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

Books

Event in Brisbane Friday: Mark Latham, Malcolm Roberts, Ross Cameron “Cost-of-Living”

Cost of Living Summit, One Nation, October 2017

Click to enlarge

What a fantastic line-up of speakers at the One Nation, Cost of Living Summit on Friday 13th October, 9.30-4pm.

Go see Malcolm Roberts, Mark Latham, Ross Cameron, Graham Young, Tim Andrews, Dr Alan Moran, Prof Tony Makin, and Dr Dan Mitchell (USA) and others speak on Friday at the Queensland Parliament House, LC (red chamber):  Just $20.

https://www.trybooking.com/book/event?eid=323166

From the flyer:

Australians are facing severe cost-of-living pressures and decreasing living standards caused by Federal and State governments who no longer represent everyday Australians. Pauline Hanson’s One Nation party are bringing together experts in tax, regulation, money, banking, housing, farming and energy who will highlight the key issues driving our high cost-of-living in Australia.

Our Cost-of-Living Summit will demonstrate how excessive government interventions have created a mess in the energy market resulting in our unaffordable power prices, and how we can remove these drivers of high costs to create a fairer and more affordable future. One Nation wants to set our nation free, harness human ingenuity and resourcefulness to create a better Australia for all Australians.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (60 votes cast)
Event in Brisbane Friday: Mark Latham, Malcolm Roberts, Ross Cameron "Cost-of-Living", 9.5 out of 10 based on 60 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/y6wx9ren

72 comments to Event in Brisbane Friday: Mark Latham, Malcolm Roberts, Ross Cameron “Cost-of-Living”

  • #
    Leonard Lane

    Another positive sign from Australia. I hope the results are straightforward and address the electricity generation/price problems in detail

    120

  • #
    Dennis

    “Climate Change Is Real

    RACHEL BAXENDALE
    Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg has hit back at Tony Abbott, declaring “climate change is real”.”

    Relax, we’re in good hands people

    93

    • #
      Another Ian

      Time to bring on that song from Li’l Abner

      - or perhaps one of the wordsmiths could update it to the present

      70

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Well, now is probably not the best time to point out to Josh Fryenberg that there are dust bunnies under his bed, and they are real, and just as dangerous as climate change.

      190

      • #
        Another Ian

        RW

        You realise that those dust bunnies are really ghost turds?

        50

      • #
        Rod Stuart

        That reminds me of my grandfather mocking an immigrant Lancashireman to the Red River Valley in Manitoba.
        Apparently, soon after arriving about 1900, this fellow wrote to his friends and relations across the sea “This country has two native animals; the buffalo and the gopher. Of the two, the gopher is much more ferocious”.
        The idea that a gopher is “ferocious” This the locals as about as dumb as a person could get.

        20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          I don’t know about that Rod. The gophers that invade my yard from time to time are ferocious enough to try to tackle the metal trap I set for them… …and then they’re mine to “nail up on the barn door”.

          Buffalo don’t invade my yard so I have no basis for comparison. ;-)

          00

    • #
      toorightmate

      Dennis,
      I agree.
      Climate change is real.
      Climate has always changed and will always change AND CObloody2 has nothing whatsoever to do with those changes.

      150

    • #
      AndyG55

      ““Climate Change Is Real”..

      OK, apart from a fraction of a degree rise in the much fabricated nonsense of the “global average temperature”…

      In what way has the climate changed over the last 100 years ?

      Its a simple question.

      42

      • #
        David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

        G’day Andy,
        I’ll attempt an answer, in three parts:
        a) there has been a small amount of warming, a continuation of the warming which ended the LIA; but a single century borders on the insignificant;
        b) similarly there has been a small increase in sea levels in geological stable sites, possibly from the same source, but much larger variations have occurred over geological time; and
        c) in my opinion, the most obvious examples of climate change are the ice ages, and the inter-glacials between them, again over geological time scales.

        Cheers,
        Dave B

        21

      • #
        Wayne Job

        Where I live in South Gippsland the climate changes every day, showers and cold today, but I call climate change weather.

        21

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Time and time again the catch cry is “climate change is real”.
      Problem is, no one ever defines what that is supposed to mean.

