mindset was chosen wilfully by the people that suffer under it due to ever creeping leftist elements that have infiltrated our society for decades which has conditioned people to comply without question, such conditioning breaks the spirit of independent thought and resistance to tyranny.

      90

    • #
      Greebo

      Or hurricane damage in places like Haiti or mudslides in China or tsunamis in Asia.

      Yes, like The Clinton Foundation. Oh, wait…

      30

  • #
    Ruairi

    The warmists are eager to shun,
    All the climate effects of the sun,
    As a breach in the dam,
    Would expose the whole sham,
    Leaving them and their fake cause undone.

    230

  • #
    • #
      Willard

      “Seba said the residual stock of fossil-based vehicles will take time to clear but 95 per cent of the miles driven by 2030 in the US will be in autonomous EVs for reasons of costs, convenience, and efficiency. Oil use for road transport will crash from 8 million barrels a day to 1 million.”

      A disruption brought about by reasons of cost, convenience and efficency.

      26

      • #
        Dennis

        But peak oil arrived decades ago Willard, so the leftists warned.

        But how would the transport fleets of the world be charged with electricity if fossil fuel was no longer used?

        50

        • #
          Willard

          Dennis why are you OCD about electric cars being charged with fossil fuels?

          11

        • #
          David Maddison

          The first Peak Oil was proclaimed in 1919:

          1919: Two to five years until maximum production

          “In meeting the world’s needs, however, the oil from the United States will continue to occupy a less and less dominant position, because within the next two to five years the oil fields of this country will reach their maximum production and from that on we will face an ever increasing decline.”

          — October 23, 1919 Oil and Gas News

          20

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Wrong – the electrical infrastructure is being run down, as the globalists pursue the green lunacy, as such charging the pie in the sky said EVs by 2030 is highly unlikely.

        And besides, givent he choice between a burbling V8 or turbo 4 and an electric shopping trolley, I ( and a lot of other people ) will take the V8 every time…..

        Interstingly, as the price of fuel is squeezed, hydrogen tech jumps forward, so the gloablists cant really win….sorry…. people prefer liberty and freedom. Idiots like Nikolai Ciacescu found out what happens when you puch things too far.

        20

      • #
        el gordo

        “What the cost curve says is that by 2025 all new vehicles will be electric…”

        Far too optimistic, but might be a reasonable proposition if there is a battery breakthrough.

        10

    • #
      TdeF

      Odd, isn’t it. Unless you decide CO2 and H2O are pollutants, hydrocarbons and carbohydrates for that matter are completely clean. Zero pollution. That includes the seven billion people and hundreds of billions of animals. Without lead, sulfur and now nitrous oxides from Green diesels we have the cleanest energy in history. No waste at all.

      So the mad Greens are plotting a future where disposal of batteries, windmills, solar panels will fill our environment with cadmium, lead, acids, neodyumium and other rare earths to a point where it becomes a huge pollution problem. Welcome to the nonsensical world of Green energy.

      We will end up with a pollution tax on Green battery driven cars as now exists on Green diesels. Sending all the problems to China is the least caring, least planet friendly solution imaginable but that is the Green philsophy. NIMBY. Not in my backyard. As with nuclear. As short on caring as they are on science.

      141

      • #
        Willard

        You need to read the article correctly TdeF, let me put it in block letters for you so it sinks in- “FOR REASONS OF COST, CONVENIENCE AND EFFICENCY”.

        28

        • #
          James Bradley

          Dullard,

          Internal combustion vehicles actually require less fossil fuel per/klm than do electric vehicles.

          100

          • #
            Willard

            No James, your statement is totally incorrect. Even an electric vehicle charging its batteries off a 50 year old brown coal power station requires less fossil fuel per km and over its full build and scrap average lifecycle than an internal combustion engine…..or maybe the whole oil well to service station process is totally renewable these days?

            19

            • #
              Bobl

              That’s not true at all, the energy consumption of any vehicle is related to the loads so energy consumption of electric and ICE vehicles is similar for similar loads but the ICE engines make less CO2 because some of the energy comes from oxidation of hydrogen in an ICE.

              Not only that if as you claim transport fuel use declines by 80% then electricity generation needs to be doubled to reach it. Energy is NOT free.

              50

              • #
                Willard

                No Bobl, you’re over complicating it, look at total energy consumed to get electric vehicle along a set distance and compare it against petrol/diesel vehicle of the same size/performance to cover the same set distance.

                12

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                At each and every step in the energy production line, there are losses. There are mechanical losses, there are frequency conversion losses, there are transmission losses, there are switching losses, there are operational shedding losses to keep the network balanced, there are storage losses, and there are losses due to the inefficiency of whatever is being powered, and there are operator losses, caused by the end user not understanding their responsibilities to the system.

                That is what happens today in the fixed frequency electrical network, based on a distribution frequency that is multiples of 50Hz (or 60 cycles, in the US). Such a network is centrally planned, regionally managed, and finely monitored and tuned, from a central point that governs the frequency. Frequency is important, since it keeps clocks and critical medical equipment functioning correctly.

                That same type of network will be required to gather the wind, or tide, or thermal energy at source, convert it to a form that is transmissible, and at the same level of quality as the rest of the grid, and then match it exactly in phase. But because the wind and the tide (and thermal to some degree) are not truly cyclic but are inconsistent events, you have another order of magnitude of difficulties to overcome.

                I don’t think Bobl is over complicating it at all. I think that what you suggest is the press release, which is fair enough, but it has not been properly thought through to the stage where peoples lives can be dependent upon it.

                40

              • #
                Bobl

                Willard,
                Unfortunately this is another of those things that makes it difficult to be an engineer. End to end the efficiency of the coal energy to power EVs is around 20% and kW for kW Burning coal emits more CO2 than diesel. Modern high compression engines have a thermal efficiency of around 35%.

                Those comparisons you talk about compare a low torque electric power train with a high torque one – it is not equal performance in any sense.

                EVs also use a whole bunch of energy saving tricks that are also possible analogously in internal combustion engines (ICEs). You can only compare these EVs to a variable displacement ICE with equivalent energy saving tech. Those engines are far better than EVs.

                60

          • #
            TdeF

            Agreed. Old internal combustion engines are 20% efficient while coal is 33% for old stations and up to 40% for new, but then you get the transmission losses at say 50%, which means less CO2 per km for petrol than coal/batteries. 20% against 17.5% Petrol wins and diesel even more.

            Toyota are now claiming 38% efficiency for their engines. A hybrid would last twice as long with energy recovery on braking or hills and you do not need to wait hours to recharge at RET prices, so cheaper too. So 38% for Toyota gasoline and 20% for new coal power stations.

            10

            • #
              Willard

              50% transmission losses??? In what country? TdeF are you serious?
              By the way, your calculations above are only a part of the equation, there is so much more to comparing an electric vehicles total energy use per kilometre to a petrol vehicle per kilometre.

              15

              • #
                TdeF

                Yes. I am serious. Australia. Losses everywhere. That is why we use transformers and the only reason we use deadly AC, to lower the losses and make long distance transmission possible.

                When Portland was built in Portland for the votes, we the public also had to pay $250Million just for the transmission line from Yallourn to Portland. They kept the losses to 50%. Often half the power goes to heating the lines. If you are living next to the generator, fine. Most people do not. Windfarms are generally a long way and when Malcolm Turnbull proposes selling Tasmanian electricity to Queensland, he is nuts.
                Of course in your perfect world, line losses do not exist, but never let the facts get in the way of a bit of shouting.

                80

              • #
                Bobl

                Yes in many places. But you also fail to take into account life cycle losses, Eg say 20% electricity system losses + 10% loss in the cars batter charging system and another 10% is lost in the VFD. So even in a major city losses are of the order of 40% and could be up to 60% in say Portland. Add to that the fact that hydrocarbon engines emit less CO2 than coal and that modern ICE engines are up to 35% thermally efficient and verging on 40% ICE vehicles are much cleaner than EVs

                60

              • #
                toorightmate

                Dullard old mate,
                Go and have a chat to the Brazilians who transmit hydro power from the Amazon to their heavy industries in the south of the country.
                They don’t experience 50%. They only experience 38% transmission losses PLUS system losses.

                10

            • #
              TdeF

              The Alcoa smelter, when we invited Alcoa to Australia to use our abundant and cheap night time power. In China the smelters are always next to the power station to minimize the losses.

