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


Advertising


Australian Speakers Agency



GoldNerds

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



The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper



Archives

Australians voted for “No Carbon Tax” but may get Net Zero deal anyhow. Thank China, and US Voters (who probably didn’t vote for it either)

Hello Nuclear Subs means Hello Net Zero Targets?

Nuclear Submarine, HMS Ambush, Nuclear Submarine

HMS Ambush

As I suspected, the whole Net Zero witchcraft push is being driven by our defense partners, and has nothing much to do with Australian voters. That explains why the government that won The Climate Election with a skeptical stance are now pushing blindly for “Net Zero targets”. It also explains why the public debate has shifted since the AUKUS deal just in time for Glasgow and has no content, apart from the insistence that we don’t want to be “left behind” in some global fashion race to wreck our electricity infrastructure faster than everyone else.  Kudos to The Nationals who are still trying to respond to both The Voters, and the Science. Send them your support.

With this admission from inside Cabinet, we see that the AUKUS sub deal was probably quietly loaded with a climate deal too. If you want our subs, and our protection, you need to obey the carbon cult. Translated —  “the Western Alliance” means nuclear subs from the US and UK. The veil is pulled back on the illusion of Democracy.

So now it’s “Build solar farms, and windmills, sign up for carbon credits or the US and UK won’t defend you?”

Scott Morrison’s national security argument for net zero

by Greg Brown, The Australian

Scott Morrison told Liberal MPs that climate change action had become a key pillar of the western alliance as he declared his intention to adopt both a plan and a formal target to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

So the reason we may get “Net Zero Targets” and more expensive and unreliable electricity is because China is belligerently threatening us, and because the US Election was done with mass mail in votes, no security, no ID, and electronic voting machines that were hooked up to the internet.

carbon credits

Mr Morrison told MPs the plan included a “nationally determined commitment” net zero by 2050, declaring there were economic and security imperatives in transitioning to a carbon neutral future.

He said Australia needed to rely on the western alliance “now more than ever” and a net zero commitment was important for Australia’s standing in the international community.

Sources said Mr Morrison told Liberal MPs they needed to be aware Australia would be “drawing down on a lot of historical capital” if the government did not make the commitment to net-zero.

So we are being bullied into it by UK and US forces, but perhaps they are being bullied too? After all,  Joe Biden was “the Big Guy” in China CCP dealings. Perhaps that matters?

Who benefits? Follow the money — ultimately this serves China and Big Bankers: 

Our weakened industrial might serves China, but the fake currencies serve Big Bankers, and big unaccountable government bodies (like the UN) serve both:

Liberal MPs were left with the impression the government would expand the trading of international carbon credits, with Mr Morrison and Mr Taylor saying the system would be used by Pacific nations.

“They said if we don’t buy (carbon credits from Pacific nations), if we don’t draw them into our ecosystem so to speak, then other nations will buy them and they will get dragged into their sphere of influence,” a Liberal MP said, who believed the “other nations” referred to China.

We can speculate — the real powerbrokers here may be the CCP and the Big Bankers.

Big Money, Stratospheric spending.We’ve known for years now that the biggest lobbyists for “carbon markets” were the giant financial houses, as I have reported since 2008, the most committed fans of international carbon markets are  caring green groups like Deutsche Bank, Bank of America, HSBC, JP Morgan, Citigroup and Goldman Sachs . They’re the ones that benefit from a new fiat currency based on government rules and created from thin air —  the brokers of an international currency profit from every deal, no matter who buys or who sells, and no matter what the price is, as long as “We the People” are forced to buy these credits.

The Carbon Market is forecast to be the largest single commodity market in the world — bigger than oil, gas and gold. And it’s a market that has no connection to reality, no natural limits, and it can be used to favour compliant industries and companies with the right “tailored” loop-holes. If you annoy your rulers, they will arrange for your carbon punishment.

And the people of those little Pacific Nations would rather we just gave them foreign aid direct. But if the money is funnelled through the UN, it makes the UN stronger, and if the CCP are allowed to keep using the UN as their lap dog (as they did with the WHO ensuring the spread of Covid) presumably that’s a good thing for the CCP too. We buy useless windmills for the islands which quickly fail, while the CCP funds coal fired plants and infrastructure that is worth something and will last for years.

We are sacrificing our electricity grids and President Xi is here to help us.

China, dragon flag.

So we, as skeptics, have two choices — one is to support every last democratically elected representative and to protest, protest, protest! If there were giant marches in the streets it gives Scott Morrison more ammunition to take to Boris and Biden and point out how hard it is for Australia to comply. We stopped the trainwreck in 2009 with a mass email campaign in the weeks after ClimateGate and before Copenhagen.

The other choice in the New Corrupt Order is to do what every other nation is, mostly pandering to symbolic targets while increasing their coal use. We could copy China which has put brakes on wind and solar subsidies,  is going nuclear and in a massive wayChina only ever agrees to make unenforceable long term commitments with no consequences. Nukes cost more than coal, but if we have to go “Net Zero” at least with uranium we aren’t adopting more of what surely IS a national security risk — more unreliable, grid destroying wind and solar “farms”.

Some people wondered why I viewed the US election as more important than our Australian one, but this admission from Scott Morrison shows exactly why.  The US election controls Australian policy too. 

This is a harsh lesson that we should always have been able to defend ourselves. Without a good defense force, Scott Morrison had to sell our soul to the team with bigger guns, more boats and bombs.

This post marks the coming together of so many threads that I’ve been writing on for thirteen years. Here are some of those posts:

All those caring Bankers want you trade Carbon. They just want to save the world right?

Carbon credits are just another “fiat” currency that make the rich richer: 

Big Governments get bigger when they have to control the weather too: 

The renewables industry is 100% dependent on the myth that “carbon” matters:

China is not even trying to reduce carbon emissions:

10 out of 10 based on 79 ratings

197 comments to Australians voted for “No Carbon Tax” but may get Net Zero deal anyhow. Thank China, and US Voters (who probably didn’t vote for it either)

  • #
    Grogery

    Scomo and the LNP’s arrogance astounds me and I think it may well be their downfall come the election.

    They have forgotton how they actually (against the odds) won the last election.

    I don’t imagine conservative voters will be voting for the greens/alp mob, they will go for minor parties and independents that align with their views.

    With very little point of difference between the 2 major parties, the lefties will stay to the left and the LNP will most likely gift the leadership to the greens/alp rabble on a silver platter.

    Probably won’t matter who is in power anyway, they’re all in it together.

    590

    • #
      Mark Allinson

      ” … it may well be their downfall come the election.”

