I saw on the ABC news tonight that Mark McGowan announced that he doesn’t like the Carbon Tax. He’s the West Australian state opposition leader and there are just four weeks left before the State election. Strangely I can find no story, no news headline to confirm this.
What does it matter you say… it’s a federal issue, not a state one. But it says everything you need to know about how unpopular both Gillard and the Carbon tax are. McGowan has dodged the question repeatedly for months, but trailing in the polls, he finally chose to dump the policy, despite it making his name Mud with the Federal Government and his fellow Labor compatriots. Peter van Onselen suggested it would pick him up some votes only a few days ago.
He would be the first Labor State Leader to do so.
In May the former Labor premier Kristina Keneally says Julia Gillard should revoke or wind back the carbon tax in order to claw back public popularity. But she’s was safely out of the action by then. On August 9th 2012, the NSW Labor leader — John Robertson told his caucus they’d never hear him support the carbon tax, but publicly announced the very opposite the next day. The Victorian Labor leader Daniel Andrews came under pressure to protest against the Carbon Tax, but declined too.
How much does he object to the Carbon Tax? Not enough to speak up until the election is one month away.
Thanks to commenters Warren L, Sceptical Sam and Daremo for this ABC link to the Greens outrage in response.
Sorry no links to the story. Thanks to James for confirming.
Background links | Wikipedia: Australian State Politicians | WA Labor Party | ABC news (No I can’t find the story there either).
He’s just chasing votes. Interesting, though, that he throws Gillard’s pet policy under a bus in his attempt to stay in power. Now he’s in a damned if he does and damned if he doesn’t situation. I hope WA kicks him out, and if he does get kicked out, he’ll have no sympathy from the Gillard Monster.
231
A.D. He is not in power. He is the Leader of the State Opposition.
60
If only Abbott had won the election, we’d have his policy, which in 2009 was “why not just put a price on carbon with a simple tax?”
Hang on…
36
Abbott said “IF you are going to price carbon, why not do it with a simple tax”.
Note the “IF”.
20
Yep. The Greens talked Labor into adopting a more efficient policy.
02
Of course, if McGowan is elected, he can always change his mind after the election.
320
Exactly right, tell the lies you need to tell to get re-elected. Only the idiots that vote for them are dumb enough to believe the lie.
160
Sean
Paul Keating expressed his natural disdain for the voting public when he described election campaigns in these terms:
A tradition tha Madam (No carbon tax) Gillard proudly continues.
Cheers,
Speedy
110
Did he Speedy? Where and when was that? If he did, his maths is worse than mine: in Australian federal politics, election campaigns run five weeks and parliamentary terms last three years.
I’m quite fond of Keating’s turn of phrase, he was the master of the put-down. John Howard was a “little desiccated coconut,” “the brain-damaged Leader of the Opposition” and “the greatest job and investment destroyer since the bubonic plague.” Peter Costello was “all tip and no iceberg”. Then there was that exchange with Ironbar Tuckey: “You boxhead you wouldn’t know. You are flat out counting past ten.” National Party leader Ian Sinclair was “a political carcass with a coat and tie on”.
11
Apologies – I misquoted the honourable gent. It was three years. And under Madam (No carbon tax) Gillard, election campaigns now run for ~8 months.
I’ll google the quote and get back if I can find the source.
Cheers,
Speedy
00
The official campaign doesn’t start until the governor general fires the starting gun. Abbott launched a soft campaign before the date was announced. It’s still a policy-free campaign, mind you.
01
“The Governor general”.
like.
Would that be a political appointment for services rendered?
Is that the lady who was involved with the other QLD pollies like rud and co in the poor treatment of the young girl?
Documents lost and all that?
don’t tell me she’s still GG?
KK
00
Speedy
Even with three years it’s still a ratio of 1 : 52 which is obviously more of a benefit to pollies than taxpayers.
KK
00
Would a Labor leader do that?
10
First change the dialogue to match the consensus of the majority then change the dialogue.
UN WATCH
http://www.womensgroup.org/998NEWLT.html
100
I wouldn’t trust him as far as I can throw a manhole cover! Gillard lied to the Australian voters and I wouldn’t be surprised if McGowan would use the same tactic to save his sorry arse.
231
The comment below was attached to the news article on Dr. Benjamin Carson’s speech at the National Prayer Breakfast a few days ago.
“It is well worth your time to watch the video. Check Emperor Obama’s body language. I have seen him with that angry rigid jaw before, but his reactions to Dr. Carson take the cake. It is all he can do to sit there and endure Dr. Carson’s wise words, including: “What do lawyers do? Lawyers want to win by hook or by crook. We need to get rid of that. We need to ask, ‘How do we solve the problem?”
From memory Carson said that 5 doctors signed The Declaration of Independence, were involved in the framing of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. He said we need doctors and scientists and engineers – we need all these people in government. Then followed with “What do lawyers do?… (above).
Which gets us back to McGowan, WA’s Opposition leader. You guessed it he is a lawyer. The question that arises is what qualification do solicitors have for successfully running a country? The solicitors, including our lying PM, who are making such a mess of Australia’s economy, are invariably limited to being gifted professional liars (euphemistically called advocates).
The brilliant neurosurgeon Ben Carson has hit the nail on the head. He touches on a few issues of interest to those concerned about the future of Australia.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/02/07/dr_benjamin_carson_addresses_national_prayer_breakfast_criticizes_obamacare.html
40
Yeah. And I bet when he said it his lips moved.
210
Nice to know that this will be a lead up to the “main bout” coming up on (or before) September 14 this year.
Let’s hope this precursor sends the appropriate message to the incumbent buffoons at the federal level.
I just love the fact they will be subjected to the thought of a wipe out from now until (THEIR) eternity.
Cheers,
60
Has anyone got an update on what the public think of the carbon tax? The last numbers I remember are from Essential in November, when support was split 46/44 in favour. Remember those “carbon tax more popular than Tony Abbott” headlines?
53
Labor leaders grumbling about it is probably a more accurate indicator than stupid (ie costless) opinion polls.