              40

              • #
                Willard

                No seriously TdeF, 50% electricity transmission losses? sorry sunshine way off the mark.

                25

              • #
                TdeF

                Willard, you are just abusive. Go away. Come back when you have your facts right, sunshine.

                41

              • #
                Willard

                No TdeF I’m certainly not abusive, you’ve claimed 50% electricity transmission losses, I’ve put you on the spot and you can’t handle it, if your going to stretch the truth to try and make a point at least make it half believable, the national average is thereabouts 8% by the way.

                [Willard, you referred to Tdef as "sunshine", in a derogatory way. We expect contributors to be polite. I suggest you apologise, and then try to understand what Tdef is implying by his statement] Fly

                34

              • #
                Bobl

                No Willard, average transmission loss is around 8-10% but average distribution losses are also 10%. The total is around 15 – 20% in certain cases losses are much worse. It depends on the line length.

                30

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                I think that Willard has missed the distinction between the realities of transmission network engineering, and the practicalities of managing a distribution network.

                20

              • #
                Willard

                [Willard, you referred to Tdef as "sunshine", in a derogatory way. We expect contributors to be polite. I suggest you apologise, and then try to understand what Tdef is implying by his statement] Fly

                My apologies TdeF.

                20

              • #
                Willard

                Rereke Whakaaro
                May 17, 2017 at 9:12 pm
                I think that Willard has missed the distinction between the realities of transmission network engineering, and the practicalities of managing a distribution network.

                No so RW, TdeF claims 50% transmission losses, That’s a pretty clear cut figure and statement, the figure is closer to 8% average, 7% has been quoted on here many times by long term posters and never disputed.

                20

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                … TdeF claims 50% transmission losses, That’s a pretty clear cut figure and statement …

                Yes it is, to an electrical engineer.

                Australia is possibly unique (I have no information about The Russian Federation) in the length of its transmission network. It is huge. Unlike Europe, power is not generated close to where it is used. In Australia, it is shipped for long distances. Losses occur for every kilometre of that network, and those losses are accumulative. As Tdef points out, “Often half the power goes to heating the lines”. In your secondary school physics, you would have called that Resistance. In the world of alternating current and long distance transmission engineering, it is called Impedance, because it is cyclic. The physical conductors get hot. That is the losses to which Tdef refers. The transmission network acts like a large electrical heater.

                The 7% or 8% losses you quote, usually refer to the local distribution network at the final destination of the energy. That is entirely different from transmission.

                And while I have your attention, “COST, CONVENIENCE AND EFFICIENCY”, are lovely feel-good notions, of the marketing variety, found on the glossy leaflets in the sales room. So, in terms of going where you want to go, when you want to go, and how much load you want to carry, can you define what your three words actually mean in the real world?

                20

          • #
            Rereke Whakaaro

            Yes, I know. But don’t tell Willard that. He seems set on having a bad day, without our help.

            21

        • #
          TdeF

          So we are polluting our environment with heavy metals the planet because it is cheaper, easier and faster? Brilliant.

          50

          • #
            Willard

            Heavy metals TdeF? Can you name these heavy metals and point out to which particular electric vehicle contains them?

            34

            • #

              Well, umm, every single electric vehicle really, Willard.

              Dysprosium is a heavy rare earth metal, and is used in the permanent magnets in the electric motor of every electric vehicle and also in wind turbines generators, an essential metal in fact.

              A recent paper I saw said the following:

              Rather than worrying about a lack of lithium, there could be shortages of rare earth materials, should the EV replace the conventional car. One such material is the permanent magnet for the electric motors. Permanent magnets make one of the most energy-efficient motors. China controls about 95 percent of the global market for rare earth metals and expects to use most of these resources for its own production. Export of rare earth materials is tightly controlled.

              It would seem that there really is more than meets the eye when it comes to electric vehicles.

              Tony.

              82

              • #
                Willard

                It’s handy that you mention Dysprosium Tony as that’s the very reason a mine is opening up near the WA-NT border-http://www.abc.net.au/news/rural/2017-04-19/construction-to-begin-on-first-heavy-rare-earths-mine/8452602
                Not that it will be needed for the AC motors in Tesla vehicles but maybe other car makers still find the need for it, bonus for Aussie miners I say.

                22

              • #
                David Maddison

                It’s best to keep the rare earth production in China because we don’t want the pollution in Western Countries. It’s better to stick to clean fossil and nuclear than dirty windmills and EV’s.

                41

              • #
                Willard

                Better still Dave Maddison how about the rare earth production being moved to Chernobyl or Fukushima, or better still the Gulf of Mexico.

                23

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Mining Dysprosium in Australia, with all the by products and environmental impacts will give the Greens something to think about. Has anybody told them?

                30

              • #
                toorightmate

                Dullard,
                You asked for a heavy metal.
                Tony gave you one (of many).
                Please don’t then change the subject to the opening of mines.
                I suspect you would know less about the opening of new mines than you do about renewable energy – and the latter is infinitesimally small.

                30

        • #
          toorightmate

          Dullard,
          Can I take you back to 1988 when all the “experts” and “scientists” said we would run out of gas by 1995 – AND NO FURTHER CORRESPONDENCE WILL BE ENTERED INTO.

          43

          • #
            Willard

            Yes, not sure of the exact year but I can recollect the obsession with a possible lack of oil, it’s ironic that we now enter an era where the world (other than Australia) is awash with oil and the demand will fall rapidly.

            33

            • #
              Graeme No.3

              Willard:
              I once tried to trace the first “oil will run out soon” claim; I got back to 1862 but that was apparently a copy of an earlier prediction.
              Since oil extraction started in 1859 we can say the “oil will run out soon” prediction activity has a long, although inaccurate history.
              Ironically one who did believe the prediction was John Rockefeller who tried to corner the world market ‘to prevent wastage and sell at the proper price”.

              Incidentally your claims re electric cars are optimistic. The weight of batteries is still too high for the power produced. Yes, electric cars avoid some weight in the engine, differential etc. and gain from regenerative braking but it is estimated that batteries would have to gain 3-4 times the energy capacity per unit weight before they would become superior.

              20

              • #
                Willard

                Sorry Graeme once again incorrect, although improvements in energy density will happen and be welcome the electric car is already superior in performance to an internal combustion engine-http://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/videos/a33498/watch-the-nio-ep9-lap-the-nurburgring-faster-than-any-production-car/
                As well as an electric vehicle now being the fastest production car around the Ring an electric car also has the fastest ever 0-100 time for a production car.

                23

              • #
                Bobl

                Wrong Willard, yes you can get good burst performance but hopeless torque especially at low revs and if you do drive it like that you get no range out of it. The energy storage capacity is what is being compared here. I can guarantee you that NO EV is about to win the F1 championship or even Bathurst any time soon or ever, especially given refueling in the pits take 8 hours or more.

                50

              • #
                ROM

                Just so that you know about the blatant promotion of vested interests being displayed so openly here on Jo’s blog, folks! :-)
                .

                South Africa’s Insurance Times

                The failure of Willard car batteries

                Loss of power – and confidence.

                Moral of the story is to buy a more expensive, more reliable battery, especially one that is maintenance free. That’s more convenience too. It will cost quite a bit less in the long run.
                In a nutshell plan avoid buying any Sabat or Willard product.

                50

              • #
                Willard

                Hopeless torque you say Bobl? Are you kidding? That’s one of the major advantages, Bobl did you not say your an EE? Have you been paying attention lately?

                31

              • #
                Willard

                Good find there Rom, although that’s a battery for starting internal combustion engines.

                30

              • #
                Bobl

                Clearly you know little about electric motor starting torques

                31

              • #
                AndyG55

                Oh dear.. what a pity !!

                https://www.canstar.com.au/news-articles/electric-car-sales-slump-despite-record-year/

                No wonder poor Willy is pushing so hard.
                .
                LOTS of ground to make up, hey little shill. ;-)

                “Amid another record sales year for new cars in Australia, electric vehicle sales have taken a huge dive. Just 219 electric cars were sold in 2016, out of nearly 1.2 million new vehicles which left Australian dealerships.”

                “Current EV market share sits at less than 0.02%, with other car sales overwhelmingly still dominated by petrol and diesel engines.”