      That would inevitably mean mean a Labor government, which would not need the prompting of Biden’s US to kill off the coal/manufacturing sector – they would be happy to make such a “progressive” move unilaterally.

      In essence, the “net zero” philosophy is: The world powers who hold the financial reins have decreed that the West will shrink as China expands.

      The refusal of any Western nation to do the required shrinking of its economy and manufacturing base will mean that the US and UK will not offer that nation protection from China.

      That is, either do what China wants or we will expose you to Chinese aggression.

      120

      • #
        Ursus Augustus

        I basically agree.

        Together with et US and UK, Europe and a bunch of other nations, not the least being small Pacific Island nations and of course NZ, have all dreunk the koolade and have together with big international finance etc all but put a gun to our head and said sign up or to cop it. In that context the military threat from China is actually comparatively small. The Euro loons would happily see us sacrificed as an example of their ‘even handedness’, I mean the French are likely sharpening their economic guillotine as I type.

        That said, its an ill wind as they say so maybe some viable technologies may come of this, including nuclear and maybe, just maybe we will start to look at the energy demand side and just put aside the suplly side obsessions and demonisation.

        Thermally efficient and even better designed, smaller footprinbt and cheaper housing in the general mix, less cul de sac urban sprawl and greater use of public transport. Hybrid vehicles actually make sense (having owned one), are cheaper and an easy adaption from IC cars while small ‘town car’ EV’s might actually be affordable. Converting SUV’s to EV’s mean everyone driving a Hummer mass equivalent which is just nuts. The big question will be “Will the NIMBY’s break out into open ‘me-me-me’ revolution?”

        I’m not convinced on hydrogen. Sure there is no CO2 emissions but 100% H2O which is also a ‘greenhouse gas’. Some CO2 ends up in plants and some H2O will end up in the ocean but will the atmospheric mix stay the same? I doubt it. Wow, am I a hydrogen denier?? OMG! Am I the first??

        30

        • #
          Ursus Augustus

          Just to quantify the atmospheric H2O thing, it already accounts for about 50% of the planets greenhouse effect just with water vapour and another 25% or so if you include clouds vs CO2 which is about 20% of the total effect.

          So, on what basis do you shift to a ‘green hydrogen’ energy source, generating water vapour, as a way of avoiding the greenhouse effect of CO2?

          This has a whiiff of that nutjob Timothy Leary who postulated that LSD woud ‘expand our minds’ as against cause schizophrenia.

          It really does quantify the degree of mania that now surrounds carbon, that unique element that is at the centre of all life.

          I/m not a big fan of Pauline but can someone PLEASE EXPLAIN?

          20

      • #
        Lucky

        either do what China wants or we will expose you to Chinese aggression.

        How about- we say, thanks but no.

        We will get no subs, no F16 or F35 planes, we make far fewer sales to US and Europe.
        They may cut sales to us, we buy more from China and India, but we must remake our manufacturing, this requires reform of the union movement. It may not work, but it gives us a few more years to try to develop our own industry and defence.

        10

    • #
      Ted1

      There has to be something that we haven’t been told yet.

      60

      • #
        Bruce

        “They know they are lying. We know they are lying. They know that we know they are lying.
        Yet they still lie.” – Alexander Solzhenitsyn

        70

    • #
      Strop

      It’s a big backflip on everything the Libs have been saying.
      But it’s recoverable if they push for reliable energy via nuclear at a reasonable cost and don’t just rush into renewables.

      Shorten was ridiculed and possibly lost the last election by not answering the cost question simply saying what’s the cost of not taking action.
      I nearly fell off the couch the other night when Frydenberg uttered the exact same words when asked about cost.

      170

    • #
    • #
      Philip

      Might be a bit of a swing to independents but Australians will never abandon the two party system. Have a look at comments in here – a place where one would expect dissent – if you want any confirmation. Libs who are annoyed at this decision always fear ALP who are always that bit worse and will keep voting LIbs, despite the sell out.

      Myself I refuse to vote, which is basically a gift to ALP I guess. There’s no rosy picture. Its a slow death or a quick one.

      10

  • #
    Hasbeen

    Perhaps it’s time for Qld & WA to leave the commonwealth. The commonwealth today is Qld Coal & WA iron ore & gas. With out those the rest would have trouble raising the funds for a dozen windmills.

    382

    • #
      clarence.t

      Newcastle coal !

      191

      • #
        beowulf

        Yes, I think Hasbeen needs a lesson in coal exports. 10,000 tonnes goes down the rails near me at 4 to 6 minute intervals headed for Newcastle while the ships are piling up waiting to load. That’s a lot of the black stuff, way more than QLD, and that’s just Newcastle, then NSW also has Port Kembla.

        For almost a century the mendicant frontier states of WA and QLD were propped up by NSW and VIC — that was the price the developed states paid for federation — and now that WA and QLD have some toys of their own they don’t want to share them.

        193

        • #
          GlenM

          Boggabri/ Narrabri coal.

          70

        • #
          Hasbeen

          Last year NSW coal exports, 169 million tons
          Last year Qld coal exports, 226 million tons.
          Nsw has to import a lot more to supply it’s larger population.

          What rubbish. While we had high import duties to support Victorian & NSW industries, the rest of us were paying 50% more to fund those industries than we would have to import the same stuff. The support was from the little states to the big states in a very large way.

          92

        • #
          TedM

          “For almost a century the mendicant frontier states of WA and QLD were propped up by NSW and VIC — that was the price the developed states paid for federation — and now that WA and QLD have some toys of their own they don’t want to share them.”

          Absolute nonsense Beowolf, in the 1960’s WA alone was producing around 60% of the nations export income, and it’s still pulls well above it’s weight.

          61

          • #
            Ronin

            They’re talking two centuries ago

            10

          • #
            Ursus Augustus

            If they had their own way WA would have been first off the block for the Japanese once they had secured Singapore. They new all about the iron ore and no doubt the gold. Go it alone now folks and you will be China’s favourite ‘bitch’/’toy boy’, Comrade McGowan will happily sell you off into slavery to stay in power for life.

            Oh and I am a WA expat who moved ‘Over East’ decades ago and has never looked back (although I miss the Rotto of old and Freo is halfway civilised)

            10

    • #
      Ted1

      The commonwealth is indeed broken.

      With Tasmania’s 550,000 and South Australia’s 1.75 million holding each the same number of seats in the senate as NSW with 8 million + and Victoria 6.6 million the system is wide open fo managed corruption. This was evidenced in the submarine dealing. How is Scott Morrison planning to get votes in SA without the submarines?