50
So I think it important to know why he doesn’t support the carbon tax. Is he unconvinced by the IPCC view? Does he think the consequences (of the IPCC’s view of climate change) are not so catastrophic? Does he think the costs of the tax do not outweigh the benefits? It must be one of these three, unless his view is just political opportunism. Then the next question is, is this a WA Labor position or just the position of its leader? I do hope media follows up on this!
61
All of the above
But most critically, what to do about it ? The Achilles Heel of CAGW
30
Perhaps he doesn’t support the tax as it is totally ineffectual in reducing CO2 emissions to a level that has the slightest effect on global CO2 levels. This aspect of the tax seems overlooked by most. As the population of Australia is so small, total eradication of Australian CO2 emissions would barely register globally
10
So a Labor “leader” is not onboard with the carbon tax??
Is he lost? Someone should help him.
The ALP at a state and federal level deserve to collectively be repeatedly and mercilessly derided for the un democtratic Carbon tax.
Whether individuals in the party agree with it or not, they have chosen to represent the party that shoved that tax down our throats for no other reason than their corrupted internal workings and a desire to retain power.
No reprieve or mercy for anyone bearing the ALP brand from now and forever more.
They have made their bed and they will lie in it.
230
Peter Garret’s infamous line,”We’ll change everything once we get in.”, pretty well sums up Labor. Their objects are power and snouts in the trough. Australia comes a very long last.
260
Mcwhatshisface, the bland Labor leader for WA, didn’t bother to make a stand when it was introduced. Let him go down with the carbon tax lie tied around his neck.
190
He wasn’t leader of the WA opposition when it was introduced.
212
He could still have spoke up in the party room. He and his kind are the reason I, a long time Labor voter gave up on them. They are no longer there for the party members at the local level,let alone the population at large. They are nothing more than a self centered club of egotists.
180
That’s a fatuous comment.. It doesn’t matter a damn what he was at the time he could still have made his views known.
10
No, not as a junior member of the Labor party.
10
The Carbon Tax was made law on the 1st July 2012
Mark McGowan
2001 appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier.
2005 Tourism portfolio as well as Racing and Gaming, Youth
2005 Environment Minister while retaining Racing and Gaming, created the Department of Environment and Conservation and provided approval for the Gorgon Project.[6][7][8]
December 2006, Minister for Education and Training and for the South West.
2008 shadow minister for State Development, Trade, Planning, Housing and Works and also managed Opposition business in the Legislative Assembly.
On 23 January 2012 elected Leader of the Labor Party in Western Australia.
NOTE THE LAST DATE.
5 months BEFORE the Carbon Tax
JUNIOR MEMBER of the Labor Party?
You Labor types just cannot help yourselves when it comes to lying.
00
hi old44, I didn’t know the chronology… sorry.
What I was implying is that as a member of the Labor party, any comment made against the “heirachy” would have meant that he would have no longer had any prospects. And anyway, according to Gillard and Swan, the Labor leader in WA would still be a junior position, because only they count.
00
and please, please,… do not cast me as a Labor type…
that is just plain RUDE and the highest of insults. 🙁
00
Had on Old… that is when it came in to effect, but the parliamentary decision to apss the legislation, including that it would start on 1st July 2012, was made on November 8 2011. I’m not a labor man either for the record.
00
How many times must you lot come to the same conclusions via different paths before the underlying problem becomes a glaringly obvious elephant in the room?
It’s the party politics system which prevents politicians voting as they wish and so prevents people in this country from being represented.
Labor and the Liberals are as different as Gorgonzola and Edam because the system does not allow diversity. They’re both cheese.
10
Imagine the coverage had Colin Barnett uttered such a comment? The ABC would have been all over the story.
100
The Newcastle Herald asks a question each day for public response.
This week a vote against the Carbon Tax was 70% in a safe labour seat.
ERIC A.
150
But a seat of old time Labor people, not those from the Chardonnay Socialist wing. The Democratic Party in the US seems to have been completely taken over by the left. I wonder if that is the case in Australia for Labor, or are there remnants of the ‘workers party’?
80
I know pre polling date polls are notoriously wild swinging and not really reflective of the end result, but there is something of interest in the latest pre poll poll from W.A.
Labor has clawed back 5%, but is still in an election losing position.
The Barnett Government still has a comfortable lead and has not lost a percentage point in that pre poll, and this is Primary vote and not Two Party Preferred.
All of Labor’s recovery is from The Greens Party.
So, it would seem that people have indeed had a gutful of Green, and are moving back to where they came from.
Tony.
140
That is indeed an interesting poll result. There was a sense a few years ago that the Greens had peaked.
60
Here is a link which addresses the poll. Unfortunately its in the Weekend Oz, I was able to read the paper version, but the web version is paywalled.
In the 3-7 Feb poll the ALP vote is 35% vs 35.8% last election. Greens are 8% vs 11.8% last election. LNP is 51% vs 43.3% last election.
This is in keeping with what happened in my town in the local government elections, where the Greens lost half to two-thirds of their vote across the board. But the ALP lost the same number of votes from their right hand side that they gained from the green left.
If McGowan feels he has to burn the carbon tax then that means their internal polling is really bad as soon as the word ‘Julia’ is mentioned. She’s already been told not to come anywhere near Perth during the election campaign.
140
Bypassing the paywall …
Step 1: Click on the paywalled link.
Step 2: Highlight the headline and copy it (control-c on Windoze, command-c on Mac)
Step 3: Go to Google, paste the headline into the search text box (control-v / command-v) and press enter or click the “search” button.
Step 4: Click on the link (usually the first one) that matches the headline.
Step 5: Voila – full article!
11
The ALP Vs the Greens
THey’re one and the same to me. Always will be from here on in.
90
Yep, the ALP has tainted themselves for a VERY long time !!
50
Hopefully for my lifetime. They’ve definitely burned this bridge.
00
There must be many reasons for the decline of the greens popularity – but I wonder how much effect the replacement leadership had on it and if the polls show a relative dateline.
Milne has nothing of the charisma or authority of the ‘Global governancer,’Bob Brown.