                Oh dear.. what a pity !!

                41

              • #
                Willard

                Bobl
                May 17, 2017 at 8:52 pm
                Clearly you know little about electric motor starting torques

                Please enlighten me Bobl.

                21

              • #
                toorightmate

                I detect a trend here.
                Everyone is wrong – EXCEPT – the marvellous, modest Dullard.

                31

              • #
                AndyG55

                http://acapmag.com.au/home/2017/01/ev-sales-plummet-australia/

                In the private passenger car segment, there were drops in both electric vehicle and hybrid sales in 2016 compared to the previous year.

                There were 65 EVs sold in this segment last year compared to 220 EVs sold in 2015 – a 69% drop.

                In the non-private passenger car segment, sales dipped from 145 EVs in 2015 down to 101

                Oh dear, what a pity.

                and so much ground to make up !!

                SHILL, SHILL as loud as you can, little willy !!

                51

              • #
                AndyG55

                “Please enlighten me Bobl.”

                I doubt even a 10000V electric shock would enlighten you, little shilly-willy

                11

              • #
                Willard

                So if I’m wrong Toorightmate please feel free to add to the discussion with evidence backing up your claim.

                21

              • #
                Rereke Whakaaro

                Willard is just spouting the PR blurb and quoting press releases.

                Nothing he has said has any material substance to it. I doubt that he has anything really material to contribute. Other than what is on his “fact sheet”.

                He is certainly not an engineer or physicist.

                20

              • #
                AndyG55

                EV sales in the USA last year were LESS THAN 1% of new car sales. !!

                Gunna take a while for all those “legacy” new non-EV cars to disappear.

                SUV’s sold some 63% of the market !!!!

                Ford F-series pickup, by itself, outsold EV’s by over FIVE to one !

                Even Mercedes sold more than TWO times the number of total EVs sold.

                Nissan by itself sold over NINE time the number of EVs sold.

                31

        • #
          Dennis

          You can shout all you want but it makes no difference.

          31

        • #
        • #
          AndyG55

          ““FOR REASONS OF COST, CONVENIENCE AND EFFICENCY”.”

          ie, total BS from a fantasy island battery shill. !!

          21

      • #

        The crazy thing is that, despite their age, old technologies like wind, solar, electric cars etc are pretty handy in their niches. I wouldn’t mind rigging my house with some solar (as I’ve done before) so that lights and electronics run during blackouts. Solar hot water could be an okay addition in my situation, though I find right now that an old, large (for critical mass) all-electric heater fits my present very light usage.

        The tragedy is that we have pretended these old alternatives and limited technologies are new and fit to be mainstreamed…and thus cut off what might be truly new and fit to be mainstreamed. The future is made by angry, spotty, hormonal youths tinkering in garages, not by overpaid Living National Treasures doling out the usual green fables through dinosaur media.

        The shallow futurism preached by intellectuals is the enemy of the future.

        90

    • #
      Rick Will

      Tony Seba is the kiss of death. All the high flying solar companies he talked up in 2013:
      http://tonyseba.com/tag/solar-power/
      are now bankrupt.

      Statement “fossil fuel vehicles will vanish in 8 years” reflects a naive, possibly imbecilic, lack of understanding of technology.

      70

      • #
        Willard

        “All fossil fuel vehicles will vanish in 8 years” is the headline by the media outlet, there will still be fossil fuel vehicles in 8 years, as each year goes by the number will diminish just like other forms of old tech, just as electrical retailers no longer sell new CRT Televisions, car dealers will no longer sell new passenger cars with internal combustion engines, the claim is 8 years from now, it could be anywhere from 6 to 20 years from now but it will happen.

        59

        • #
          James Bradley

          Dullard,

          That’s what Kindle backers said about books… but it just aint so.

          93

        • #
          Gordon2

          And I suppose as we are no longer using fossil fuels our 747s and A380s will be solar and wind powered.

          30

        • #
          Mark M

          Don’t Count Out the Internal Combustion Engine

          http://www.realclearfuture.com/articles/2016/08/29/dont_count_out_the_internal_combustion_engine_111937.html

          “But this assumes that the internal combustion engine is standing still—and it’s not.

          In fact, the internal combustion engine is a moving target, and if you assume that we’re going to see future advances in the technology for electric cars, you also have to contend with current and future advances in the technology of the internal combustion engine.”

          20

        • #
          Rick Will

          just as electrical retailers no longer sell new CRT Televisions, car dealers will no longer sell new passenger cars with internal combustion engines, the claim is 8 years from now, it could be anywhere from 6 to 20 years

          The first flat panel LED screen was demonstrated in 1977. It took 30 years of development to completely displace CRT TVs and monitors by 2007. That is the usual development period for a new technology.

          First mobile phone 1973 – 30 years before ubiquitous. Kids have been using them for about a decade. First computer 1943 – ubiquitous in businesses and home by maybe mid 1990s. TCP/IP that enables the internet was first used in 1983 – ubiquitous use by mid naughties.

          There are some exceptions that have little start up cost like Google. Started in 1996 it was widely used within a decade. However the enabling technology was the internet.

          With transport there is considerably more investment involved. Transport underpins modern society. Car production is material intensive on a global scale. Setting up supply chains for large quantity of new materials does not happen in a decade. Maybe 2 decades and usually at least three before the change is ubiquitous.

          Vehicles using battery as the sole energy store cannot develop with the currently available technology because they are already pushing the lithium supply wall. Try to get any mine started inside a decade anywhere in the world. When I bought my home battery bank I paid AUD153 for 100Ah cells. The price 5 years later is AUD180. Battery price is inflating twice as fast as CPI. Lithium Carbonate jumped 250% in price in 2016. The batteries may not use much but it does not take much in quantity to impact production costs when the price is taking off.

          Fuel cell powered cars are under development but there is no clear winner on the basic cell. Despite cells being around for a long time the opportunities for improvement are significant and no car maker is willing to seriously bet their future on a particular technology. Even if there was a clear winner it would take a decade to set up the new production facilities. Any fuel cell technology used in vehicles needs to incorporate only readily available materials otherwise their production will hit the supply wall.

          The Toyota Mirai sells for USD57k after it gets a USD7000 subsidy. I cannot see it flying out of showrooms. Toyota has a production target of 30,000 of these on the road by 2020 – three years output, rapidly accelerating from the 1500 sales from 2013 to 2017. Toyota built 70 million vehicles over the last 7 years. So, if they meet their target by 2020, their fuel cell car will be 0.04% of their total production since its introduction. It will require a huge acceleration to get to 100% within 20 years.

          I did my degree thesis on electric vehicles and even built an electric bike 4 decades ago so I already have skin in this game – at least in terms of time invested. I doubt I will see the ubiquitous use of electric cars within the next 30 years. As stated before 8 years is an imbecilic contemplation that shows no understanding of production and supply chains.

          40

          • #
            Willard

            “because they are already pushing the lithium supply wall. Try to get any mine started inside a decade anywhere in the world”, really Rick? If your going to try and make a point try and at least make it believable.

            32

            • #
              Rick Will

              If your going to try and make a point try and at least make it believable.

              These are mines I had personal involvement with during their development and early production:
              Century lead and zinc orebody discovered 1990 began production 1999
              Roxby Downs Copper gold and uranium discovered 1979 production 1989
              Mt Weld Rare Earths discovered 1988 rare earth production 2013 (included upstream plant in Malaysia)
              Oyu Tolgoi copper discovered 2001 production 2013

              All this data can be found on the www to verify.

              Not sure if you think the 10 years was optimistic or pessimistic but experience has taught me 10 years is aggressive timescale for a mine. It takes persistence and lots of hard negotiation. If you think mines can start up overnight then you have incredibly limited knowledge of the regulations that must be met during their development and the complexities of financing new ventures in remote locations. As well as the logistics of construction and transport of supplies in and product out.

              As far as the lithium wall. This is what it looks like:
              https://assets.bwbx.io/images/i1Jtpwj9BmJM/v2/488x-1.png
              The price of lithium batteries will not hamper their use in F1 cars where budgets are limitless but for average car maker they will observe the dramatic price rise of lithium as an alarm ringing loudly. Battery prices are not coming down despite all the forecasts based on mass production.

              Most car makers are backing hydrogen where battery requirements are modest. Hydrogen is readily available and has zero recycling cost. As an energy store it costs about 2.5% of lithium battery storage.