      40

      • #
        Ian

        “With Tasmania’s 550,000 and South Australia’s 1.75 million holding each the same number of seats in the senate as NSW with 8 million + and Victoria 6.6 million the system is wide open fo managed corruption. ”

        Perhaps you are not aware that the Senate was constructed that way so that states with small populations have an equal say as those with large populations

        51

        • #
          Ted1

          Indeed it was. And it has now passed its time.

          20

          • #
            Bruce

            No; however, the entire “Federation” (of sovereign States) thing has been inverted and subverted.

            The statists and legalists just love it that way, because it WILL inevitably result in the neutering of States and the systematic imposition of totalitarian central RULE (NOT “government”).

            We are well down that track now and being cheered on by Academia and the Lamestream Media. If the “talking points” trending on various radio outlets is any indication, the “Nudge” is well underway.

            00

          • #
            Lucky

            That was the agreement under which the States opted to enter the Federation.
            If the agreement is broken the Federation is invalid.

            00

            • #

              Exactly Lucky. If the smaller population states don’t have Senate votes they will merely become the powerless chattels of the big states. That isn’t a Federation they want to be a part of.

              Scott Morrison has, sadly, looked like the PM for Sydney lately. The ABC too is the left-leaning-Sydney-Melbourne Broadcasting Commission. The corruption Ted1 fears is here, but it isn’t due to the Senate seats. Most Senators in WA of both majors run for Their Parties, not for Their State. The worst corruption is in The Media and the institutions. If journalists reported minor parties and interviewed independent candidates before the election Australians may well vote “outside the one party system”. But the media gives The Greens glory and ignores all the Right alternatives unless it thinks it can make fun of them.

              30

    • #
      reformed+warmist+of+logan

      The only problem with this fairly worthy response is that they are both currently labor states, & have already fully od’d on the global warming coolaid.
      Warm regards, reformed Warmist of Logan.

      00

      • #
        Ian

        “The only problem with this fairly worthy response is that they are both currently labor states, & have already fully od’d on the global warming coolaid.”

        I’m not sure to which states you are referring but if they are those mentioned in the post by Ted1 @ 2.2, namely NSW, Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania only Victoria is Labor the other three are all Liberal. So if Tas and SA have “fully od’d on the global warming Kool-aid” it aint because they are Labor.

        Do you think News Corp and Peter Dutton, who have recently done a complete volte face and now agree zero emissions by 2050 is the way to go, have been influenced by these Liberal states.

        10

  • #
  • #
    Nezysquared

    Something which meshes very nicely with Jo’s previous posts on the banking system. https://rumble.com/vn7lf5-monopoly-who-owns-the-world-must-see.html

    130

    • #
      RobB

      Thanks for this link Nezy^2. A rather fascinating video.

      10

      • #
        Nezysquared

        I thought so too. I did some further research and couldn’t find anything in error. Woodside, NAB, FMG, Chevron, Wesfarmers – the list goes on. Major institutional shareholders are all in the big 4 and mostly Vanguard….. Explains much surrounding the dis/information wars on Covid, vaccines etc…

        20

  • #
    another ian

    From elsewhere

    :Not trusting the government doesn’t make you a conspiracy theorist.

    It makes you a history buff”

    370

  • #
    Mentat

    Spot on – on everything Jo.

    Particularly the US election.

    Elections have consequences.

    Stolen elections have catastrophic consequences.

    310

  • #
    Graham Richards

    If there’s a voter desertion of the Lib/Nat coalition to independents it had better have high numbers or Labor will still get their way with the help of the defeated Coalition!

    Somehow the Labor Party must be forced to declare it’s true stand & the policies on climate/zero emissions well before the election so the electorate will be fully aware of what they’re voting for!

    Remember none of the current delegates will around when the economic disaster ensues, so they don’t really care & will use any policies they can to look after themselves for the immediate future.

    Not too many of the current conservative voters will be around in 2050 either. We must ask the question therefore, does anyone really care??

    200

    • #
      el+gordo

      A small handful of Nats are holding out for sanity and if they fold its the end of democracy as we have known it.

      ‘Barnaby Joyce has said Scott Morrison’s net zero plan won’t get support from the Nationals as he warned they will not be threatened or pushed into it.’
      (Daily Tele)

      130

  • #
    Serge Wright

    This is where Scomo loses me. He’s trying to suggest that we go Net Zero for national security reasons, but Net Zero would completely devastate our economy and society and leave the small bit remaining to a simple takeover by China. If someone can suggest how this makes any sense please…

    All I have come up with is that there might be a secret “fake target deal” to enact global trade sanctions against non-compliant countries, designed to target China, but China is way too powerful with half the world’s countries in its debt from Belt and Road and that would never work. Also, Biden is the “big guy” and already been bought off by the CCP.

    IMO – If Net Zero is a real commitment and gets signed, then we all need to be very afraid. When you run through the impacts it’s the worst case scanario, akin to the globe being hit by a big asteroid and it would wipe out just as many people. The early impacts to Australia would be from the huge energy shortage, causing total loss of our oil imports as all countries halt their exports to retain energy for their domestic use. This would be a brutal outcome for us down here and would halt all transport within weeks and lead to no food in supermarkets and mass starvation would rapidly follow. After the mass starvation deaths there would be people on farms and with large processed food stockpiles that survive, but they would then need to survive with no power, tap water, transport or medial services, living in a mad max type world where it’s everyone for themself. It would be a brutal outcome that you would never wish upon your worst green Marxist enemy.

    361

    • #
      GlenM

      We, of all countries lose the most;constraints on production and income generation options. We are strategically screwed.

      160

    • #
      Gary S

      We had better begin a rather massive draught horse breeding program. They can once again become the B doubles of the roads.

      80

      • #
        Serge Wright

        LOL, I was actually think the same thing.