60
I think the main reason is that people are realising that the Greens are NOT an environmental party, like they might once have been (a long time ago).
In fact, they actively support environment vandalism such as wind turbines etc.
The vast majority of people in Australia DO NOT WANT far left wing socialist agendas, and its very easy for most people to see that this is ALL that the Greens have to offer.
121
I think the answer is more complex than that. Back in the 60, 70’s and 80’s, smog and litter were significant and obvious problems. Everybody could see the environmental problems first hand (even if these weren’t the primary serious issues at stake).
Now that the Greens have had a finger in the pie; everybody is coming to the realisation that the Greens are a “political” party, named after a common nicely worded ideology, but having little to nothing in common with their namesake.
00
Perhaps they should rename themselves The Browns? It’s what colour you get painting a thin layer of green over red anyway.
70
I found a report here
“WA Greens slam McGowan’s tax stance”
Posted February 10, 2013 12:20:15
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-10/greens-slam-mcgowan-tax-stance/4510724?section=wa
The WA Greens have labelled the Opposition Leader Mark McGowan adinosaur after he revealed he does not support the Federal Government’s Carbon Tax.
The Premier Colin Barnett had been calling on Mr McGowan to declare whether he supported the tax or not but the Labor leader refused to be drawn saying it was a federal issue.
However yesterday Mr McGowan finally revealed he does not support the tax.
80
“labelled the Opposition Leader Mark McGowan a dinosaur”
A dinosaur is a far higher form of life than “slime” or “mould”
90
Nicki Savva repeated the statement that McGowan was not in favour of the Carbon Tax on the ABC’s Insiders this morrning. Barrie Cassidy seemed to question whether it was accurate. He then couldn’t move on quick enough to prevent any further damage to his beloved but incompetent and lying comrade Julia.
100
It’s now on the ABC here:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-10/greens-slam-mcgowan-tax-stance/4510724?section=wa
40
Just did a google on “Mark McGowan Carbon Tax” – as stated in the thread starter, his (I suspect strategic??) duplicity on the matter is nothing new. From this six month old link
http://www.watoday.com.au/wa-news/attack-on-mcgowan-signals-very-dirty-election-campaign-labor-20120811-241bs.html
there is a blatant giveaway actually;
“Mr McGowan has said he would make up his mind about the Carbon Tax once it has been implemented long enough for him to assess its impact. He has said he would make that determination by Christmas.”
[Translation – I`ll keep this as potentially an extra arrow in the political quiver, depending on how things are shaping up for us closer to the election.]
Also, what I would really like to know is exactly in what context he “assessed” the “impact”…and more importantly, what WA Labor can actually do about rolling it back on an intra-state basis should they tout themselves as wanting to do so…but these would all probably be inconvenient questions for him.
Vote-grabbing attempt weasel words. Peter Kennedy in that ABC link is at least being reported as stating the obvious.
100
No doubt Chapple believes Combet’s BS about China and their green initiatives.
90
“emitters per capita”
Now work it out again, per unit area.
I have no doubt at all the WA would be a net carbon sink !!
50
Watch them slowly climb down from the ivory tower, even Hansen, the father of Global Warming is climbing down. As the evidence mounts the trickle will become a flood.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.
I think we are between, “then they fight you”, and “Then you win” an interesting is the converse, how does it go when you are on the losing side
First you hold sway, then you fight, then they laugh at you, then they ignore you.
Confirming the diagnosis, I’d say the warmists are somewhere between “Then they Laugh at you” and “Then they ignore you”
Having said that, it’s kinda difficult to ignore them given the $23 a Tonne slugging to our back pockets skyrocketting power bills, Pensioners dying from cold or heat afraid to turn the airconditioner on, and (for our American friends) Obama’s EPA driven attack on coal.
I dare say though that after the election Julia Gillard will be pretty easy to ignore either as the opposition backbench member for Lalor elected only on slim green preferences, or even more so as prisoner 876324 should the states investigations pan out. Julia has said “she has done nothing wrong” though, (right after she said there will be no carbon tax and then created one) …. Make of that what you will – I make no accusation.
161
What is interesting when looking at the United States Data with reference to this EPA regulatory attack on coal fired power is to notice what is actually happening, and the emphasis is always on the up front figures ….. the Nameplate Capacity for all those coal fired power plants.
To the average ‘punter’ who has no understanding of what the data actually is telling us, it’s an easy thing to look at that Nameplate Capacity lowering and say that it is actually working.
However, as I have always gone to great pains to point out, it’s not that Nameplate Capacity we should be observing, but the actual power being generated and delivered for consumption, and that applies not only with Renewables (especially) but across the board for all power delivery.
There has in fact been quite a dramatic fall in that Nameplate Capacity for coal fired power. Having said that, the fall in actual power delivered is nowhere near as dramatic, and that actually explains graphically a concept that is sometimes difficult to explain ….. Spinning Reserve.
Older plants closing in on their lifespan limit are not used in the same manner as those large plants (2000MW+). What happens with them is that they are moved across to the spinning reserve area of generation. In other words the plants are burning and turning at their maximum revs, but just humming along at their most efficient burn rate, but not switched onto the grid. Whenever large scale coal fired power plants (and also large scale Nuclear Power) have scheduled down time for maintenance, usually one generator at a time, then those spinning reserve plants get tasked to take up the power lost from the large scale plant.
So the plants are burning coal while waiting, and not actually delivering power until tasked. This is a requirement that they keep spinning, because the design of coal fired plants is that they take hours and hours and sometimes even longer to run up from cold to a state where they can actually be switched onto the grid. Spinning as they are, it’s just a matter of switching them onto the grid, and then switching off the generator undergoing maintenance, hence no loss of power.
What has been happening now with that reduction in Nameplate Capacity is that these older plants, mostly in the power range of 20 to 50MW are now all just shutting up completely.
That is borne out when you see the delivery rate of power from coal fired sources, The reduction is only around one third of the reduction in Nameplate Capacity. Plants are not closing because of regulations. They are closing because of old age. The average age of EVERY coal fired plant barely three years ago was just a tick over 49 years, and here you need to consider that the average life span for a coal fired plant is 50 years, so the whole fleet was approaching 50 years old.