              20

          • #
            TdeF

            Good points, logic and facts. Interesting.

            20

        • #
          AndyG55

          “it could be anywhere from 6 to 20 years”

          or 100 or 200 !!

          21

        • #

          The incredible energy density
          of hydrocarbons, made modern industry
          and modern transport a possibility,
          ending famine and early child mortality
          in the West. Whereas, intermittent-energy
          -storage,mis-nomered, renewable technology
          is sich a … well u know.

          30

    • #

      Elon the Musik Man needs lots of fresh-faced actors, along with quite a few serious, crusty types, to staff so many of his operations. Maybe Australia could do its bit for the climate by donating the services of first year NADA graduates to keep up the constant supply of cheer squads.

      Because when the world turns a bit chilly again and those grimy solar panels, whirlygigs and battery banks start to look as modern as whalebone corsets…we’re going to need a lot of cheering.

      80

  • #
    el gordo

    ‘….researchers said about $50 billion a year would be needed by 2020 to help people who lose their land and culture or are forced to migrate as a result of climate-related problems.’

    Global cooling has already begun and it may take more than $50 billion to help with the resettlement. Already in Sydney and Melbourne the indigenous population is being swamped and will soon be forced out of the cities into the outback to live out a precarious existence.

    This is not a joke, mass migration will only intensify as climate change bites.

    62

  • #
    PeterS

    As anyone who has a brain knows there’s no shortage of money. It’s the way it’s spent that’s the problem. Tax increases just proves we have failed and we are heading in the wrong direction. As for finding more money to spend on climate related problems, that’s just another way of saying let’s increases taxes even more and add some new ones. That’s a sure way of imploding anyone’s economy.

    50

    • #
      Yonniestone

      Printing more money without value is folly, if everyone quickly became Millionaires they would still end up paying a thousand dollars for a loaf of bread
      as inflation readjusted to the new valuations, this used to be explained to school children.

      60

      • #
        Dennis

        Yes, but consider the new market for wheelbarrows to carry cash in.

        40

        • #
          PeterS

          Won’t be an issue as they intend to get rid of cash and make all transactions digital. It’s inevitable for a variety of reasons, mostly so that the governments can skim more money of us poor plebs. In any case more and more people are happy to go cashless. I’m not.

          30

      • #
        toorightmate

        Oh Bummer’s arms are still sore from printing money – the bloody jerk.

        10

  • #
    Alfred (Melbourne)

    It is all about control.

    Why would oil companies fund climate change hysteria and political activism in favor of carbon taxes? Why would Rothschilds and Rockefellers be speaking out at press events about the need for carbon regulation and the impending doom of climate change? Because they’re not just “oil companies”, and they’re not just people who happen to be rich, they’re oligarchs with a major hand in every industry in the world, and their ultimate goal has nothing to do with oil or money. Their goal is power – control of other people – and through establishing a supra-national, perhaps even supra-monetary system of laws based directly on the usage of resources, they stand to gain control on a level impossible in the current paradigm.

    Since it apparently triggers ShareBlue super hard, some more information about the catastrpophic anthrpogenic CO2 global warming myth and why it’s been so heavily pushed for decades</a?

    30

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      It depends – if people realize the oligarchs are fleecing them, the people just say no and refuse.

      Then the money stops, the power ends.

      Simple.

      These people rely on bluff, when in fact the average person has more power than they realise, and the oligarchs relaise this, which is why they run massive disinformation / fear / smear campaigns against teh truth…..

      Ghandi beat the british through non-violent methods.

      The oligarchs are nasty bits of work – they will try to provoke violence ( see “One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest” as a paradigm for Murphy ( the people ) vs Rachet ( the oligarchs )) because they are inherently violent….

      10

  • #
    Neville

    Even the former leader of the free ? world can tell blatant untruths and get away with it, because he’s yapping silly BS about their so called CAGW. It’s total garbage and factually wrong, but who cares?

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andrew-bolt/warmist-obama-wrong-wrong-and-wrong/news-story/d881d57b335ce1abc465e188ceacfbdd

    60

  • #
    Tony Porter

    I wonder, has anyone bothered to point all this out to President Trump yet? I can’t help feeling that he seems to know nothing about the corruption and the real (Socialist) agendas that are behind it all. All he’s really said so far is that “it’s a hoax”, but his reasons for why he thinks it is are not even close to what the globalist bigots invented and engineered the whole thing for. He doesn’t even seem to be aware of how they intend to destroy capitalism and hope to form a Socialist UN based world government. Maybe people have tried to tell him, but like many, he dismissed it all as tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist’s paranoia, (as I used to myself).

    50

  • #
    Clyde Spencer

    “find” is a euphemism for “put their hands on.”

    20

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    Two comments in The Australian this morning might illustrate why our taxes are increasing.

    As a recent retiree, I will find it almost impossible to vote for the Liberals because they have lost trust.  After ten years planning for retirement, 12 months out – the Liberals shifter the goal posts.
    When I retired, I received the Pensioner Concession Card (PCC) and a few dollars a fortnight in pension.  A couple of months later I lost the PCC because I was a few hundred dollars over the new asset limit.  What happened after that was ridiculous:
    - 3 weeks later, I received a (cardboard) health care card
    - 3 days after that, I received another health care care – plastic this time
    - A week later I received a letter saying that the PCC would be restored following Centrelink’s catch up with three month old correspondence.
    - A new PCC was subsequently received and it was identical to the suspended card
    And now, in last week’s budget, the Liberals have realized the impact of their actions that was not thought through and restored all of the suspended PCCs.
    Lack of trust, waste and incompetence!
    The only real problem is that the ALP is will be worse.  I hope the Australian Conservatives can fill the vacancy in time.

    Janet. Let’s just find ourselves $15 billion or more right now and get rid of these taxes and the super grab.
    1. Windmills and solar hot air $ 4 billion
    2. Increased costs to govt of number 1 would be another $ 1 billion
    3. Julie Bishops increases to overseas welfare budget in the last two years $ 1 billion
    4. Julie Bishop overspending this years budgeted amount for overseas aid $600 million
    5. Our payment to the Paris Climate change scam $ 1 billion
    6. Parliamentary and govt gold plated pensions over and above industry standards $ 3 billion
    7. Submarine deal to SA. $ 10 billion
    8. NDIS overspend $ 6 billion
    9. Payments to welfare for overseas family reunion visas $ 2 billion
    10. Payments to bloated universities churning out more sports scientists.
    $ 5 billion
    11. NBN costs $ 6 billion
    12. Badgery’s Creek $ 5 billion
    Not that hard really if you really want to save money. There is more than $44 billlion above and there is more everywhere you look.

    100

    • #
      Dennis

      Consider the savings from $15 billion a year of foreigners being paid Australian welfare payments, and the numerous Non Government Organisations being paid taxpayer support (Pedestrian Council of Australia, Council for Australian Arab Relations just two on a long list) and foreign aid to distant countries, not just our region’s poorer neighbouring countries, and the list goes on and on.

      50

  • #

    Bear with me for a moment here.

    The UN says that to raise these billions, we need to impose a Carbon Tax a taxation on Carbon Dioxide emissions.

    Either they are incredibly st00pid, or they implicitly know (hand on heart know) something.

    The stated intention of a CO2 tax, (other than to raise incredible amounts of money) is to end the reign of coal fired power, as the plants progressively lower their emissions (Cap and Trade) to the point of plant closure.

    Now, if the UN’s stated intention of a CO2 tax raises their rivers of money, then, as those plants close down, there goes the source of their money, hence the UN could now be seen as being st00pid, cutting off their major source of their rivers of money.

    Either that, or they know (hand on heart know) that all those already Industrialised Countries just CANNOT get by without coal fired power CO2 emitting power plants, hence, they have an absolutely captive source for their billions.

    For example, take the closure of the Hazelwood plant. At the former (pre Abbott) rate of the CO2 tax, Hazelwood would have to pay $360 Million each year. All that is gone now, and as more of our plants close, there again goes their endless source of their big buck billions. Just three plants, and there goes a billion.

    And I wonder who might be the biggest source of those rivers of money for the UN?

    Just from the generation of electrical power alone in the U.S. (from all CO2 emitting sources, Coal fired and Natural Gas fired the largest) and using the same dollar value we had here in Oz, (pre Abbott) that would see $80 Billion a year.