      41

  • #
    TdeF

    The Australian Newspaper is making a great contribution. Front page two economists questioning whether economically and socially crippling Australia makes a difference to world temperatures. The Editorial makes the same point.

    Even if man made Global Warming was real, so what? As Tony Abbott points out, our largest export is being banned at home. We cannot use what we are selling because we are trying to save the people to whom we are selling it? That’s like Alfred Nobel banning guns in his house because he cares.

    Worse, there is this fracture in the logic that the CO2 increase is ‘obviously’ man made? The emotional logic is that machines are polluting by definition,factories are dirty and the 40% CO2 increase is somehow caused by the industrial revolution? No, it is not true. Has anyone even tried to prove this?

    We have known since C14 radio carbon dating was invented that there is precious little man released CO2 in the air. Under 2%. This is not mentioned on the front page, nor in the editorial. Everyone accepts the idea that man has increased the CO2.

    This is nonsense built on a fantasy wrapped in absurdity and without evidence. If the CO2 increase is not man made, how can any warming be man made? Then if we shut all our factories, stop our cars and sit around in hair shirts, what difference would it make to the world?

    The CO2 level is set by the sun, the ocean surface temperature. Henry’s Law. We cannot influence it. 98% of all CO2 gas is dissolved in the ocean with a half life of 14 years. This is real science, not presumption.

    As for the latest notion that the government has infinite money and can just compensate everyone in cash, you have to be kidding. The government is broke. The country owes $500Bn+. We owe $500Bn.

    Can someone in Federal parliament get real? Is it always down to Tony Abbott and only Tony Abbott to make sense? Malcolm Roberts perhaps, but sadly to join the long list of people ejected from parliament.

    We will have another Federal election very soon. This ecopolypse madness must stop. Can we please have our real Prime Minister back?

    382

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Let’s all hope The Australian will be given enough attention. From what I’ve read here on Jo Nova over the past years, it has some influence, not always good but influence and that’s what we all need, someone with the authority it takes to change minds.

      40

  • #
    Surftilidie

    Not too many people are denying climate change is real. Even TA in his speech said as much. What the realists are denying is that CO2, and in particular, those magic CO2 molecules that humanity produces, are that drivers of that change. The whole AGW thing is a scam that takes money off poor people in rich countries and delivers it to rich people in poor countries, as well as very rich shysters such as Gore, Musk, Di Caprio, etc.

    292

    • #
      AndyG55

      “Not too many people are denying climate change is real.”

      OK, apart from a fraction of a degree rise in a much fabricated nonsense of the “global average temperature”…

      In what way has the climate changed over the last 100 years ?

      61

      • #
        Rod Stuart

        EXACTLY!
        In order to define change, a parameter must have a metric.
        The metric for “climate” is a classification, generally either Koppen-Geiger or Trewartha.
        Pick any region on the planet, and over the past century the K-G classification changes slightly and then back again about every thirty years.
        The Trewartha classification simply records the increase in vegetation over the past few decades.
        Why is it necessary to parrot over and over that it is “real”?

        40

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Why is it necessary to parrot over and over that it is “real”?

          Probably only because that’s the only thing they have in their defense, constant insistence that it IS “real”.

          00

  • #
    PeterS

    Perhaps Turnbull isn’t so dumb after all. Just perhaps he’s encouraging Abbott to say the things he’s saying to stir up the ALP, Greens and much of the MSM into a frenzy. The longer the leftist retards keep yelling and screaming their heads off, the more people will take notice and listen to what Abbott has to say, all the while the cost of electricity creeping up and up. Then Turnbull will let loose closer to the next election and push hard the message that if the ALP wins things will get even much worse, which of course they would. Of course all this could be wishful thinking on my part.

    141

    • #
      David

      Of course all this could be wishful thinking on my part.

      Peter I think you over estimate Lord Waffle in thinking he is doing a Baldrick by “having a cunning plan” and it is most probably wishful thinking on your part. Lord Waffle’s history speaks otherwise.

      As for his Energy Minister, Frydenburg, I doubt he will ever see the light.