That average age has now come down to just under 47 years, and is falling, so it’s obvious that older plants only are closing, because no new plants have been commissioned or built for a number of years now.
Now, what is also borne out by the data is that there has been a dramatic rise in the power delivery from Natural Gas fired plants, and here I mean that this power output has doubled in just on ten years, and now actually is closing in on power delivered from coal fired sources.
So, as those older spinning reserve smaller coal fired plants shut down, the move to ‘take up the slack’ during maintenance of coal fired plants has moved directly across to that Natural Gas fired sector.
So, plants now specifically designed to operate for just a few hours a day are now working almost double that time, because not many new NG plants have been constructed, well, enough to account for the dramatic increase in power delivery from that sector anyway.
So, while all the hype is about regulations working to shut down coal fired power, the data actually tells an entirely different story altogether.
Currently, in the U.S. there are 126 coal fired plants with a Nameplate Capacity of 213,000MW, and this constitutes every plant greater than 1000MW. That number has not changed in the five years I’ve been watching this data. Not one large scale plant has closed. They just keep delivering what they always have delivered. That total of 126 plants is only 20% of the total number of coal fired plants, and yet those 126 plants deliver 65% of all coal fired power delivered to the grids.
It never ceases to amaze me how no one even bothers to check the hype that is put out there, but you see, that’s the point here. They can publish the most accurate and truthful data, actual data, but the average punter has no idea what it means, and perish the thought that a journalist might actually even try and find out what the data means.
Tony.
150
Days actually, Tony. And also days to run down and become cold enough for boiler scale and so on to be cleaned out, routine maintenance carried out
Spinning Reserve is mission-critical for 24/7 power on demand. I haven’t seen one Greenie give that up. The Achilles Heel again, and again…
90
Have you ever looked at something you’ve written and thought that something’s not quite right there, but couldn’t put your finger on it. Then you go away and while you’re thinking and doing something else, your brain, which has been working on the problem behind the scenes, finally sends a message down the neuron paths to the front of brain and flags you that it’s worked it out.
Here’s the offending passage in my text above, and I’ve highlighted in bold the small error:
While those 126 large scale coal fired plants make up only 20% of all coal fired plants, the 65% I mentioned here is with reference to Nameplate Capacity. Those 126 large scale plants make up 65% of the total coal fired Nameplate Capacity.
The actual power those 126 plants deliver to U.S. grids comes in at 85% of the total power delivered from all coal fired sources.
Now, with respect to what ianl8888 mentioned above about coal fired plants taking days to run down for maintenance, and then back up again, the main problem here is the weight of the rotor. (which in the U.S. rotates at 3600RPM while here in Australia, it is only 3000RPM, their 60Hz as opposed to our 50Hz power frequency for AC)
In the case of a large generator (600 to 1000MW, just one generator) that weight can be anything between 450 and 800 tons, and all of that weight is on the one shaft so any sudden or fast stop is not only a major problem, but in fact a catastrophic problem, so it has to be done very very slowly, and with extreme care.
That’s why these plants run flat out all the time, and are never scaled up and down in speed. The coal burn rate to run them back up to speed is considerably larger than it is at the normal speed of operation.
Even while shut down for maintenance, that huge weight on the shaft means that the generator is kept rotating at a few revs, even while that unit is shut down for maintenance, and generator maintenance is always fraught with danger if they have to completely stop the generator.
Tony.
50
Good points guys. Coal is dirty, dangerous and inefficient. I couldn’t have put it better.
114
So I hope you don’t use the electricity it produces
70
So then Ricardo K,
having just said that, I suppose you have an equivalent replacement for the electricity that you already use, and isn’t it amazing how people who have zero knowledge about things like this always misconstrue everything that’s said, mainly because they cannot understand it, and don’t even bother to take the time to try and understand.
As to inefficient, it’s the second most efficient method of generating electricity that there is, and your side won’t countenance the most efficient.
You people prove conclusively that the Britney Spears ploy is all you have.
Tony.
130
Oh look, an even less intelligent version of JB !!
Is that even possible ??
81
My power company uses my electricity. I generate more than I use. And they pay me a pittance. That’s one of the joys of living in Queensland.
18
“My power company uses my electricity. I generate more than I use” is for the gullible.
Energex said the state’s electricity network since the 1950s had been designed to deliver power from the station to the home and the voltage now heading “the other way” was causing a huge dilemma.
They are not ‘using your electricity‘ as the grid is not built to take it and the tax-payer funded “pittance” rebate is soon to be worth nothing, as it should be in genuine free market.
And did your solar system stop the man made global warming floods, fires or northern hemisphere blizzards this year?
How about that carbon (sic) tax you voted for?
The carbon (sic) tax didn’t stop the floods or fires this year. It’s a fraud, and you have been had.
121
Thats all true Tony, spoken like a true Engineer, however it misses the point. Congress in the USA said in no uncertain terms, there shall be no carbon tax, but Obama has defined the will of the peoples house and has unilaterally introduced these rules instead.
00
WTF? Its the “skeptics” who will be climbing down…
09
At #18.1.2.1.3, I was wrong.. there is no-one with less intelligence than JB !!
80
JB is something of a mystery Andy.
Despite his antagonistic approach I think he is just lonely and likes the intelligent company here.
He tried SkS and only lasted a week; bored witless by the repetitive “show me your link” or “show me the peer review” or “big oil did it” .
Still trying to figure him out.
I worked Trystan out.
He was just educating himself and is now a nicely paid member of the warmer machine.
JB?
KK :).
10
I’ve tried to teach maths to low IQ 14 and 15 year olds, so I thought I had the “zero” position pegged pretty wel..
JB, Fur-brain, Assinine Ass, and now RK have me constantly reassessing that zero point.
10
I’ll consider taking you seriously and climbing down when you learn how to use apostrophes correctly!