    Shut that down, Not on your life.

    Yep! They know all right.

    And please don’t try and tell me that when we are talking 300 plus billions, there won’t be corruption on a grand scale.

    Tony.

    132

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      Hmmm…..the UN…..

      - huge international bureacracy
      - not answerable to anyone
      - funded by govts world wide
      - is knowingly destroying western civilisation
      - while doing us over?

      What could possibly go wrong…..?

      The question is – why are we funding such an organization?

      Dare I raise the T****** word?

      70

    • #
      TdeF

      Agreed. It was like the taxation on sugary drinks, ostensibly to reduce their consumption. When you read the projected incomes, there was no expectation that consumption would actually go down. Similarly with all taxation. In fact governments desperately need consumption to stay the same or increase.

      So you have well meaning doctors this week proposing taxes on high sugar food to combat obesity in children. It just means the cost of food goes up but the food consumption does not change. If the portions do get smaller, you can be sure that the prices will not go down, but that happens without taxation. More taxation is just more taxation, money for public servants to spend on themselves and socialists to spend on their own pet schemes to make their world better, not yours.

      However never before has our country had to pay $6Billion a year for nothing at all like the RET. Weatherill does not buy all those windmills. We did, but we own nothing. Most of the cash fled the country anyway. Then these private companies charge us for ‘free’ power whenever they want, not when we need it. Ditto for home solar. We pay for them and then we have to pay for their ‘free’ power, again whether we want it or not.

      This is not taxation, it is a break with the medieval prohibition on enrichment of others ordered by the Crown and in law usually requires restitution. It was the reason for Magna Carta, revolt of people being unfairly taxed to enrich King John.

      I would guess the windfarms and private solar people now owe us about $30Billion. Cash please.

      70

      • #
        TdeF

        Or they can hand over the windmills for which we have already paid, so at least what power they do produce is free.

        30

        • #
          TdeF

          Interesting though. The states own the minerals. Otherwise they are free, as with coal, gold etc. There are taxes after the Eureka Stockade and a mining licence.

          Daniel Andrews this year forced the closure of Hazelwood by suddenly increasing brown coal prices 300% without adequate reason. That’s a lot more than the CPI. The resources in the ground, coal, iron, gold, oil, gas are owned by the State Government. However I doubt Daniel could charge anything for wind.

          However if the basis of the RET was found to be unconstitutional and the law invalid, by way of restitution the recipients would owe us the money. Then we, the people, would own windmills and the government would earn nothing and could charge for nothing. The poles and wires retailers could manage and maintain them and a whole layer of cost would be gone. Exciting. Windmill power would be 0c kw/hr, as if that mattered anyway.

          50

    • #

      Note here that this new taxation proposal is only aimed at already developed Countries.

      Those Countries still developing are not subject to these CO2 Taxes. All they need do is to rake in all the money.

      Notice also, in reference to earlier posts and comments that China is constructing those new HELE large scale coal fired power plants in those developing Countries, 31 Countries in fact.

      So, effectively, with the money being provided by those already developed Countries, those still developing Countries are constructing, umm, coal fired power plants.

      Part of the original Kyoto, and I would also mention that part of any new deal already in place, say, like Paris, is that those Developed Countries are not allowed to construct new coal fired plants, and this was actually a provision of Kyoto.

      The U.S. which never signed up to Kyoto got around it anyway. All their coal fired plants were old to ancient as they dragged themselves out of the dark ages, beginning at the end of the Second World War. (see this Post of mine at this link) After utilising coal fired power for that, they have, and still are replacing all their old coal fired plants with new Natural Gas fired plants. They can do that because of all the gas they now have. In fact add up all the closed coal fired power, (actual generation here and not Nameplate) and the new gas fired power generates more than they have closed down. They know, as some of us do that the only replacement for large scale power generation is with power plants which can actually deliver those large amounts of power.

      China, well what do they care. They are constructing new large scale coal fired plants wherever they can, in their own Country, and now in many many others. They have the technology to do that now, and this effectively makes China look okay in those Countries.

      As for us, well we have people who won’t allow us to do what they have no qualms about doing.

      There’ll come a time when we have no money left, and, oh, no effective electrical power generation. It’ll be too late then to scratch your head and wonder what just happened then.

      All OUR money is being used to construct something WE are not allowed to have.

      No money, no power. What then?

      Oh, and one last thing. If the UN is so hell bent on telling us that the emissions of CO2 from power plants is so d@mned bad, why are they just turning a blind eye to what is happening with the construction of new coal fired plants virtually all across the Planet, except in already developed Countries that is. That does not concern them in the least. Why is that?

      Surely it’s not just about the money.

      Tony.

      92

    • #
      toorightmate

      Tony,
      Corruption within the UN!!!!!!
      Wash your mouth out with soap young man.

      30

  • #
    David Maddison

    There is only so much wealth that can be sucked out of the economy before collapse is inevitable. “Innovative” taxes is simply code for arbitrary confiscation of wealth. The latest example of such an arbitrary confiscation is the Turnbull Party’s decision in the latest Australian budget to “tax” i.e. confiscate $6.2 billion out of the banks, which of course, will come directly out of the pockets of consumers and shareholders. They really are trying hard to destroy the economy, as is also happening in other Western countries. Climate Change (TM) and the mass immigration of uneducated, unassimilable and violent people from the Third World are the two weapons being used by the elites to destroy Western Civilisation.

    82

    • #
      mikewaite

      David I believe that your comments are completely valid for most western economies , but Australia is not your average western economy. It is one of the richest countries in the world .
      According to statistics from various sources

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP)_per_capita

      Australia has a GDP/capita of 46 – 48 thousand International dollars(Int$), similar to that of Germany , but 6000 more than UK , and 8-10thousand less than USA.
      Consequently Australians can afford to indulge in numerous Green initiatives , acquiring the satisfying glow that they are saving the world, before their standard of living falls to that of the average UK citizen , which is actually quite comfortable at present (until the marxists get in on June 8th).
      Rich people can afford to play games and the Green game is the best one around at the moment.

      20

  • #
    Roger

    Corrupt third world politicians, AGW ‘prophets’ and green enviro-activist organisations will become the wealthiest on the planet if this is allowed to proceed.

    They will then claim to have saved the poverty stricken people of the world at the same time as they keep them starving and facing major respiratory disease and early death through denying them electricity.

    There is an inherent evilness within the AGW religion that brings a foul corruption with it.

    The Northern Hemisphere has had an unusually cold, and continuing to be so, spring. With the sun in a very quiet and inactive phase the AGW religion knows it must grab what it can before it is fully exposed for the scam it is.

    80

  • #
    pat

    let’s look at the writer of the article, Laurie Goering:

    Skoll.org: Laurie Goering, Head of Climate Programme, Thomson Reuters Foundation
    Laurie Goering edits the Thomson Reuters Foundation’s award-winning daily news website on the humanitarian and development impacts of climate change. As part of her work, she created and mentors a network of more than 100 developing world climate change journalists.
    The website she runs has won a broad range of awards, including the Society of Publishers in Asia award for “excellence in reporting on the environment” in 2016 and the Asian Environmental Journalism award for “excellence in environmental reporting by a media organisation” in 2015 and 2013. The journalists she trained and mentors also have won numerous awards, scholarships and reporting fellowships.
    Prior to coming to the Thomson Reuters Foundation in 2009, she worked as a foreign correspondent for the Chicago Tribune newspaper for 15 years…

    Twitter: Laurie Goering
    https://twitter.com/lauriegoering?lang=en

    14 May: Reuters: Laurie Goering: INTERVIEW-Glitter or green? Sydney’s big bash gives way to speed climate action
    One of the highlights of the Sydney social calendar has long been the spectacular Lord Mayor’s New Year’s Eve party, held each year at the iconic Sydney Opera House.
    This year, however, the money put into hosting the exclusive bash for the city’s well-heeled has been reallocated to something more important, the mayor says: Ramping up action on climate change.
    “People have been quite amazed that I’d do something so radical,” said Sydney’s Lord Mayor Clover Moore…

    So the approximately A$750,000 ($560,000) cost of Sydney’s big bash is now instead going toward things such as 10 new urban parks over the next year, a zero-carbon building competition, efforts to help tenants access renewable energy, retrofitting buildings for energy efficiency and expanding efforts to help commercial buildings cut their emissions.