      Now we have the ridiculous situation of asking the most vulnerable people in our society, the poor and elderly, to turn off the air conditioner to save power for which they will get reduced power prices and theatre tickets. I’ll warrant the Point Piper Palace does not set an example for us to follow.

      130

      • #
        toorightmate

        Agree David.
        I just cant reconcile myself to the statement “Perhaps Turnbull isn’t so dumb after all.”

        70

        • #
          TdeF

          Turnbull hates Abbott. Abbott is everything he is not. A real hero, not a pretend sportsman. A man who fights real fires, rides past his security detail and is really popular, not just a PR character.

          Malcolm did his best to engineer Abbott’s ejection from his seat and from Turnbull’s Liberals. He was just too popular to remove, too dedicated and Abbott saw that punch coming. Only now when nearly all is lost is Abbott speaking up, sensibly, accurately and in a timely manner. He is much more the politician than Turnbull who at best is a very rich dillettante, playing at Prime Minister to feed his own ego and sense of importance. It must have been awful for him to get on a Melbourne Tram in the very little he did in the last election. Abbott would have been cheered.

          No the Prince of Point Piper, the legend in his own lunchtime has no interest except his own legacy. Dumb? No, but self interested and utterly uninterested in a good deal for Australians. He will just walk away when his time is over, an actor who strutted and fretted his time upon the stage and then is heard no more. The tragedy is that he may have done irreparable damage. $500Billion in debt. As if he cares. The ego of Rudd and the ethics of Gillard. What did we Australians do to deserve such people?

          122

          • #
            Rod Stuart

            I have seen the claim in several spots, even on BOLT, that Abbott endorsed the Paris Excrement.
            When did that come about? It was clearly Turnbull, Bishop and their loyal bed-wetters that idiotically did so after the administration changed in Washington.

            30

            • #
              clive hoskin

              Abbott had been dumped well before the Paris debarkle.Lord Monckton predicted that the UN would have to remove Abbott before the Paris CONflab got under way.They new that if he was still Prime Minister,there would be less chance of it being a success.

              10

      • #
        PeterS

        I gave it some more thought and I agree with you. I was suffering a moment of desperation hoping for some solution to save this once great nation of ours, which is now rapidly deteriorating in front of eyes.

        80

        • #
          PeterS

          Some more reflection – given what’s happened of late I suspect there is more chance of the ALP building new generation coal fired power stations than the LNP. This sounds far fetched at the moment but who knows? OK, OK I better stop this wishful thinking, it’s starting to get to me too.

          30

  • #
    Richard111

    Well said Surftilidie, Hope they discuss real science, like there is no such thing as ‘greenhouse gases’ in the atmosphere and gravity controls the temperature gradient up the atmosphere.

    The real question is what/who is maintaining this world wide AGW farce? Why/how are they so successful?

    121

    • #
      turnedoutnice

      Au contraire: the detailed aspects of the variation of water vapour GHG self absorption, plus low level clouds, and greening, give OLR emission altitude and control CO2 CS with a fixed surface temperature set point subject to tsi variation.

      50

      • #
        KinkyKeith

        What does that mean TON ?

        60

        • #
          Graeme No.3

          KK:

          The sun is turning quiet, and like the last 2 times it turned quiet when we had thermometers available, it means things are going to get cooler, esp. in northern Europe and Northern America. It will be slow but after a few years people are going to notice and get upset.
          When that happens it would not be a good idea to be known as an advocate of cutting reliable electricity that keeps people warm. Unfortunately there will be many deaths in the UK, Germany etc. but then the anger will surge.
          Historians accept that people in France were not as disadvantaged in 1789 as they were in 1783 when things turned cold (helped by the Laki erruption) but inside 4 years what a change!.
          Even earlier when it got colder in the early 1600′s there was convulsions with the 30 years war devastating Germany, Austria, what is now the Czech Republic, with damage in Poland, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and France. And England and Scotland had their own war before some bloke called Cromwell went through Ireland. They still remember him.
          And look what is happening. Complaints from the locals about a second cold winter in southern Australia, despite the propaganda of the BoM, more snow and disruption in Europe and Nth. America with ski resorts staying open longer than before, frost damage to the grape harvest in France, severe weather in South America despite it being ignored by the media. The cooling has started and will continue for at least the next 20 years, whatever the current crop of politicians think and the compliant media squwarks.
          The Left is feeling the coming cold and is desperately trying to hold onto their political gains of the last 30 years and ignoring history. Well, it couldn’t happen to a more deserving bunch of arrogant would-be dictators. Look where Robespierre finished up.