        On the topic of our own oil situation, there was a study into the lack of onshore supply a few years back and it concluded we urgently needed to rapidly start up a coal to oil generation capacity and bring back the refineries. Link below:

        https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjJxLrV_dTzAhUjwzgGHbjSBegQFnoECAkQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.aph.gov.au%2FDocumentStore.ashx%3Fid%3Dc296f0b2-1eef-4db9-9b4a-b3466af56170%26subId%3D302929&usg=AOvVaw0AbccFVwLXs7haiL3Id2kM

        If this report had been actioned it would significantly de-risk the Net Zero transition for Australia. Yes, the world would collapse, but we would be able to survive down here with food and energy security whilst we watched the rest of the world crumble. In my opinion we need to ramp this up at maximum effort from today. The big oil crunch will be happening this decade and possibly within a few years if Net Zero gets signed off at COP26. There is also the big shale oil field in SA that is as big as Saudi Arabia, but it needs to be extracted before we can save our sorry As.

        https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-01-24/major-oil-discovery-in-outback-sa/4481982

        70

        • #
          MP

          We have the largest untapped known oil reserves in the world, we do not have the refining capabilities to meet our own consumption anymore.
          Morison has allowed one of our remaining three to shut and is subsidising the other two to remain open, each refinery had three trains, this has been reduced to one at each.

          https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-11/australia-loses-another-oil-refinery-risking-fuel-supply/13139648

          233 billion barrels is a whole lot of oil
          It most certainly is – we’re talking game-changing amounts for the oil industry. It’s double what’s found in Iraq, almost twice as much as Iran, and considerably more than Canada or Venezuela can boast.
          In fact, it’s only just shy of the oil reserves of mighty Saudi Arabia. If a further discovery is made, Australia could end up being the oil capital of the world. The nation already now owns 12% of the world’s oil reserves.

          https://www.thesized.com/trillions-of-dollars-oil-australia-outback/

          This is the planed destruction of our society.

          110

          • #
            farmerbraun

            Naturally the NZ Refining Co has already voted to close our only oil refinery.
            “Punching above our weight” . . . again . LOL.

            30

          • #
            Dennis

            Also consider the capped oil wells around Western Queensland capped by the Commonwealth Oil Refineries government owned organisation in the mid-1900s because Middle East oil was less expensive to pump and transport at that time.

            20

            • #
              Bruce

              Dennis: The exploration companies were drilling well into the late 1980’s

              There are dozens of capped, viable wells all over south-west Queensland. NOBODY puts a “Christmas Tree” or a surveyed market cap on a dry hole.

              The stuff down there is VERY “light” crude; having a high proportion of light fractions. The sludge from the middle east makes good bitumen and axle grease. It is also the LOWEST Sulphur-content crude in the world. HUGELY valuable for that point alone.

              E are being played by future slave masters.

              50

              • #
                Dennis

                I have searched the internet for more information, the little I know was told to me by relatives who came from pioneering family properties in the Winton and Roma Districts of Queensland.

                10

    • #
      farmerbraun

      BofA suggests that printing 150 trillion will go a long way to financing Net Zero , and the subsequent hyperinflation will achieve the very same dire outcome that you describe.
      Damned if you do . . . . or don’t.

      10

  • #
    TdeF

    What is the difference between 12 nuclear subs and nuclear power stations? Same technology. And both without dangerous emissions. The Greens can hardly complain now. We are going nuclear to save the world from Climate Change.

    170

    • #
      John+R+Smith

      Yes, but you must remember, that governments the have maintained nuclear arsenals for 70 years, capable of destroying the planet three times over …
      are desperate that every man, woman, other, and child receive a free injection to make sure no one has even 0.1% chance of dying.

      120

  • #

    Peer pressure prevails! What is this “western alliance” that has apparently forced him to take this action?

    101

    • #

      It may not have been big news for you in the US but here in Australia the AUKUS deal meant we dumped our diesel subs deal with France and will get UK or US Nuclear subs and “an alliance” called AUKUS. Since we have no nuclear anything, bar one medical research reactor, this was A Big Deal. And it was popular here, out of the blue. Though it could hardly be called a new alliance.

      But, as I suspected, there was a price. We have fought nearly every battle that the US has asked us to fight. We’ve been the most reliable ally, but that wasn’t enough. We had to sell out on carbon trading and “Net Zero”. And what else I wonder?

      461

      • #
        Tombo

        This started with Boris Johnson being pressured to change his position – largely influenced by the spectacular months long Australian fires media coverage (“The world is on fire!”) just prior to his near-death covid conversion experience. (and possible loss of some brain function at the time)
        Then once Joe Biden was selected it was two against one – Australia was the last holdout, and the “business community” (large banks and insurers lobby) put the final push in.
        Again the lobbyists did this by omitting evidence that the Australian fires were exacerbated by an SSW event (as BOM predicted and on this very site – though most people focused on the ozone coverage instead)

        150

      • #

        I would happily trade a worthless promise for nuclear subs. These 2050 targets are a way of doing nothing now. They may be all that COP26 gets.

        192

        • #
          Ted1.

          The subs are a way of doing nothing now too. Maybe we could get lucky.

          It makes no sense for me. I thought Oz is already leading the way on reducing carbon emissions. Why are we the target for these demands?

          110

          • #

            The 2050 net zero target is a big fat symbol. It has nothing to do with now. Plus Biden needs something to claim since it is unlikely that any of his so-called climate legislation will pass before COP26, if ever. He can claim he brought Oz to the table.

            92

            • #
              Choroin

              It’s not a big fat symbol, it’s the bi-partisan and international agreement necessary for PCA (Personal Carbon Allowance) Legislation to be tabled and passed with no opposition in Australia.

              With engineered consent and completely captured media and academia, such symbols are actually the cornerstones of irreversible economic tyranny.

              20

        • #
          Peter Fitzroy

          Exactly David – this is just posturing by cynical politicians, and helped by an equally cynical Murdoch press.

          As posted by Jo, the electorate voted, the winners should stick to their platform (which and to their credit, our National Party is doing)

          /I’m not saying I agree with the platform, but in a democratic society, I accept the majority decision.

          211

          • #
            el+gordo

            With the Murdoch stable joining the MSM green left delusion, its a disaster for free speech and democracy.

            100

        • #
          Dennis

          When Australia’s six Collins Class Submarines were built here they were based on the Swedish design now Gotland Class Submarines modified and increased in size to Royal Australian Navy requirements. They received very poor media ratings when first launched because of technical problems long since overcome, in fact last year The Weekend Australian newspaper commented that Collins Class remains a highly rated by international standards vessel compared to all conventional diesel-electric submarines.

          Recently the Minister for Defence announced a plan to prepare the six Collins Class Submarines for future service, major overhauls and installing new technology that will result in an even better deterrent capabilities. Noting that technology is now developed to enable conventional power submarines to remain submerged for much longer periods and propulsion that is even quieter, more difficult to detect.

          I wonder if new Gotland Class Submarines would be a better option in the short term to add to the Collins Class fleet?

          The United States Navy chartered a current model Gotland Class and were apparently very impressed with its performance.

          20

      • #
        Raving

        As Gee Aye pints out, ‘Nobody is suggesting nuclear’. An enourmous hole of silence heard around the world.

        Meanwhile the world races to Net zero loathe to mention the obvious solution

        Interesting

        80

        • #
          Choroin

          Implying that a solution is the actual solution in this problem-reaction-solution.