    Creating climate-friendly projects that people can see and benefit from on a daily basis – particularly new parks but also bike lanes and pedestrian-only streets – is crucial to building and maintaining support for action on climate change, Moore told the Thomson Reuters Foundation in a telephone interview.
    “People can’t see emissions reductions,” she said. But giving residents visual signs of green progress – amenities they want that also happen to cut emissions – “creates some ownership,” said the mayor, who walks in the city’s parks most days with her husband and dogs.

    The emissions-cutting moves are part of the city’s broader Sustainable Sydney 2030 plan, which aims to reduce the city’s emissions by 70 percent by 2030 and make it carbon neutral by 2050…
    So far, the city’s emissions have fallen by a little over a quarter since 2006 – despite a 25 percent growth in population and about A$26 billion ($19 billion) spent on development in the city since she took office, Moore said…
    That’s happened despite an indifferent or occasionally even hostile attitude toward climate action by Australia’s national government, which under former Prime Minister Tony Abbott scaled back carbon reduction efforts, disbanded a key climate advisory group and was widely seen as obstructing action on climate change.
    Such foot-dragging has happened despite clear evidence of the damage climate change is causing in Australia, such as blistering heatwaves and worsening bleaching and die-back of large parts of the country’s famed Great Barrier Reef, Moore said.
    That the United States now also is slamming the brakes on climate action under President Donald Trump is “very distressing, frankly,” she said.
    “What’s heartbreaking is the damage governments can do in a short time when they’re in power. The clock is ticking (on climate change), we’re aware there’s so much to do and we’re still fighting these battles,” she said…
    The level of support for the city’s green ambitions is evident in the mayor’s own longevity…
    http://www.reuters.com/article/australia-sydney-climatechange-idUKL8N1IE4UJ

    10

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      It seems these days “radical” is no suprise…only those who have signed up to “The Cause” get the top jobs…

      Hmmm…how many times have I said the Establishment is part of the green lunacy….?

      10

  • #
    pat

    from the following participants:

    PDF: 293 pages: UNFCCC: BONN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
    Provisional list of registered participants
    The official document containing the final list of participants will be issued on Thursday, 18 May 2017.
    Parties/Observer states: 2,052 participants
    NGOs: 379 organisations 1,478 participants
    Total: 3940 participants
    http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2017/sb/eng/PLOP.pdf

    Reuters Thomson Foundation CAGW activist Goering chose to reference Heinrich Boll, but didn’t mention:

    Heinrich Boll: Who we are (excerpts)
    The Heinrich Böll Foundation is closely affiliated to the ***German Green Party…
    The Heinrich Böll Foundation is a catalyst for green visions and projects, a think tank for policy reform, and an international network. We work with 200 project partners in over 60 countries and currently maintain 32 international offices…
    Our Washington, DC office is a 501(c)(3) organization that provides expertise on issues related to our mission…

    9 May: Heinrich Boll Stiftung: Financing Loss and Damage: A Look at Governance and Implementation Options
    by Julie-Anne Richards, Liane Schalatek
    To read the full report, click here (LINK)…
    ***In the end, while technical discussions and the development of criteria and methodologies matter, ultimately, this is a highly political and deeply moral issue…
    http://us.boell.org/2017/05/09/financing-loss-and-damage-look-governance-and-implementation-options

    about the report’s authors:

    Climate Justice Org: Julie-Anne Richards (Manager – International Policy)
    Julie-Anne co-authored the report, Carbon Majors Funding Loss and Damage for the Climate Justice Programme. For more than a decade she has been part of campaigns fighting climate change. She coordinated strategy and lobbying campaigns at Climate Action Network International, an organisation with more than 700 member organisations in 90 countries. As Advocacy Coordinator for Oxfam Australia she played a key role in establishing Oxfam in the policy and campaigning climate change space within Australia, and co-authored a key Oxfam International paper on equity and climate change. At Climate Action Network Australia she successfully expanded climate change outside of the environment sector and facilitated a new approach to campaigning which led to a shift in awareness and increased concern about climate change. Her campaign and communication success draws from her previous career in marketing in the private sector.

    1millionwomen Australia: Celebrating inspiring women: Liane Schalatek
    http://www.1millionwomen.com.au/blog/celebrating-inspiring-women-liane-schalatek/

    10

  • #
    bullocky

    ‘…..$300 billion a year needed to help countries deal with unavoidable climate losses will have to come from innovative new sources, such as a financial transaction tax or carbon tax, researchers say.’

    ‘Researchers’ will, no doubt, be notable beneficiaries of such a fund. It’s difficult to determine what is and what is not, objective research. …. Especially when no examples of ‘unavoidable climate losses’ were given.

    20

    • #
      el gordo

      Its a given, rising oceans and extreme weather.

      Global cooling will create more extreme weather events, but that’s unavoidable.

      20

      • #
        Dennis

        The End To The Age Of Abundance.

        At least for a while!

        10

      • #
        bullocky

        ‘…rising oceans and extreme weather’ are, of course, features of natural variation too.
        A claim such as ‘climate losses are unavoidable’ needs extant examples to distinguish it from ‘weather losses are unavoidable’.
        Perhaps this wasn’t the intention of the ‘researchers’?

        For credibility, both the citing journalist and the cited researchers need to establish their objective bona fides.

        (Unless they reasonably expect an uncritical audience)

        10

  • #
    pat

    ***$100 trillion is the magic figure – watch your Super/pension funds:

    16 May: Marketwatch: Opinion: Green bonds in Africa could be one way out for a zero-yield world
    By David Marsh
    The new frontier for Africa may be the issuance of green bonds to finance environmentally friendly development projects including infrastructure, under a range of initiatives by governments, banks and international development agencies.
    A panel on green-bond issuance, with around 100 participants, was one of the best attended sessions at last week’s African capital markets conference in Nairobi organized by the International Finance Corp. (IFC), the private-sector arm of the World Bank. It featured presentations from Barclays, Citibank, the Kenyan Bankers Association and the London Stock Exchange. As one speaker said, three or four years ago only a handful of delegates would have taken part…

    Jingdong Hua, IFC’s treasurer, points to $40 trillion of fixed-income placements in industrialized economies in low- or negative-interest instruments. He urges investment groups and pension funds to become more adventurous in funneling capital to developing economies…
    IFC is placing $325 million in a green-bond fund for developing markets, under a move announced in March. The IFC has partnered with Amundi, the European asset manager, to raise up to $2 billion from other international investors to create the biggest-yet green bond fund for emerging markets.
    Other groups such as the European Investment Bank and KfW, the German state financing agency, are both issuers of and investors in green bonds.

    ***The worldwide green-bond market totals less than $1 trillion, a tiny part of the overall fixed-income sector of around ***$100 trillion. But issuance has picked up, driven by worldwide accord on anti-climate change measures in Paris in December 2015, adroit marketing by investment management groups, and demand for environmental instruments from governments and investors around the world…

    Issuance this year is forecast at $110 billion to $120 billion, above the record $93 billion in 2016. Because demand outstrips supply, green bonds appear to be performing better than standard bonds in the aftermarket, although the paucity of longer-term data makes it impossible to discern whether this is a durable trend…

    One of the drawbacks is lack of international standardization of what constitutes a green bond. There is no worldwide monitoring mechanism to ensure compliance with the parameters set by frameworks such as the Green Bonds Principles or Climate Bonds Standards, adding to market fragmentation. To improve certification procedures, the Bank of England and People’s Bank of China are combining forces under an initiative spurred by the Group of 20 leading economies.
    As emerging-market green bonds attain greater scale, one area of demand will be the Nordic pension funds and public-sector agencies.
    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/green-bonds-in-africa-could-be-one-way-out-for-a-zero-yield-world-2017-05-16

    20

    • #
      PeterS

      Climate bonds (aka Green bonds) could be our modern version of the Tulip Mania. Timing will be key as usual.