          81

    • #
      clive hoskin

      Look no further than the UN and agender 21(now agender 2030)

      00

  • #
    manalive

    On the previous thread Pat linked to a report that the federal government is proposing cash or other rewards for consumers who turn air conditioners off during heat waves for instance.
    I thought the idea of subsidising coal generation so as to compete with subsidised ‘renewables’ was plumbing the depths of absurdity.
    The NSW Energy Minister Don Harwin has the gall to compare the idea to the way people learned to reduce their water use during the last major drought.
    The energy ‘drought’ is entirely due to politicians like him.
    Next idea: electricity rationing in an economy built on and totally reliant on energy fuel exports.
    This country is going to the dogs.

    181

  • #
    OldOzzie

    From the Chicago Tribune

    Deadly weather: While more have died from extreme heat, cold a more consistent killer (data visualization)

    Twenty years after Chicago’s deadly 1995 heat wave and in the midst of stifling summer days, the dangers of hot weather are a rising concern.

    However, an analysis of state data shows that those more than 700 deaths two decades ago are far from the norm — in Illinois, cold weather is more consistently deadly.

    While more people have died from heat-related causes since 1995 — a total of 1,290, compared with 1,095 deaths from cold-related causes — the deadly 1995 summer is the main factor driving the differences in totals. Starting with 1996, there have been nearly twice as many cold-related deaths as heat-related (Cold: 1,044; Heat: 585), and the yearly average also is nearly double (Cold: 52.8; Heat: 30.7)

    There have been only a few heat-related deaths so far in 2015, and fewer than 20 people statewide died from the heat in each of the last two years (10 in 2014 and 18 in 2013), while 73 people died from the cold in 2013, 88 in 2014 and 41 in 2015.

    The Illinois Department of Public Health collects data on weather-related deaths from state death records, where “exposure to excessive natural heat” or cold have specific codes, a representative said.

    Click through the charts below to see the heat- and cold-related deaths in Illinois.

    81

    • #
      David

      in Illinois, cold weather is more consistently deadly.

      I once had the privilege of being sent to Northwestern University in Illinois to do a short course which took me into the winter. Up to that time I had never experienced temperatures so low and I would not be surprised at the reality of cold being more deadly than heat.

      100

  • #
    Santa Baby

    I am not denying or sceptic of climate change. Climate has always changed.

    What I Am denying and sceptic of is the political established UNFCCC with its claim of future CAGW.
    UNFCCC is like putting the wagon in front of the horse.

    101

  • #
    robert rosicka

    At last something a bit more positive from one nation , they need to hammer the point on cost of living due to fed and state largess and industry killing policies something similar to what Trump did and get of your behinds go out and sell yourself and your ideas in both the cities and regional .

    101

  • #
    Asp

    Great to see a little momentum building up against the MSM tirade on climate change/renewables/etc. It really would be good to put this one to bed before tackling the other big issues we have on hand such as the rise and rise of bureaucracy, the explosion of the entitlist mentality, the hijacking of our education system by cultural Marxists to name a few.

    141

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Just how windy was it expected to be to trigger this notice ?

    Market Notice 59456
    AEMO ELECTRICITY MARKET NOTICE

    Cancellation Reclassification of a Non-Credible Contingency Event: Para -Templers West and the Magill – Torrens Island A 275 kV Lines in the South Australia region due to severe weather warning for damaging winds that may exceed the rating of the structures of these Lines.

    Refer AEMO Electricity Market Notice 59427

    The severe weather warning for damaging winds has been cancelled.

    AEMO has cancelled the reclassification of the simultaneous trip of those circuits as a credible contingency event at 1500 hrs 11/10/2017.

    Manager NEM Real Time Operations

    <100 Kilometers an hour is the fastest predicted speed I could find .

    51

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Oops should have put OT and included quotation marks , also noticed they took advantage of the extra wind and increased the wind turbines while lowering the gas turbines output .
    Will they ever learn .