          When dealing with Malthusian billionaire psychopaths who view the world as their fidget spinner, it helps to think from the perspective of such a mind.

          These people aren’t looking to solve any problem other than the world not yet being a technocratic authoritarian hellscape operating under a technological form of feudalism with a population cap of around 500 million, managed, hominids formerly known as ‘people’.

          10

      • #
        Raving

        I think Biden is a different kind of president. He’s doing many things right. Not sure his Democrat constituency will let him get away with sensible choices

        03

  • #
    John+R+Smith

    Yes, both Ozzies and Americans are getting Danned.
    Let’s go Brandon.

    150

  • #
    Joe

    LFTR’s (Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactor) have the capability of burning 99% of the fuel Uranium (transmuted from Thorium). Sufficient numbers of them would make pricing electricity almost pointless from a generation view. Thorium is readily available in Australia and we have enough material to power us for centuries. In addition, LFTR’s are designed to run at between 800 to 1000 degrees centigrade, facilitating the cheap conversion of sea water to fresh water. A 1 GigaWatt LFTR every 100 square kilometres could provide cheap electricity and GigaLitres of fresh water to its transmission area. City areas could have multiple LFTR’s as needed. LFTR’s are inherently safe and fail safe. The nuclear fuel is molten in a flouride salt, a small plug of frozen salt prevents the draining of the reactor into a holding tank. Should the reactor fail, the cooling of the salt plug will cease and it will melt, draining the fuel to the holding tank and stopping the reactor immediately.

    182

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      Joe:
      Like your enthusiasm BUT can we have a liquid fluoride thorium reactor actually running before galloping off in all directions? And a 1GW reactor might need something a little more sophisticated than the original 5MW (not fluoride) thorium type which ran.

      And thorium can be (and is) used in many reactors although nowhere as efficiently as in the proposed LFTR.

      80

      • #
        Joe

        Chinese are starting their LFTR next year.
        In the States FLIBE inc, are progressing to a pilot reactor to test the monitoring of the reactor and chemical processing of the fuel.

        20

    • #
      Tel

      Liquid flouride has so far proven impossible to keep in pipes, especially when minimum reactor lifespan must be 30 years.

      It’s waiting on better materials to become available.

      80

      • #
        Joe

        Not liquid fluoride. Molten fluoride salts of lithium and beryllium. Fluoride salts are chemically stable and very difficult to disassociate. Lithium and Beryllium Fluoride are used as the medium of transport. Thorium HexaFluoride and Uranium HexaFluoride are melted into the transport medium. The Fluorides are chosen because it is much harder to knock them out of an atomic compound with the free neutrons in the reactor. Water on the other hand disassociates into hydrogen and oxygen at the mere approach of a neutron. The other advantage is that the fission products also readily form fluorides and we can then use chemistry to remove them from the fuel stream. Also we can leave the fission products in the reactor until they reach a less radioactive state and then extract them, reducing the exposure to radiation.

        60

      • #
        MP

        They have not thought it through, just make the pipes out of recycled toothpaste tubes.

        70

    • #
      Lance

      A good Thesis paper on thorium cycles and their benefits/issues.

      “A review of the benefits and applications of the thorium fuel cycle”

      https://scholarworks.uark.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=cheguht

      40

  • #
    truth

    This is a really dangerous inflexion point…so Morrison should go to COP26 and bust it wide open.

    Australia should never succumb to blackmail…..we have less to hide or feel compromised for than any other country on earth.

    He should start by just calmly laying it all out…maybe in private meetings ….say we want to buy the subs because China is threatening to nuke us with their missiles simply because we wanted to know the origin of COVID to prevent it from happening again…but we’re not up for paying blackmail…so if our allies of > 100 years refuse to sell us the subs at the cost of hundreds of billions…and refuse to stand with us against the adversary who threatens us and the world…we’ll go it alone….get some subs somewhere else or make do with the old Collins class….and meanwhile pull out all stops with research into drones ….asymmetric warfare options etc….so we can try to defend ourselves.

    If that doesn’t change anything…he should announce to the Eurocartel….the gormless Royals and Boris…and to Kerry …Soros…and whoever else is running America…and to the conference…that Australia knows now what their real game is ….knows it ends with power and control of the world under a Marxist Fascist cabal …their New World Order…and ultimately with China dominating the world…knows it’s a no-win game and an obscene prospect…anathema …for a people who have fought in the cause of individual freedom in every conflict where freedom has been threatened ….for all of Australia’s existence as a nation.

    Morrison should tell them the Australian people won’t play this evil game because they’re not prepared to betray their parents and grandparents who fought …and many died…to preserve our freedoms.

    America can’t afford to cut Australia loose….not because they give a damn about us…but because of our geography…straddling the Indian and Pacific Oceans and important sea lanes….and because without the intel from their installations here….they’re blind to Chinese missile activity and launches etc …against America.

    But they also can’t afford to let China have Australia…because then it would truly be all over.

    For America now, Australia is a reliable friendly source of many of the vital minerals like rare earths…lithium…uranium ..thorium…cobalt…everything it needs to stay powerful…but if it decides to jettison us because we failed to fold to blackmail…and it thereby risks China taking Australia and appropriating all of the minerals and commodities the world most needs…it puts itself…America… at existential risk…especially as China and Russia are showing signs of collaborating against the democracies.

    So Scott Morrison should use this moment to shake some sense into the whole world…go for broke because capitulation to blackmail will just ensure we’ll never be a sovereign autonomous free nation again…curtains for Australia.

    The next demand would be that we open our borders to all comers.

    Or if he’s not brave enough to do all of this…he should sign up to the minimum…come home and once the subs deal is signed ditch the toxic hex re emissions …do what’s required to keep Australia prosperous and tell them when they complain …that we’re only doing what China and the rest of the world is doing…paying lip service to emissions cuts so we can survive.

    350

    • #
      el+gordo

      ‘ … we’ll go it alone…’

      Totally agree, we should quit the Alliance because Premier Xi has no intention of starting WW3.

      Not sure if Morrison has the bottle to tell the world leaders that Australia is a carbon sink and we have already reached Net Zero.

      71

  • #
    Hasbeen

    Germany fought WW11 with about half it’s liquid fuel coming from coal conversion. We have a fair bit of coal to provide out petrol.

    Plus we have huge reserves of shale oil & gas. Perhaps starving greenies would agree to harvesting it.

    140

    • #
      Dennis

      Another example of the real purpose of UN registered National Parks, hidden behind the who could argue preservation for future generations claim, being to ban mining, oil/gas extraction, new dams, logging and generally accessing natural resources.

      Natural resources such as the enormous shale oil and gas fields now inside National Parks.