      10

  • #
    pat

    16 May: ModernDiplomacyEU: Comparisons between China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative and the Sustainable Development Goals
    By Stella Papadopoulou
    Speaking at a major international conference in Beijing, United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres today drew comparisons between China’s ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative and the Sustainable Development Goals, saying both are rooted in a shared vision for global development.
    “Both strive to create opportunities, global public goods and win-win cooperation. And both aim to deepen ‘connectivity’ across countries and regions: connectivity in infrastructure, trade, finance, policies and, perhaps most important of all, among peoples,” the Secretary-General said addressing Chinese President Xi Jinping and dozens of other state leaders at the Belt and Road Forum…

    “In order for the participating countries along the Belt and Road to fully benefit from the potential of enhanced connectivity, it is crucial to strengthen the links between the Initiative and the Sustainable Development Goals,” Mr. Guterres noted, adding that the 17 Goals can guide the policies and actions under the Belt and Road towards true sustainable development…

    “With the initiative expected to generate vast investments in infrastructure, let us seize the moment to help countries make the transition to clean-energy, low-carbon pathways – instead of locking in unsustainable practices for decades to come,” he said, praising Chinese leadership on climate change…ETC
    http://moderndiplomacy.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2595:comparisons-between-china-s-one-belt-one-road-initiative-and-the-sustainable-development-goals&Itemid=135

    15 May: ClimateChangeNews: Megan Darby: China’s Xi promises green ‘belt and road’ investment strategy
    Sunday’s summit represents the latest Chinese move to own the globalisation agenda as rival superpower the US retreats into protectionism…
    China leads the world in mass production of solar panels and other clean energy technologies, a growing export market…
    At the same time, it is the world’s biggest investor in coal power development overseas, which threatens to bust international climate goals.
    A report (LINK) published this month by the Global Environment Institute (GEI) showed China is involved in 240 coal-fired projects totalling 251GW across the “belt and road” countries. That figure includes 52 in planning stages and 51 under construction, as well as those built since 2001…

    While not directly addressing the impact of coal in his speech, president Xi called for innovation to promote “a way of life and work that is green, low-carbon, circular and sustainable”.
    To support the innovation agenda, he said China will set up 50 joint laboratories, train 5,000 foreign scientists and fund 2,500 short-term research visits to China from abroad. Specifically on ecological and environmental protection, Xi promised “a big data service platform”…

    Many high-level delegates praised China’s outreach, but India was notable by its absence. Narendra Modi’s government issued a statement questioning ***(LINK) the environmental and financial sustainability of China’s overseas investments…
    http://www.climatechangenews.com/2017/05/15/chinas-xi-promises-green-belt-road-investment-strategy/

    ***linked from above:

    14 May: Times of India: India slams China’s One Belt One Road initiative, says it violates sovereignty
    by Indrani Bagchi TNN
    In a strongly-worded statement on the eve of the event, which will see participation of more than 60 countries, India escalated its opposition to OBOR, suggesting that the project is little more than a colonial enterprise, leaving debt and broken communities in its wake…

    Sri Lanka is a big example, where an unviable Hambantota port project has left Colombo reeling under $8 billion debt…
    Like Sri Lanka, where an unviable Hambantota port project has left Colombo reeling under an $8 billion debt, Pakistan may be headed in the same direction; Laos is trying to renegotiate a railway project, Myanmar has asked for its own renegotiation; a Belgrade-Budapest railway line to be built by China is under investigation by the EU.
    Chinese infrastructure projects in foreign countries are typically executed by state-owned enterprises, while financing programmes, which initially appear attractive, sour quickly…
    Xi has given this summit top billing, projecting himself as the world’s latest globalisation guru at a time when the West appears to be in retreat…

    20

  • #
    pat

    16 May: ModernDiplomacyEU: Annual UN Asia-Pacific policy forum session spotlights poverty eradication, sustainable energy
    During the week-long session, participants will review and endorse a number of resolutions and policies, including a regional plan for implementing the SDGs. The plan – known as the Regional Road Map for Implementing the 2030 Agenda – sets out priorities for regional cooperation, calls for enhanced technical cooperation on areas such as disaster risk reduction and climate change, and discusses data and statistics, and other means of implementing the SDGs…

    In a video message to the Commission, Secretary-General António Guterres lauded ESCAP for its efforts to reduce poverty, protect the environment and help to realize the 2030 Agenda.“Your spirit of openness and willingness to work beyond borders is critical to enhancing multilateralism,” the Secretary-General said.Among the topics to be discussed this week is regional cooperation for sustainable energy in the region, which is a special theme of this year’s meeting.

    In her speech, (ESCAP Executive Secretary Shamshad) Akhtar said ESCAP’s flagship study, which will be presented on Friday to high-level officials but is now available online, recommends developing a regional cooperation framework on sustainable energy to enable Governments to identify ways to transition its energy uses to more sustainable methods.
    http://moderndiplomacy.eu/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2598:annual-un-asia-pacific-policy-forum-session-spotlights-poverty-eradication-sustainable-energy&Itemid=178

    United Nations: ESCAP
    http://www.unescap.org/

    15 May: NewHampshire1: Mount Washington breaks snow record with nearly 3 feet; observers celebrate with ice cream
    By Ryan Breton, NH1 Meteorologist
    The mid-May nor’easter that brought heavy rain and a brief change to snow for some packed a punch on Mount Washington.
    Weather observers at the summit say it snowed for 38 continuous hours – with the final flakes falling Monday afternoon.

    This long-duration snowfall amounted to over 33 inches. This broke the record for the summit’s largest snowstorm ever recorded in May. It also broke the 24-hour May snowfall record with 22.9 inches in a 24-hour period.
    Observers celebrated the ‘milestone’ with ice cream outside Monday afternoon, in a photo posted to their social media accounts. PIC…
    http://www.nh1.com/news/mount-washington-breaks-snow-record-with-nearly-3-feet-observers-celebrate-with-ice-cream/

    10

  • #
    ROM

    Dear Sirs,
    I have recently completed a study on a bridge across the Straits of Gibraltar between the white ruled continent of Europe and the white colonialist deprived nations of Africa and the Middle East.

    Such a bridge because of its very high”Estimated” cost of one trillion, seven hundred million, six hundred and fifty three thousand, two hundred and twenty six dollars and twenty seven cents would be initially a single lane one way bridge that would enable the colonially exploited and deceitfully deprived African and Middle East refugees to walk, ride and travel to the white dominated and wealthy Europe by a much safer and faster method than risking their lives crossing the Mediterranean in leaky boats.

    The initial one lane, one way bridge would be financed in its entirety by the white ruled nations of Europe in recognition of the evils they inflicted on Afriican nations during the colonial exploitation period of a century ago

    One trillion dollars of the Estimated cost of the initial across the Gibraltar Straits bridge construction would be set aside to be administered by the various UN based African orientated NGO’s as incentives to African leaders and their relatives to participate in and to agree to the construction such a grandiose bridging endeavour of a significant world stature.

    As the Wealth equalisation between the white skinned European colonialist exploiters and the deprived African and middle east refugees becomes more balanced it will be necessary to build the second lane for the bridge to cater for those Africans and Middle East refugees who wish to return home to visit families left behind and to return bringing their extended clan and family members with them.

    Such a second lane will need to be reinforced to handle the weight of the Mercedes and Ferraris and etc of the returning Africans and middle east refugees.

    This second lane I envisage would be required within a period of a decade.
    It would be fianced by a levy on each white skinned European resident as a recompense for their past colonial exploitation of Africans, for such time as it will take to pay for the entire construction and future maintenance of the proposed cross Gibraltar Straits bridge.

    Technical and construction details of the proposed Gibraltar Straits bridge can be found in the two page attached addendum.

    Yours in trust

    ROM.

    ————-

    Addendum;

    Strait of Gibraltar crossing

    30

  • #
    • #
      Dennis

      Does she mean the lack of abortions for the mothers of UN climate change “scientists”, if only?

      30

    • #
      PeterS

      So sad and pathetic there are people who think that way. Makes me sick actually.

      10

    • #
      Mark M

      Unfortunately for the rest of us, Gloria’s parents didn’t practice Gloria’s feminist, global warming planet saving suggestions.

      10

  • #
    Fin of The West

    Probably off topic, but maybe related, is the fact that my home and contents insurance premiums increased by a whopping 38% this year. When I phoned up as to inquire why my premiums had gone up at least 10x inflation, the answer literally left me speechless.

    The person on the other end of the phone line informed me that my premiums have increased due to “increased risk of storms and cyclones….” After picking myself up off the floor, I mentioned that I live in Perth (WA), where there are rarely ever any cyclones and over the last few years the frequency of winter storms has probably been flat if not lower. He did qualify his statement afterwards saying it was because of increased cyclone activity in Queensland.