    41

  • #
    john karajas

    One Nation’s opposition to hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) is stupid and ignores real world evidence that this technique produces great benefits to humanity. Their opposition is populist pandering at its worst. Red thumb if you wish but I am telling you the truth here.

    151

    • #
      Dennis

      Playing to the ignorant voters

      70

      • #
        robert rosicka

        Yes exactly Dennis , the so called popular vote , I don’t want a popular politician I just want one who stands by his or her word and can lead us out of this mess without trying to be popular and form policies that are decided by the media .

        51

  • #
    pat

    11 Oct: CNN: EPA makes ‘climate change’ vanish from four-year plan
    By Rene Marsh and Gregory Wallace
    The Environmental Protection Agency has identified its priorities, and climate change is not one of them.
    In fact, the phrase “climate change” does not appear in the agency’s draft four-year strategic plan, a 38-page document quietly released for public comment last week.

    The three priorities outlined in the plan are consistent with EPA administrator Scott Pruitt’s public comments about how he plans to run the agency: focus on the “core mission” of clean air, land and water…
    What doesn’t appear in the agency’s strategic plan for 2018 through 2022 is any mention of the words climate change or the causes behind it, including carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions…

    Dr. Rachel Cleetus, lead economist and climate policy manger with the Union Of Concerned Scientists, blasted the removal of climate change from the report.
    “Climate change is one of the most pressing challenges of our time and it doesn’t even appear in the strategic plan for this agency — that’s stunning,” Cleetus said. “This wasn’t an oversight, this is a deliberate strategy by this administration.”…
    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/10/11/politics/epa-climate-report/index.html

    81

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Australia gets Malcolm Turnbull “Too much idiocy over energy, Turnbull says” and Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg “hits back at Abbott’s climate change claims”

    While America gets

    Maganomics – Pruitt at The Plate…

    President Trump’s MAGAnomic Main Street policy initiatives surround a very basic set of principles. To add wealth to the middle class you: A.) increase wages, and B.) lower the cost of living.

    However, there’s a part of the plan for reestablishing middle-class wealth that also comes from lowering the cost of living (high consumables). That’s where EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt intersects with Ross and Mnuchin as Pruitt works to lower energy costs.

    Lowering energy costs has an exponential benefit to the overall economy. Not only does it drive down the cost of domestic highly consumable products, but it also binds the building blocks of the manufacturing and production sector. Lower energy costs offset higher wages on products manufactured for export and helps keep the U.S. competitive.

    Manufacturing and industry sectors have three top-tier costs as they transfer to Main Street: 1) Raw materials (or finished goods depending on sector); 2) Labor costs; and 3) energy costs. If you lower any of the three drivers you lower the cost of business operations.

    President Trump is actually the only President in modern history who is working to lower both material costs and energy costs simultaneously. In doing so, the short term benefit to the middle-class worker is a lower consumable good prices and subsequently a higher level of disposable income.

    In essence by lowering material and energy costs the internal economic action actually gives a raise to the middle-class faster than waiting for full economic expansion/growth to drive wage rates higher.

    See how that works?

    91

  • #
    pat

    “activists” astonished:

    11 Oct: EurActiv: Activists denounce EU’s ‘double-faced’ climate policy
    By Frédéric Simon
    Loopholes in a draft EU law aimed at curbing global warming emissions from transport, buildings and agriculture will result in a mere 23% cut by 2030 instead of the 30% originally foreseen, environmental activists have warned, denouncing a cynical ploy by EU member states to dodge their pledges made under the Paris Agreement.

    Environment ministers from the 28 EU member states are meeting in Luxembourg this Friday (13 October) to decide on a central piece of the bloc’s climate policy puzzle, the Effort Sharing Regulation.
    The regulation defines a carbon budget for sectors currently not included in the EU’s cap-and-trade scheme, the EU-ETS, which tackles emissions from power generation and energy-intensive industries such as cement, chemistry or steel.