10
Jo
Try here
00
Take two
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-10/greens-slam-mcgowan-tax-stance/4510724?section=wa
50
Wow, that ABC article is an interesting example of a propogandists work.
It’s not until the very end that the reader is aware that Mr McGowan is actually a Labour Leader – right up until that point he is referred to as “the opposition leader” just to try and confuse things.
And of curse, the Greens get a weigh in big time with their ABC yet again – here’s a newsflash to whoever wrote that partisan load of crud – most people in australia don’t care about what the greens have to say on anything.
My taxes at work again – ALP communism style…
110
It is in the WA section of the ABC. So when they say opposition leader, its pretty clear its Labor.
But I suppose its too much to expect eastern staters to know anything about WA.
16
Off Topic but on topic for green agendas
From P Gosselin at NoTricksZone:
The green economy, intended to rescue the climate from a man-made climate catastrophe in a computer, is in reality systematically accelerating the wide-scale destruction of the environment today by at least a factor of ten.
150
A review of the film, in English, is available on the Canada Free Press site.
00
Thanks to commenters Warren L, Sceptical Sam and Daremo for the ABC link to the Greens outrage in response. It’s been added to the post.
Merci.
jo
90
And the Greens accused McGowan and the ALP for being delusional as well. Wonders never cease.
90
Louis
The greens accuse labor of being delusional – and they know this is true because the little voices told them.
Only 216 days to go…
Cheers,
Speedy
50
As elections of various government levels approaches, be aware of the obfuscation by the Liebor spin doctors … there is a deliberate campaign through the MSM articles and letters and the blogs to introduce confusion to the reader. You only have to visit Michael Smith’s blog to see what the trolls come up with, some of which is very subtle.
100
BOYCOTT COCA COLA FOR PROMOTING THE GLOBAL WARMNG FRAUD !
Coca Cola (UK) has sold its soul to Big Environment, specifically WWF. According to people in London, the ads (http://www.coca-cola.co.uk/environment/arctic-home/protecting-the-polar-bear.html) are fairly frequent and always state
“The Arctic is being affected by climate change and sea ice is vanishing at a rate of around 11 per cent each decade”
The company is fully into the great polar bear scare (http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/manufacturing_the_great_polar_bear_scare/) .
It’s ironic that Coca Cola is selling a product that releases vast amounts of CO2 if used as directed.
Well let’s help Coca Cola in its objective by not buying its products which are a great way of sequestering CO2.!!!!!!
100
Keep it down angry!
The greens will demand the bubbles in beer be removed next
Then, it is all on. Seriously
80
How will they ever cope without their ‘passion pop’ bubbly ???
20
I know! They’re so wrong! In fact, Artctic summer sea ice has decreased by 50% in three decades. That’s, like, 19% a year!
211
Arctic sea ice was much, much, much more extensive during the last ice age.
Good thing the ice age we had one a couple of hundred years ago was only a little one.
51
And your maths is deplorable !!!
20
Thanks for checking my maffs Andy. I realised after I’d posted that I had typed ‘year’ instead of ‘decade’.
Isn’t this great? We’ve both admitted to mistakes on this one thread. That’s what I call progress.
05
My mistake was one of mistaken zero point. Looks like I might even be wrong again.
00
I think that in early 2012 Coke was going to do a special white polar bear can and donate proceeds per drink can to the WWF … to my recollection, a campaign in the USA put a stop to that.
40
As the bear was going to be special, was it be bipolar?
60
“was it be bipolar”
I didn’t think they had polly bears in Antarctica 😉
00
Off topic …Question to the Scientific people on this site..
As an observant ( Science based ) career person….I have noticed in my city over the past 5 yrs at least .that my windowsills have MORE accumulation of dark brown particles than ever before.!!
I live one street away from a major arterial road..
My hypothesis is …that the use of “unleaded fuels” in cars/trucks etc .is causing more pollution particles to be “pumped” into the atmosphere, than leaded fuels ever did !
Examination of this material resembles soot!
Does unleaded fuels ie plant origin ..actually pump more carbon/soot particles into the atmosphere ..than did previous lead based fuels.??
I personally think it does…but have no proof ..except for observations .
Has anyone else observed the accelerated growth of Lichen on tile roof’s around the East Coast city areas ??
I was taught Lichen does not grow in “polluted areas” …so obviously the “fallout” is VERY friendly to this fungal/plant.
I would be really interested to hear other people’s views on this phenomenon..
50
Shannon,
If you can put together a research proposal and somehow tie it to climate change, you might get some funding for some research.
Just remember to have a section in there about how you believe the increased emissions of trace gasses by human beings may appear to be turning the emissions from unleaded fuel into a more toxic substance than lead originally did.
Remember to tie it into something along the lines of “It’s worse than we thought” and you might be in with a chance.
If you can also state something along the lines that it may have reduced in it’s intensity since the Carbon tax was passed, you may end up with some major Government subsidies. Just be aware that your statements may have to be vetted by the governments department of Climate change. You will be sure to get some major airtime on their ABC as well.
Also, get some practice on how to stifle FOI requests. Also find ways to muddy the data and methods.
You’ll be sweet. Good luck.
30
MadJak,
LOL .. I appreciate your sense of humour…but I am not interested in Research. I see far too much money being wasted on “trivial subjects” now…..instead of “real” services getting the funding they desperately need. ie Health, Aged care and Accomodation for Disabled people ( and dont preach to me about the NDIS ..just progaganda BS…as I am, a ageing mother of a disabled child )
My question above was sincere …that in spite of all the hype re adverse affects of lead …we may indeed be causing a far more serious affect …adding to the ” Great Carbon Bogey” !!
If my observations are correct ….a major “cover up” or suppression would be more to the point ..than Research Grants..!!
30
Shannon
The old style petrols had tetra-ethyl lead in them as an anti-knock agent. The residue from this combustion did in fact emit lead out the exhaust pipe of the vehicle. It would have been a dust and a friend of mine actually did her thesis on lead deposits on roadside vegetation. (Measurements showed it was there.)
My understanding is that the tetra-ethyl lead was replaced with an organic agent, which presumably would have burnt in the engine.