    Much as I’d like to be nearer Queensland, I’m about 3300 kms from the coast of Queensland. Indirect taxation seems to be the only way to raise the sums they’re talking about. Insurers are inserting blanket “Climate Change” references everywhere – this has to stop. If the Taxing Elites want some more of my money, they’re not getting it this time! I switched insurers and got a quote that was $20 bucks a month less than I was paying anyway. So there!


    Wow?! Thanks for that Fin. No one can even predict rainfall cycles here let alone storm frequency. – Jo

    30

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘The changes to the nature of extreme weather events, brought on by climate change, will occur in an environment where extreme weather has already become more devastating and expensive for many communities. The increasing migration and expansion of Australian communities, and their insured assets, into locations with significant exposures to extreme weather has already contributed to growth in disaster losses over the last 40 years. Increased losses have been most notable where population increases have not been accompanied by implementation of risk appropriate building codes, land-use planning, and localised defensive infrastructure.’

      Insurance Council of Australia

      10

  • #
    pat

    read all:

    16 May: WindPowerEngineering: Paul Dvorak: Your wind turbine’s power and data cables may be wearing faster than you think
    The biggest problem with closely arranging cables in this manner is there can be as many as 16 tightly bundled together, twisting and rubbing against each other. This arrangement creates excessive heat and wears down the jacket insulation, ultimately exposing a cable conductor which can carry between 600 to 1,000V…

    This wear can appear only a few months after the start of operations but is often missed or overlooked during end-of-warranty inspections or when competing with other major corrective action. It’s no surprise that the abrasion issue can eventually lead to turbine faults and downtime, and in worst cases, serious injury to technicians. “Over the past 15 years, I have visited many wind farms with trash containers filled with worn cables that had been cut out of the drip loop,” says Jim Moorman, Wind Industry Manager at Lapp USA, a global cable manufacturer…
    http://www.windpowerengineering.com/dw-sync/wind-turbines-power-data-cables-may-wearing-faster-think/

    16 May: UK Telegraph: Jillian Ambrose: World’s largest wind turbines may double in size before 2024
    Dong Energy will officially open the second phase of its giant Burbo Bank offshore wind farm off the coast of Merseyside coast later today by showcasing its 8MW turbines, the largest ever used.
    The 258MW Burbo Bank project includes 32 turbines which stand almost 640 feet high, taller than the Gherkin in London, across an area the size of 5824 football pitches…
    But Benj Sykes, the UK boss for Dong Energy wind power business, has said he may be cutting the ribbon on turbines double this size by 2024…
    “We’re already talking about the need to scale up the current turbine range to between 12GW to 15GW as part of the cost reduction journey. I think we will see that scale of turbine come in but we’re not sure from who, or when,” he added…
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/05/16/worlds-largest-wind-turbines-may-double-size-2024/

    16 May: Daily Caller: Andrew Follett: Wind Turbine Tips Over And Crushes Truck [PHOTOS]
    A wind turbine’s blade tipped over and crushed a truck on a German highway Tuesday morning, after a truck transporting the massive blade was involved in an accident.
    The giant turbine blade blocked the entire highway after a truck transporting it was involved in an accident on the A33 autobahn near Bielefeld, Germany. The highway has been closed in both directions, causing several miles of traffic jams…
    A 61-year-old driver was injured in the incident and had his vehicle badly damaged, according to The Telegraph (LINK)…
    There is increasing concern about wind turbines in Germany, as wind power has failed to meet the country’s stated energy goals, even after over $1.1 trillion was spent…
    http://dailycaller.com/2017/05/16/wind-turbine-tips-over-and-crushes-truck-photos/

    20

  • #
    pat

    17 May: Bloomberg: Jess Shankleman: How Scottish Wind Power Beat Trump But Lost the War
    Trump lost a legal fight to keep offshore windmills from spoiling the views from his Scottish golf course. Years later, there’s still none there and the industry nationwide has missed its ambitious goals
    Five years on, Trump’s ambitions have taken him to the White House. But instead of the 950 offshore turbines Scotland envisioned by the end of 2017, it has only 63 because of legal battles, geographical challenges and caps on government aid.
    The swooshing blades out at sea were a pivotal part of the nationalist-led Scottish government’s goal to get 100 percent of the nation’s electricity from renewable sources by 2020…

    In 2011, when the Scottish National Party won a landslide election victory, the government predicted the offshore industry could create as many as 28,377 jobs and be worth as much as 7.1 billion pounds ($9.1 billion) by 2020. Less than a tenth of those jobs have materialized so far with just about 500 people working in Scottish offshore wind, according to the Office for National Statistics…
    So far none of the turbines are disrupting the maritime view from Trump’s golf course on the northeast coast…

    Scottish judges paved the way for as much as 10 billion pounds to be invested in offshore wind power this week by overturning an original ruling that said the turbines would kill too many birds.
    Marine energy also hasn’t been working out as planned. The goal to harness 25 percent of Europe’s tidal power and 10 percent of its wave power from Scottish waters became more of a research and development activity than industrial strategy. Two of the most promising wave converter companies went bust.
    “I don’t think there are clear elements in place between the people who want to build the clean energy projects and the government’s vision,” said Tok Aisake, 40, a Fijian-born national working on the Vattenfall wind farm project…

    It may be just a case of over-lofty ambition in a country run by politicians championing Scotland’s potential to go it alone…
    The Scottish minister in charge of renewable energy didn’t respond to requests for a comment. Alex Salmond, Scotland’s former first minister who oversaw the original renewable energy target, said delays to offshore wind may be a good thing, though…READ ALL
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-05-17/scotland-fights-to-keep-its-renewable-energy-dream-alive

    10

  • #
    Mark M

    BoM Fails. Again.

    Carbon (sic) forced Climate outlook overview, Issued: 27 April 2017:

    May to July rainfall likely to be below average over the southern two-thirds of mainland Australia.
    May is likely to be drier than average over most of Australia, except far northern Australia and Tasmania.
    http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/outlooks/?cid=001tw64#/overview/summary

    Reality: More than a month’s worth of rain could fall in three days
    But for one populated pocket of Queensland the drenching could be even more disastrous with up to five times the average rainfall for May falling.

    The Bureau of Meteorology has issued a flood watch for Queensland coastal catchments from Cairns to Gladstone, including Townsville, Mackay and Rockhampton.

    http://www.couriermail.com.au/technology/more-than-a-months-worth-of-rain-could-fall-in-three-days/news-story/43722c454c47b2a01b01d038022ee632

    Only on the planet Itsacon, the climate never changes.

    10

  • #
    John Watt

    Reminds one of the Australian Federal Budget process. Put some airy-fairy concept into the budget that is outside the lifetime of the current Parliament so you won’t have to explain why it did not happen but you can claim were “smart” enough to cover it with a budget provision of “funny money”.
    In the real world we have a few “white elephant” desalination plants that originated from this type of foggy thinking.
    Perhaps someone like Bjorn Lomborg should be on this case.

    10

  • #
    Ted O'Brien

    When did this kind of thing start, and where will it finish. A paragraph from today’s Oz.

    “In December, the EU’s executive started infringement cases against seven EU member states, among them Britain and Germany, for failure to adequately punish German carmaker Volkswagen for manipulating its diesel emissions figures.”

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/italy-faces-eu-legal-action-over-fiat/news-story/0b033a3c413ef74f4b1700e0c1c7ff4c

    This is what they’ll be doing with their extra $300 billion!

    10

  • #
    Ted O'Brien

    #37 was meant to be a reply to #35.

    10

  • #
    Colin Carrick

    Sounds very much like the circumstances in Yanis Voroufakis book ‘Adults in te Room’ the Greek Bail out is basically bailing out German anf French Banks, are we all bailing out the bankers? STrange this originated in Germany.

    00

  • #
    Peterg

    In prior times central government needed some sort of convincing ideology to get the peasants to pay taxes so central services could happen. Every now and then the ideology would be proved false because bad stuff happened even though they prayed really hard and followed all the obscure rules, with the result that civilization would collapse until some new ideology developed. I don’t know where I am going with this but as a convincing ideology the climate change meme doesn’t do it for this peasant.

    00