    But environmental campaigners claim that “loopholes” built in the draft regulation mean the EU will only achieve a 23% emissions reduction by 2030 in those sectors – way short of the 30% it originally committed to delivering under the Effort Sharing Regulation.
    “Already in Paris, member states recognised that the EU’s commitments were not sufficient to meet the 2°C global warming target” agreed at the UN, said Wendel Trio, Director of Climate Action Network Europe, an environmental pressure group.
    “So it is quite astonishing to see how member states are now trying to reduce their efforts,” Trio told a Brussels press briefing on Tuesday (10 October).
    “In fact, what countries are negotiating now is to do very little,” Trio said, denouncing the EU’s “double face” when it comes to the Paris accord…

    The use of forestry credits has attracted particular attention from scientists who signed an open letter last month voicing “grave concern” about plans which, they claim, will allow EU countries to harvest more trees and leave other sectors to pick up the slack…ETC
    http://www.euractiv.com/section/emissions-trading-scheme/news/activists-denounce-eus-double-faced-climate-policy/

    31

  • #
    Peter C

    Cory Bernadi has made his Best Ever email post.

    Consequently I have signed up to his party.

    Just when I thought politics couldn’t disappoint any further, I see more half-baked proposals to fix our broken electricity system.
     
    The system was broken by the actions of the very same politicians who now claim they can fix it. Such was the hysteria about ‘needing to do something about climate change’, successive governments and their collaborators in the opposition have done incredible damage to our economic prospects.
     
    For decades, Australians benefited from cheap and reliable electricity fuelled by the bountiful supply of coal. This cheap coal and cheap electricity provided us with our greatest economic advantage. That has now been sacrificed at the altar of climate change.
     
    In South Australia, where the Labor party, the Liberal opposition and the Xenophons have all embraced massive renewable energy targets, we have the most expensive electricity anywhere in the world. The subsidies tipped into the renewable energy sector makes it unprofitable for 24-7, 365 day base load power solutions to operate when the sun shines and the wind blows.
     
    You can’t turn a coal fired generator on and off to cater to the whims of wind and sunbeams, leaving gas as the only real alternative. Unfortunately, these same politicians have limited the exploration of gas and other fuels to accommodate more green lunacy – meaning our gas supplies are limited and the price has risen accordingly.
     
    After trashing our energy market and economy, the powers-that-be are now doubling the bet and gambling your future – again.
     
    SA Labor are spending $100 million on diesel generators for a couple of summers and another $50 million on a battery that will basically power the state for a few minutes. Not to be outbid in this energy roulette, the SA Liberal opposition have just announced $100 million on subsidising batteries in homes.
     
    The simple maths is that (depending on the battery itself) it costs more for battery storage power than buying it off the grid. This makes the Weatherill and Marshall energy bids just more political and uneconomic boondoggles, shepherded into public acceptance with the unaccountable snake-oil promise of ‘lower power prices’. If you then add the limited lifespan, disposal issues and the explosive potential of lithium-ion batteries, it becomes a heady mix of political froth and waste – at your expense.
     
    But if you think this foolishness is limited to the State arena you will need to think again. This morning The Australian newspaper speculates that the Federal government is set to announce they will pay you not to use electricity. This is a very special approach….if special means unbelievably dumb!
     
    Now I am not one of them, but some readers really have bought into the man-made climate change myth and the associated falsehoods.
     
    They want to see us meet the carbon dioxide reductions demanded by the Paris agreement and agreed to by the Turnbull government. Amazingly, these same people aren’t all that enthusiastic about the zero emissions solution provided by the nuclear option which suggests emissions reductions aren’t really their end goal. It seems the blind pursuit of ideology is what it is all about.
     
    But here is another option.
     
    Over a twenty year period, Australian taxpayers will be slugged $60 billion to subsidise the unreliable and intermittent renewable energy sector. This method of wasting money has zero prospect of meeting the Paris accord demands. However, if we spent that money building twenty-five 800MwH new-generation HELO coal fired power stations, not only would we meet our emissions reduction targets – we would have baseload, affordable energy to boot.
     
    Even better, if we provided contractual and operational certainty to private enterprise, they would build them without the government borrowing any more money. Surely that is a better way!

    141

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      Perhaps there is hope for the future!