What you are noticing does not necessarily have any links to the change in fuel types. Coincidence does not equate to causation!
Cheers,
Speedy
20
Hi Shannon,
Sorry for the hijacking. Couldn’t resist. You weren’t coming across as an alarmist.
00
The greater prevalence of diesel powered cars and SUVs?
50
shannon, you seem to be struggling under a misapprehension. Both leaded and unleaded petrol were, and still is in the case of unleaded, refined from crude oil. The only difference is that lead was previously added as an anti-knock agent for engines. This was a woefully stupid thing to do as there was never any lead in air beforehand, and the biosphere, having developed in its absence, is not designed to cope with its toxicity. It was a very good move to stop adding it to petrol.
Perhaps you are confusing straight unleaded petrol with unleaded + 10% ethanol, the latter portion (ethanol = alcohol, the same as in beer, wine and spirits) being derived from sugarcane in Australia and Brazil, and other biofuel crops elsewhere. You may have a point about differential production of engine exhaust soot, depending on combustion efficiency, but I don’t have any info on that. Unleaded + ethanol does give lower mileage than straight unleaded, however I’m not sure that any added pollution effects would arise from such.
Hope this clarifies to some extent.
40
Chris,
Thank you for your information to date and I understand what you are saying …..
I dont know whether cars using unleaded + ethanol…are more common than straight unleaded. Can anyone answer this question ?. .
Surely there hasnt been such an increase in diesel usage ..as Brett has suggested which may account for the increased fallout ??
This is a possibility I guess …but my problem doesnt have an “oiley” appearance or feel….so does anyone have any other logical ideas for the fallout particles.?
20
G’Day Shannon,
It is getting more difficult to find Unleaded without Ethanol now as Governments are mandating that a certain percentage of Ethanol is used. Ethanol is hygroscopic which means it absorbs moisture so now you really need to keep refreshing the fuel in your tank and dont let it sit. Catalytic Converters in Motor Vehicles now mean you get very few particulates from the exhaust pipe. There are some additives available that keep the moisture in suspension in the tank. 10% Ethanol seems to equate to a loss in fuel consumption of around 8%. Depends a lot on the driver too.
Diesel has gone from 5000ppm of Sulphur to 500ppm of sulphur to 50ppm of sulphur so the black soot you used to see from diesel engines should now be gone. Modern Diesel engines conform to Euro4 specs and dont run well on high sulphur diesel. It is possible to make Diesel at 10ppm of Sulphur. The reason that is not done is cost. The Catalyst for the Reactor is very expensive and to get down to 10ppm you have to use higher temperatures which destroy the catalyst properties much faster and would make the cost of Diesel much more than it is today.
I suspect what you are noticing is an increase in road dust from the increase in traffic.
Jo I apologise for not being on the topic but I felt this was a good question and deserved a solid answer.
Have a great day.
Kneel.
00
Hi Shannon
Don’t think you need to worry too much about the unleaded producing anything more dangerous than the leaded does.
Basic issue as Chris mentioned may be in the completeness of combustion.
At worst all you are going to get is Carbon dioxide, water and maybe soot.
The ethanol is attracted to water and reduces the ability of the other fuel to burn.
The particulate matter you see on your windowsill may be nothing more than dust stirred up by all the heavy traffic.
Humans have survived very well in dust but the main issue is there is now less lead in the air and that’s great.
When I was kid we had coal fired stove and heavy particulate pollution with dirt everywhere.
Things have improved out of sight. Relax.
KK 🙂
10
suprised its on abc, i have put so much shit on abc on their fb page, about bias, i am suprised i am still allowed to comment! bob down brown stopped me! hahaha
00
In addition to my previous post…
I do NOT believe in Global Warming and have been a sceptic ever since this total SCAM was first promoted.
101
A bit O/T, though not completely. I’ve asked this question in a few places today. It would be good to get some kind of answer. So far no luck. Here we go:
I’ve arranged to send the climate back to when it was good. This is being done through an array of taxes, regulations etc based on non-Kardashian models. But I have a prob, so I’m asking around. Here’s the question I’ve been posting.
I still can’t get a date, not even ballpark, for when the climate, especially our Oz climate, was stable/normal/non-extreme. Any ideas, anybody? I’m so disappointed when I’m told that such-and-such an event is the worst or most extreme in a hundred years. Being a redneck doofus, I assume that means we’ll have to wind the clock back further than a hundred years to return to the good old stable times. Clever people see the word “worst” and conclude that something is new, but I see the word “ago” and assume that something is therefore not new.
For example, a hundred years “ago” in my region of Oz we were setting monthly heat and drought records which still stand. If I roll back over 150 years, the Darling River had stopped flowing. If I roll back over 200 years, there was that horror El Nino of the early 1790s. (It was like this year’s heatwave but not relieved by rain after a mere few days. It went on and bloody on.) In between we had wet times, but I’m a bit concerned at going back to the serial storms of the 1970s or the flood catastrophes of the 1890s and 1950s.
Help! I have ordered my Time Machine but don’t know what year to set it for!
120
I’d suggest going forward in time, not back, setting up with the Eloi, you need to avoid the Morlocks but if memory serves me well the climate is stable.
50
On facebook today someone posted a poster that stated
“German solar power plants produced a world record 22 gigawatts of electricity per hour, equal to 20 nuclear power stations at full capacity.
Solar power in the US has been demonised as a Left Wing Conspiracy”
What they didn’t tell you!
Germany has an installed solar capacity of 32.8GW and set a world record for solar power production with 22 GW produced at midday on Friday 25 and Saturday 26 May 2012.
Someone followed up with a post saying that solar roof installations should be compulsory!
So I replied with the following:
OK, lets get some facts straight.
There are 7.6 million households in Australia and every house will have a 3kW solar panel system installed. At midday on a day when there was no cloud or rain it could produce it’s installed capacity of 22.78GW of power.
Based on the German experience, as described on this poster, where the total installed capacity is 32.8GW yet on it’s best day produced only 22GW at midday we can expect these household systems to produce upward of 15.28GW between 8am and 4pm provided it doesn’t rain and is not overcast.