      What upsets me is that this UN manipulation via compliant political parties on sovereignty has gradually increased over some 70 years since just after WW2 and most Australians have ignored it, our elected representatives do not mention it and in my experience try to change the subject if asked about it.

      It reminds me about the Australian who decided to start a new political party, he called it The Australian Apathy Party and widely advertised the first meeting but nobody came.

      40

  • #
    Dave in the States

    All this evil intrigue is underpinned by one faulty premise: That we must drastically reduce emitting co2 and stop using fossil fuels.

    Rather than fighting the burgeoning green-gangue evil empire on a thousand fronts, the single faulty premise should pulled out from under the whole stinking mess.

    Where are the scientists?

    160

    • #

      The scientists work for the government and write for the IPCC. They are the problem.

      241

      • #
        TdeF

        No turkey votes for an early Christmas. The IPCC is a political organization, an “Inter Governmental Panel” and their job is to push “Climate Change”. It is their reason for existence and it pays the wages. And this panel of UN politicians writes the final report, not any scientists. Over the years senior IPCC contributing scientists have resigned in protest that the summary contradicts their findings.

        100

        • #

          The politicos only write the 40 page SPM. The 4,000 page report was written by something like 300 scientists, many of whom have lots of journal articles, which they then cite. The IPCC does not pay them, their governments do, just like the modeling. Most academic scientists are AGW believing lefties. Being selected by the IPCC is a big ticket on their resumes.

          170

          • #
            TdeF

            Yes, the Summary for Policy Makers is written by politicians for politicians.

            But you have added that scientific conclusions are being driven by a leftist political agenda. When I bothered to go through it, the outstanding omission is the lifetime of CO2 in the air. The reality as demonstrated since 1958 is a half life of about 12 years, but the only two statements I could find were 80 years which is an IPCC reference standard and ‘thousands of years’.

            And nothing has changed because without this, any idea of man made CO2 driven Global Warming is impossible. And it is. There has been no observable short term effect of human activity on CO2 levels at any time. Not even the worldwide shutdown of 2020/2021. And the fact that satellites show average temperatures have not change in 40 years should be the end of it.

            150

          • #
            Dennis

            The creators of the climate hoax modelling caught when hackers released in two parts emails exchanged between them which were called climate gate 1 and 2.

            Suggestions about how to change figures, and even worrying what might happen if the public discovered what they were doing.

            Well we did find out thanks to the hackers, but what did we do about?

            20

    • #

      Over at BomWatch.com.au we HAVE tackled and exposed the so-called science and we are still hard at it.

      Using hard data such as aerial photographs, maps, plans and documents held by the National Archives and National Library of Australia, we have found enormous high-level corruption within the Bureau of Meteorology. This could not have happened without the consent and knowledge of Ministers, including the current Minister, the Nationals Sussan Ley.

      For two decades, commencing with Neville Nicholl’s ‘high quality’ dataset, they have changed the data to agree with models. Now I’m branching out to look at tide gauge data, also masterminded by the Bureau. Then sea surface temperatures – all fudged. They put in the trend then claim it is real.

      Ley has just signed the international biodiversity declaration (https://minister.awe.gov.au/ley/media-releases/australia-signs-international-biodiversity-declaration). Farmers in Australia just won’t know what hit them, but its part of COP 26. Ley said “Australia is well placed to make a substantial contribution to a global target and will work with other nations to see it adopted as part of a Global Biodiversity Framework in 2022.” See also: https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/99c8/9426/1537e277fa5f846e9245a706/kunmingdeclaration-en.pdf.

      This stuff is pure poison and it’s been ratified by the Nationals!!

      This is pure WWF – imagine-up a problem, sell it as catastrophic, then demand crippling ‘action’.

      Our democracy is fast disappearing right before our bleary eyes!

      Cheers,

      Bill Johnston

      120

      • #
        MP

        OMG, our democracy is being destroyed from within. Governed by traitors.

        Always out of China. From your link.

        We, the Ministers and other heads of delegations, having met in Kunming, Yunnan
        Province, People’s Republic of China, in person, and remotely, on 12 and 13 October
        2021, on the occasion of the United Nations Biodiversity Conference,1
        at the invitation
        of the Government of the People’s Republic of China,

        41

    • #
      truth

      Dave in the States…
      I agree 100%.

      The so-called journalists of the world could have exposed the reality of this last-ditch strategy for Global Socialism decades ago and at many points in between.

      Here…and everywhere …they just swallowed whole the declarations of ‘consensus’…that the science was ‘settled’…’over’…they puffed and blew on the ‘urgency’….amplified the scare campaigns and admonished and denounced any scientist or citizen who dared to question….nodded their approval of the sackings of dissenting scientists…..demonised dissenters who put their careers on the line for objective truth….buried and knocked on the head any exposure of the Climategate emails and the clear admissions of peer review corruption….dutifully referred sceptics to the phony ‘inquiries’ established only to cover up the fraud….and the miserable hacks studiously dodged ever opportunity they had to find the truth and convey it to the people….their only raison d’etre.

      Even the on-air ‘personalities’ who pontificated and blustered on the sceptic side …have never ever bothered to get leaders and CAGW-flogging scientists on air to answer the seminal questions that would reveal …IMO…that the leaders making existential decisions about the future viability of this country and our children’s lives ….are wilfully or conveniently ignorant of the full implications and about the full extent of the disproportionate demands the world is making on Australia…and the ultimate outcome for all democracies.

      Those ‘leaders’ IMO are led by the nose by Marxist bureaucrats and university boffins like former PM Rudd’s ‘ex-Communist’ guru who waxed on in his own writings …unchallenged ever by ‘journalists’…the same piranhas of the press who precipitated and barracked for…and presided like vultures over…. the Coup to oust the new PM and veto the Australian people’s unprecedented landslide vote against aggressive ‘climate action’…when he ..the guru…said….

      [‘Climate change may become a central driver of all government decision-makng.’…involving…

      ‘ massive dislocation and deprivation’….

      .‘the social and political consequences will be volatile and unprecedented’…

      ‘ the cost of energy will need to be enormous’….but it would be worth it because …

      ‘ it’s a great opportunity for a resurgence of the Left’

      ‘The collectivist and egalitarian values associated with socialism will acquire a new relevance in the emerging political situation.’ ]

      He’s surfaced again in the last few days because he sees us as ‘almost there’.

      And the supposedly sceptic pundits …if they’ve tried to get the politicians on-air to answer questions in front of the people…and been rejected every time…should be regularly reporting on that very relevant fact so we know who the dodgers are…but they are not.