      71

    • #
      PeterS

      Bernadi ha certainly got my vote. What’s even more startling is his proposal to build the new generation coal fired power stations to meet our emissions target is EXACTLY what other nations are doing right now. In other words for some odd reason Australia is ignoring what everyone else is doing in trying to meet their targets without at the same time destroying their economies, and instead we are doing it ALONE by refusing to replace our aging coal fired power stations with the new types and as a result destroying our economy. If this is not stark raving mad then nothing is. This is worse than economic suicide – it’s deliberate economic vandalism that warrants a Royal Commission.

      111

      • #
        Another Ian

        Peter S

        Aren’t you supposed to go along with the consensus these days?

        Then why aren’t we on this?

        10

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Actually for 60 billion the best we could do is 21 HELE stations on green field sites. However the idea is good and “has merit” as they say.
      And you can see why he quit the Liberal Party and switched to be “politically non-correct” although I think with far more effect than the compliant childish media think.

      81

  • #
    PeterS

    The LNP government has now stooped to new lows with their latest news about “rewarding” people not to use electricity during times of high demand. That’s the type of practice one only sees during times of war or in countries run by a tyrannical dictator. I suppose next they will be saying “let them eat yellow cake”.

    91

    • #
      TdeF

      Paying people with their own money while taking their money off them for nothing while they sit in the dark.
      A scam from beginning to end. A super ponzi scheme.

      Get the government out of energy. Let supply and demand fix the problem because one thing is certain, the politicians have no idea how the electricity system or the climate works. Most could not run a lolly shop. Worse, they cannot even read what they are signing, even though most are lawyers.

      There should be a basic qualification for politicians when seven plead innocent to falsely signing a declaration with a one year jail sentence. Some like Xenophon are practicing lawyers who advise people on signing such documents.

      91

  • #
    wal1957

    If Cory can maintain his commonsense arguments, he will get a lot of followers. Turdball’s liberals are doomed.
    I’ve been a liberal voter all my life.
    Not now!

    71

    • #
      AndyG55

      Unfortunately, common-sense arguments are not recognised by much of modern society.

      Hence we get the green anti-society regressive agenda.

      52

  • #
    Lionell Griffith

    This is evidence that better ideas are getting into the people. Thus, there is a chance that the people in government will become better people. Enough soon enough? Time will tell.

    In any event, it is a slow one on one process to make happen. The path of the crowd is still much too easy to follow and much too difficult to resist. Yet it is the only way that really works. Without the better ideas, better decisions will not be made and failure is the only outcome.

    71

  • #
    pat

    jo also wrote that they will discuss housing. here’s one “bright” idea by an “eminent” person (according to ABC) that needs to be knocked on the head right away.

    ABC Nightlife with Philip Clark did an Issue of the Day on the subject this week and, thankfully, he and the callers were suitably outraged at the idea. my rates have tripled in the past decade, and the idea they would triple again is “OUTRAGEOUS”. as one caller said, it would only benefit those who flip houses for investment purposes, and they can increase rents to cover the high rates proposed:

    9 Oct: ABC: Why your council rates should be three times higher
    Analysis RN Breakfast By business reporter Michael Janda
    So what are the odds of state and territory politicians agreeing to a plan that would, on average, effectively treble the amount of council rates paid by property owners? Probably pretty low.
    But what if you used the extra money to replace other hated taxes, such as stamp duty on property purchases and insurance premiums?
    That’s what eminent economist Professor John Freebairn from the University of Melbourne is suggesting…

    “If you don’t change your residence, you don’t pay stamp duty. If you change residence, you pay stamp duty,” he told RN Breakfast.
    “As we go through our lives — with jobs in different locations, our family expands, it contracts, our income changes and so on — it would really be sensible for us to change the location of our property, maybe buy a bigger or a smaller one…

    A common example would be older Australians who would like to trade down from a big family home to a smaller, lower maintenance apartment, but are deterred by the stamp duty bill and the prospect of losing part of their pension if they cash out some of their housing wealth…
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-10-09/why-your-council-rates-should-be-three-times-higher/9030330

    40

  • #
    pat

    incestuous is the word that comes to mind. you have to laugh:

    11 Oct: CarbonBrief: The Carbon Brief Quiz 2017
    Last Wednesday, Carbon Brief hosted its third annual quiz night at a bar in central London.
    Twenty-five teams, featuring more than 200 people, took part in the climate and energy-themed evening, all hoping to win the coveted trophy claimed last year by Friends of the Earth.