The cost of these installations based on current rates and including the cost of the current government subsidy rebate would be $55.45 billion dollars.
The same amount spent on new generation coal fired generators such as Kogan Creek in Queensland would finance 46 new power stations with a total out put 24/7 of 34.65GW.
That would allow us to close down all our old inefficient power stations and reduce our total GHG output by over 30% which is well beyond any expectations of Kyoto or Doha.
BTW Germany has plans to build 21 new coal fired power stations over the next decade.
100
22, actually
And these stations are peat-fired – brown coal similar to LaTrobe in Oz. Peat deposits are thick and quite plentiful in Germany (unlike black thermal or coking coal deposits), which is why these stations are peat-fired … but it’s the most CO2-emitting of all the coal fuel sources as it is very high in water content so a lot more (up to twice) needs to be burnt to supply sufficient energy to heat the water boilers for the designed power output
40
janama,
I was in Germany last year …central and southern ….and I never seen ONE solar panel on any roof or Solar Farms ..the entire time I was there.
I did see power stations though ..and I did see a vibrant country …with agriculture in “full flight”.
Over here …we are being fed BS …and have went down the path of ‘extreme Green Policies”..literally destroying our Rural Industries and driving people from the land and food production …..WHY ??
My answer to the “brain washed” Australians…..get yourself overseas ..and REALLY see what other countries are INDEED doing ….We are fools !!
61
Shannon – I am overseas, in Dubai, which generates 32GW of electricity using gas for its 5.4 million population – it uses the power to light the place up, aircondition the whole country and to desalinate sea water which it pumps to the countryside for irrigated agriculture. The UAE is about to install a new nuclear power station that it has purchased from the US. I gather the US will deliver the power station by submarine.
30
janama,
I have been to Dubai ….and coming in by plane ..the city is lit up ..like a pretty Xmas tree …quite spectacular to see and their city planning layed out so well..
I was truely amazed in Northern European and the Baltic region how they too, were progressing and running their countries.
Meanwhile back in Australia …we are “sitting on our hands “…!!
I came home feeling really disgusted and angry…
Australia is going backwards, and being fed total propaganda by a controlled media, and our standard of living and unique way of life is “nose diving”..!!
Nowhere did I see the “restrictions and regulations ” ..that is being forced on us in this country.
People definitely need to travel ..to learn the truth .
30
Shannon – we could do the same if we were prepared to pay our imported workers 600dhs (AUD$158) per month. There are two economies running in Dubai – the Emirati, the tourist, the expat society and the workers. Today I discovered to alternative economy. The economy of the workers.
I broke my dental plate so I arranged to have it repaired at an Indian dentist in Al Karama, a suburb of Dubai. As I was going to be without my plate for a day and night I decided to have some breakfast before the clinic opened. There was a Large Pakistani restaurant down the road so I wandered in and sat down. No one spoke English but I managed to organise myself a typical Indian breakfast that all the taxi drivers and workers were eating. An omlette with a bowl of Channa – chickpea and potato curry, served with a freshly baked Paratha bread, it was delicious, 2 cups of coffee. Total bill – 13dhs. In the Dubai Mall and elsewhere the paratha alone would have been at least 25dhs.
The paratha was 1dhs, the coffee 2.50dhs each, the channa, 3dhs, omlette 4dhs. In aussie money that’s $3.42
00
Shannon, isn’t it amazing what German agriculture can do with $10bn a year in subsidies? So much more efficient than the massive solar subsidies which are – $10bn in 2011.
And the Germans have got one of the most successful solar industries in the world, and the solar subsidies are shrinking.
Doh! The facts keep getting in the way.
05
Hi Ricky
Have you heard that urban myth about German Solar.
Yep they line their garages with solar cells and turn on the banks of lights all night to take advantage of the Solar subsidy.
Regular power at 50 cents per kwh pumped into the miraculous Solar Cells returning a subsidised 75 cents per kwh.
pocket the difference.
That’s where the french got that old saying:
“vive le difference”.
KK
I’m sure it’s just a myth but it serves to illustrate how the rich who can put up banks of subsidized solar can be aided by the less well off who find the “subsidy” stuck onto their own bills.
10
Thanks Keef, you gave me a chuckle. So, “it’s just a rumour, but I’ll repeat it even though it’s probably not true, because it fits with what I believe”. That really IS kinky.
03
Now Ricky if you read the addendum – that’s the message.
Solar power is a political Creature.
It is not a Real source of useful power in the form of roof top units – so wasteful of materials, human energy and so on.
But the worst waste is that is keeping a huge damper on the advancement of human development.
When politicians bring in this sort of progress it diverts energy from where it should be.
Solar power will only succeed when the waste of financial and human assets on the current meme is stopped and all that cash and energy sent to where it should be:
With the scientists at the CSIRO who should have a research budget to find solutions, real economic solutions to getting hold of some of that wasted energy from the sun.
btw
I think that it’s time that big coal and big mining in general started to get out from behind the skirts of the WWF and Greenie Anti Coal movements and acted more responsibly towards the community it works in.
The anti coal movement achieve nothing and have bad motives but that doesn’t mean that the community of sane people is happy with mining.
They don’t give a stuff about damaging people’s homes, they grind ships onto the barrier reef (probably not much permanent harm, but still) and they stir up mud along the coast line.
You could almost imagine they have paid off some politicians: this time the laba parti.
This is 2013 and they can do better.
There is no need to risk our local water supplies and homes by fracking right under established cities in Australia.
Mining and communities CAN coexist but the mining industry is not as pure as it likes to make out and it needs to be faithful to the little things and the little people who are damaged by their arrogance.
Miners have taken a lot of crap from the anti mining nutters but they need to operate from a position where they are perfectly safe in saying they have not imposed on ANY Australians.
They should be big enough to do that.
I have been over the issue of rail transport of Mining exports before when responding to Geoff.
They take short cuts that saves them a few million and damage the homes and lives of thousands of Australians just in my home city alone.