      So bring on demands for proof of the premise….and all of the lies it spawned….that is what we should be demanding now…nothing less than proof of everything related to the concept of CAGW that US and Europe use to demand …akin to a warlike threat…that Australia shape up and commit suicide as a viable sovereign nation….or be cut loose to founder anyway…they think.

      80

  • #
    William Astley

    Logically before the Germans, spent $500 billion dollars on the green scheme… They should have confirmed on paper (using systematic conceptual analysis) that the scheme could work (ie. Work is defined to be possible to get to zero emissions). (See Google study results linked to below, that were published in 2014, that proved the green schemes could never work.)

    It is impossible to get to carbon zero emissions using the green schemes. Biden has said publicly, that it does not matter how much we spend on the green scams, it will not solve the problem. And of course China is going to continue building coal fired power plants so they will have the cheapest electricity in the world.

    The public are not aware that we are making our electricity very expensive and unreliable and destroying our economies/losing jobs to China… For no reason.. For no benefit.

    It is interesting that the US mainstream media is not covering the EU/UK green energy crisis. The EU is in a Green mania and hence are taking actions which will destroy their economies. EU/US/Canada/Australia and so on must compete with China. China has the lowest cost energy in the world. Super efficient, high temperature output, coal fired power stations.

    China generated over half world’s coal-fired power in 2020. We are going broke and China is winning.

    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal/china-generated-over-half-worlds-coal-fired-power-in-2020-study-idUSKBN2BK0PZ

    SHANGHAI (Reuters) – China generated 53% of the world’s total coal-fired power in 2020, nine percentage points more that five years earlier, despite climate pledges and the building of hundreds of renewable energy plants, a global data study showed on Monday.

    https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2021/02/03/china-built-three-times-as-much-coal-power-in-2020-as-the-rest-of-the-world-combined/
    China Built Three Times as Much Coal Power in 2020 as the Rest of the World

    The Green energy scam does not work. As Germany has shown, the scheme fails when the magic battery is required. At that point regardless of the amount of money spent ….. CO2 emissions cannot be significantly reduced. The problem is so much new equipment is required…

    For example, the Hydrogen storage scheme…. The energy and ‘fossil’ fuels required to build and maintain the hydrogen storage scheme and to handle and store hydrogen is so great, there is almost no CO2 emission savings. Hydrogen is extraordinarily difficult to store and transport because the small H2 molecule leaks through seals and because it is very expensive and difficult to liquify hydrogen.

    The politicians and the evil minions that are now in our governments are working 24/7 to shutdown all ‘fossil’ fuel power stations and more importantly to ensure the infrastructure is not built (like pipelines, storage facilities, power stations, and so on).

    This is the idiot Bloomberg article about the coming energy crisis caused by forced spending and not spending not building the infrastructure that is required to deliver cheap reliable 24/7 energy (See China for the engineering details).

    https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:dCZTUcCKmhYJ:https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-05/global-energy-crisis-is-the-first-of-many-in-the-clean-power-era+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

    “Global Energy Crisis Is the First of Many in the Clean-Power Era.
    The world is living through the first major energy crisis of the clean-power transition. It won’t be the last.
    The shortages jolting natural gas and electricity markets from the U.K. to China are unfolding just as demand roars back from the pandemic. But the planet has faced volatile energy markets and supply squeezes for decades. What’s different now is that the richest economies are also undergoing one of the most ambitious overhauls of their power systems since the dawn of the electric age — with no easy way to store the energy generated from renewable sources.”

    Our politicians/citizens/Greta are like little children who have been lied to … They want to believe the lies are true. They have been told not read critical discussions about the lies and there is now 24/7 censorship to push the lies and hide the truth.

    China has attacked our countries and is winning a cold war. China believes the secret to winning this cold war is to destroy our economies (our countries are over spending, not expanding our economies, and not solving problems) and to expand their economy. They are also trying to start racial fights in our countries.

    https://www.yicaiglobal.com/news/china-crude-steel-output-to-top-one-billion-tons-for-first-time-further-rise-in-2021

    China’s Steel Output to Top 1 Billion Tons This Year for First Time, Report Says
    (Yicai Global) Dec. 22 — Chinese steelmakers will have produced more than 1 billion tons of the alloy this year for the first time ever, according to a new industry report.
    https://www.worldometers.info/coal/china-coal/
    China Coal Summary Table

    Coal Reserves 149,818,259,000 Tons, 4th in the world
    Coal Production 3,708,155,408 Tons, 1st in the world
    Coal Consumption 4,319,921,826 Tons, 1st in the world
    Yearly Deficit -611,766,418 tons.

    https://www.theregister.co.uk/2014/11/21/renewable_energy_simply_wont_work_google_renewables_engineers/

    http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/11/22/shocker-top-google-engineers-say-renewable-energy-simply-wont-work/

    http://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/what-it-would-really-take-to-reverse-climate-change

    Even if one were to electrify all of transport, industry, heating and so on, so much renewable generation and balancing/storage equipment would be needed to power it that astronomical new requirements for steel, concrete, copper, glass, carbon fibre, neodymium, shipping and haulage etc etc would appear. All these things are made using mammoth amounts of energy: far from achieving massive energy savings, which most plans for a renewables future rely on implicitly, we would wind up needing far more energy,

    110

  • #

    […] for “Net Zero targets”. It also explains why the public debate has shifted since the AUKUS deal just in time for Glasgow and has no content, apart from the insistence that we don’t want to […]

    20

  • #
    TdeF

    I was asked about the UAH satellite temperature graph. Specifically about the last little bit of ‘warming’. And I can see why the promoters of man made Global Warming are upset and desperately trying to argue that it shows warming, a clear upward trend. Then I saw it.

    The fact is that despite all the ups and downs since 1979, the planet temperature in 1980 as measured by satellites over the entire surface is identical to the planet temperature in 2021, 41 years later. What warming?

    So of course Wikipedia says it is just wrong because they are measuring the wrong thing and “the UAH linear temperature trend 1979-2019 shows a warming of +0.13 °C/decade”.

    But which would you trust, land based thermometers or satellites which equally cover our world which is 75% water? Especially the arctic where no one lives and cover 25% of the world and the vast reaches of Siberia and Northern Canada and the deserts and mountains.

    What do the man made Climate Change people at NASA say about this and the IPCC report?

    They have a wonderful time arguing that global warming only happens on land. ” . “Temperatures increase at different speeds everywhere, with warming generally higher over land areas than oceans.” and ” According to the report, extreme temperatures on land are projected to warm more than the global average surface temperature, with substantial differences from place to place.”