    The teams competing this year, as in previous years, were made up of a diverse group of people who, in one way or other, work on climate change or energy. The list included journalists, civil servants, climate campaigners, policy advisers, energy experts and scientists. Organisations represented included the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Committee on Climate Change, Green Alliance, 10:10, Sandbag, Carbon Trust, New Economics Foundation, RenewableUK and four teams from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). A teams from the Danish Meteorological Institute in Copenhagen also took part online…

    BEIS Science beat a highly competitive field scoring 70 points out of a possible 100. They won by a single point, thereby reclaiming the trophy they took home at the inaugural Carbon Brief quiz in 2015 when they were known as DECC Science…

    They beat into second place the team from Carbon Trust, who had been in the lead before the final round of questions. Third place was shared by the teams from the IPCC/Imperial and European Climate Foundation…

    Teams were tested with six rounds of questions – general knowledge, policy, science, two picture rounds and a round of question set by special guests. This year’s special guests were: Claire Perry, the new climate minister; Pilita Clark, until recently, the Financial Times’ environment correspondent; Prof Stephen Belcher, the Met Office’s chief scientist; Rachel Kyte, the UN secretary general’s special envoy on sustainable energy for all; and Zeke Hausfather, Carbon Brief’s US analyst, who could not be in the room as he’s based in San Francisco…

    The full quiz can be viewed below, but here’s an interactive taster of 10 questions from the quiz. See how you get on…
    https://www.carbonbrief.org/the-carbon-brief-quiz-2017

    10

  • #
    toorightmate

    I expect the Friday session in Brisbane to be seriously disrupted by the usual mob of left wing protesters.
    The CFMEU controlled QLD Government will instruct the police to go very easy on the protesters.
    I will be surprised (pleasantly) if the function even takes place.
    Do not underestimate the power of the Left. Look at the battle Trump is having with the Left (in addition to attempting to drain a swamp which contains Left and Right crooks/wasters).
    We do not have anyone of Trump’s stature (and national loyalty) ready to stand up in Australia.

    81

  • #
    Dave Ward

    Australians are facing severe cost-of-living pressures and decreasing living standards

    Considering the regular TV programmes here in the UK featuring Brits moving “Down Under” for a new life, are there any observations/comments from those of you on the spot about how many are re-considering their decision? It’s clear from watching that plenty of them didn’t do proper research beforehand, but there must be some who did, and are now wondering why?

    32

  • #
    William Astley

    Warming did not cause the wind speed to decrease. The wind speed reduction was due to solar cycle changes.

    Jet stream wind speed has started to increase.

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-01-13/surging-jet-stream-winds-hinder-u-s-bound-flights-from-europe

    “Surging Jet-Stream Winds Hinder U.S.-Bound Flights From Europe
    Stronger westerly headwinds for U.S.-bound flights are stretching out travel times, forcing some planes to stop for refueling. Trips such as London to New York, a busy business route, are running almost eight hours — 45 minutes longer than voyages in September.

    Two Philadelphia-bound American Airlines flights, one from Brussels and the other from Amsterdam, had to touch down on Jan. 11 to refuel in Bangor, Maine, said Scott Ramsay, the carrier’s managing director of its integrated operations center. The journey from Brussels took 9 hours and 16 minutes, about an hour more than three months earlier, according to industry data tracker FlightAware.

    Higher Costs
    Flights across the Atlantic to eastern U.S. cities in December 2013 averaged 19 minutes later than a year earlier, according to industry data tracker MasFlight.com. Travel times in December 2014 were similar to those in 2013, MasFlight’s data from more than 1,300 flights a year showed.

    With the threat of increasingly strong headwinds every winter, airlines face higher costs on those westbound flights with the use of extra fuel and the crew’s time.
    “When you were planning to fly non-stop, stopping for fuel costs money,” said George Hamlin, president of Hamlin Transportation Consulting, who has more than 40 years of experience in commercial aviation and aerospace.

    20