Ordinary Australians are being imposed on by Big Mining and it is not a good look; it makes them look uncaring and arrogant and makes our governments seem complicit.
Maybe they are.
KK
11
Keith, good to see some nuance on this site. Let’s not forget: burning coal produces pollution other than CO2. That pollution puts a lot of people in hospital.
As for rooftop solar being inefficient in $ terms, why should anyone care if individuals want to spend money on solar panels? Rooftop solar has in fact lowered the overall demand on the grid: net demand has been dropping for eight years, and has knocked the top off summer peaks. A lower demand peak menas lower wholesale prices and lower profits for the generators. Check out the ‘merit order effect’. Solar actually lowers electricity prices…
03
“Ricardo K”,
The emissions from the cooling towers of coal fired power stations are called STEAM (WATER VAPOUR) !!
Try thinking before you post next time !
20
Yes Angry
Ricky is a Warmer Aploogistwho wants us to deny the economic (engineering ) fact that roof top sloar is a political con.
He says that “Rooftop solar has in fact lowered the overall demand on the grid: net demand has been dropping for eight years, and has knocked the top off summer peaks” .
crap.
The water supply companies are using the same logic to justify the fact that no new dams are being built in Australia.
He is also an economic ILLITERATE when he says: “why should anyone care if individuals want to spend money on solar panels”.
Well the answer is quite obvious. All the other Power users end up paying twice for their power because they have to BUY the solar units from the increased power bills.
And I’m not sure that German scam is an urban myth.
The whole renewables thing is a scam.
KK
30
If you live in Australia you would know that many businesses are shutting down beside the large Aluminum factories locally which shed hundreds of jobs because of power contract problems.
That’s where Ricky’s reduction in usage comes from.
The Closure of Industry and Small business.
KK
30
Shannon is offering Ricky an education:
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/02/the-wa-labor-opposition-leader-just-announced-he-doesnt-like-the-carbon-tax/#comment-1238366
10
KK @ 29.2.2.2.2
This is so correct:
1. Manufacturing, services and finance were least popular for start-ups with a near 100% decline. 2012
2. Failures were highest in services (up 58%), finance (up 58%) and construction (up 66%). 2012
3. Since 2008, Australian business failures had steadily risen, growing more than 30% in the past three years, with the worst results in the services sector (77% more failures) and manufacturing (57%).
4. Manufacturing will cease to exist if energy does not become cheaper.
Ricky lives in a Green Watermelon.
20
Hi Dave,
The figures you are quoting are just figures to people like Ricki.
Behind those numbers however lies a lot of pain and heartache because other contires have decided to devalue their overseas depbts and make their own manufacturing industry more viable at the same time.
Meanwhile we have the “World’s Most Magnificent Treasurer’ crowing because he saved Australia by borrowing 250 billion AUD from future generations.
In the meantime all of the small goods production has moved to the low cost centre across the sea in NZ leaving us with more unemplyed.
Once the Lucky Country.
KK
30
I don’t think the carbon tax – introduced July 2012 – is wholly responsible for the failure of manufacturing in Australia dating back to 2008. The Aussie dollar, however, has climbed remarkably. Why? Our raw resources are so cheap and plentiful. It’s called Dutch disease. We could lower the AUD by taxing resources so hard that we actually hurt their profits, but that’s pretty unlikely.
WRT aluminium, there has been global over-capacity for a while, and consolidation. Blame Alcoa.
Angry, that’s a good moniker. Gee, that steam looks thick. http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/508bb54569bedd7756000052-640-320-600-300/china-pollution-1.jpg
04
I agree Ricky when you say “I don’t think”.
it’s obvious.
KK
30
Rickey
BlueScope are building 10 new plants in Indonesia – where in the world do you think all the manufacturing is going to? Asia.
Porky Howes got JG to pay BlueScope, $100 million Steel Reformation plan??
No lost jobs? 1,000’s have gone. Where is BlueScope going? Asia.
You’re just sprouting lies again.
Aluminium manufacture is growing globally. Aluminium has forecast of 6% global rise in demand to 50 million tonnes for 2013 and on track already.
Combet says China is leading the world in CO2 emmission reduction – you are just reading off his totally false report.
30
Germany’s solar dream in reality.
40
Janama, what’s surprising is that even Spiegel recognises it’s a money hole. When you look at those acres of solar panels aging and collecting grime under dull winter skies, you realise how Europe is able to manufacture ruin every few generations.
At least Germany and the East have piles of brown coal and nice new power stations to burn the stuff. (I so admire how Merkel used Fukushima to tip billions back into brown coal – where it needed to go!) Imagine trying to say no to Russia and Gazprom if all you’ve got is some hectares of solar panels under snow.
Like Germany, Australia will still have the resources once we’ve wiped the green goo from our minds. But how do countries like Spain cope? They are left with “renewables” at a time when everyone is tired of fiddling numbers and shifting costs. Once Le Monde and the Guardian can no longer keep a straight face when reporting the latest triumph of wind or solar then those who have nukes and fossil fuels will have won a tedious and expensive game that was never worth playing.
Then the Europeans will remember how much they do NOT like one another!
20
nice one Robert 🙂 From Dubai I’m off to Paris, maybe I’ll learn to appreciate Nuclear.
20
Message to Nice One, repeat, message to Nice One.
Please contact your master in Hades and ask if any snow has fallen there recently.
I have just heard the most astounding thing, an event I would never have thought would happen.
Chris Monckton was just in a phone interview with John Safran on his segment Sunday Night Safran.
Monckton getting airtime on JJJ, run by Our ABC. They spent most of the interview talking about the EU and global government. And Safran didn’t challenge him once about global warming!
I was driving at the time and felt like I should pull over and check I wasn’t hallucinating!
30
Business Spectator: McGowan flip-flops on carbon tax: Barnett
10
LOL…
11 Feb: Brisbane Times: AAP: WA Labor leader against carbon tax
But Mr McGowan says he does support an emissions trading scheme…
http://news.brisbanetimes.com.au/breaking-news-national/wa-labor-leader-against-carbon-tax-20130211-2e77m.html
10