    So there you have it. There is no man made Global Warming. There is deadly man made Global Warming of land surfaces only. And the average has not changed.

    180

    • #
      TdeF

      And the implied statement is ‘who lives on the oceans anyway’? Except all our rain, all our weather and the major heat source after the sun is provided by the huge oceans. Land sea temperature differences are the basis of the monsoons on which at least 20% of all humanity depend. And the ocean surfaces are stealing the global heating? In fact the vast oceans contain 1400x as much heat as the air and do not change in temperature with the seasons insulated by 3.5km of water above and directly absorb and store solar energy.

      The NASA nonsense is now such a contradictory set of statements. Localized global warming now? The promoters of man made Global Warming aka Climate Change are getting desperate. COP26 cannot come fast enough.

      60

    • #

      The temps in 83 and 83 are comparable to today but that is an old peak and a new low point. You have to note the ongoing trendless oscillator, probably chaotic. But all of the warming occurs in two distinct jumps coincident with super El Niño’s. So there is no AGW.
      See https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/the-new-pause-2.jpg by Joe Bastardi.

      But the IPCC artfully defines global warming as surface warming, making the satellite record irrelevant. They then rely on the hokey surface statistics which show steady warming., especially NOAA and GISS which are adjusted to do so.

      81

      • #
        TdeF

        Yes, I can see that. But there are those who insist there is a trend, as some insist because the computer least squares fits says so. What would be surprising to most people is that you can allege (rapid, tipping point, Armageddon) Global Warming when at the two extremes of the data, the temperatures are identical.

        And the satellite data cuts across National data sets which are produced, homogenized, presented by the very people who profit from the idea of warming. The IPCC is after all a joint effort of world Meteorological society to join the UN and they had to find something in the weather which was the business of the UN, man made global Warming.

        40

    • #

      Interesting observation about 1980. However, if you separately create 3 plots one of just el nino, one la nina and one neutral years your observation disappears.

      11

    • #
      clarence.t

      Actually, if you look at UAH Land data, the El Nino steps become even more obvious.

      Absolutely no evidence of any underlying warming trend.

      El Ninos are totally unrelated to atmospheric CO2.. so there is zero evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2 in the UAH satellite data.

      https://i.postimg.cc/brjZmpSZ/UAH-World-Land-zero.jpg

      And we know the trend in UAH is accurate because it matches the trend in the only pristine surface temperature data almost exactly

      https://i.postimg.cc/262TTH10/USCRN_-2016.png

      10

      • #
        Peter+Fitzroy

        ha ha.
        Firstly you are just comparing the two data sets over a very short time period (why pick that interval) and of course the graph shows that the 2 datasets agree, but that is not showing anything about climate, or warming, or cooling, or your sock colour.
        Secondly why are you depending oun UAH, which does not measure all of the globe, as it can not measure mountains.
        Thirdly the time frame is nowhere near what you need to look at climate
        but you know all this, so you are just poking the possum

        01

        • #
        • #
          clarence.t

          So, yet again, nothing in the way of science to counter the facts.

          Everyone knows that the surface data is sparse, erratic, and basically just a thrown together agenda-biased fabrication of urban heat smearing over large areas that it couldn’t possibly apply.

          Time frame.. Current period is cooler than nearly all the last 10,000 years.

          But you know that, don’t you.

          So why do you always deny the fact that the AGW meme is just a load of baseless conjecture?

          “and of course the graph shows that the 2 datasets agree”

          Sorry you don’t comprehend basic sampling.

          USCRN vs UAH 48, same trend. UAH is accurate, so of course it agrees with USRCN.

          UAH proven against the only pristine surface data set, as well as against all raw balloon and radiosonde data.

          10

        • #
          clarence.t

          “why pick that interval”

          Because its the time period that the pristine data set has existed.

          Amazing match, isn’t it.. shows just how accurate UAH really is. 🙂

          “as it can not measure mountains.”

          Neither does the surface data..

          UAH covers a far larger percentage of the globe that the surface data.

          UAH covers the atmosphere.. you know, where the CO2 is. 😉

          Surface data is missing huge areas that have to be “infilled” and have urban data smeared all over them.. It is basically worthless.

          10

    • #
      Simon

      Tamino has written a couple of posts recently that show that contrary to some misguided opinion here, the rate of temperature increase may actually be increasing:
      https://tamino.wordpress.com/2021/10/16/an-honest-appraisal-of-the-global-temperature-trend/
      https://tamino.wordpress.com/2021/10/18/an-honest-appraisal-of-the-global-temperature-trend-part-2/
      Also that UAH is very much the odd one out.

      03

  • #
    TdeF

    And Let’s Go Brandon has soared to #1 place on iTunes.

    We have all had enough of man made Global Warming, Climate Change, BLM, Systemic Racism, transgender rights, men taking over women’s sports, the patriachy and me too. Which like all the woke themes from the puppet President Biden are just not true. As Jordan Petersen argues, the black population in the US is the 16th wealthiest country on the planet.

    Of all these coal driven Man Made Global Warming is the oldest attack on Western democracies. And none of them apply to China and other Marxist dictatorships by the ruling party. Democracy is being deliberately undermined and it is all coming from the post modernists who fill our Universities and the complicit journalists who hide the truth. So Let’s Go Brandon.

    120

  • #
    Peter Fitzroy

    I agree, get out, and get counted.

    22

    • #
      Raving

      Cheer on Greta rickrolling COP26

      00

    • #
      Peter+Fitzroy

      no Raving, I am supporting this:
      “So we, as skeptics, have two choices — one is to support every last democratically elected representative and to protest, protest, protest! If there were giant marches in the streets it gives Scott Morrison more ammunition” (my bold)

      20

      • #
        MP

        That’s it, I’m done.

        I have awoken in a reverse universe.

        20

      • #
        Raving

        Canada already derives 75% of it’s electricity from hydro + nuclear. The remaining 25% to net zero is minor

        So where does Canada’s heavy fossil fuel usage come from? Will leave you to ponder that answer but let’s suppose it is similar to every other country.

        Short answer is that Net Zero is all image and drama. Not really substance

        Remember, we generate 75% of our electricity ALREADY with hydro and nuclear. Look at those 2 boxes in the reference below

        https://www.capp.ca/energy/canadas-energy-mix/

        00

      • #
        Raving

        If Australia replaced all their coal fired station with nuclear ones TODAY, it would not stop thr green protests that Australia was one of the world’s worst GHG polluters

        Are Aussies playing stupid or being stupid?

        00

      • #
        Raving

        The best thing Australia can do is to take it’s own independent stand on AGW.

        Ignore what the rest of the world thinks.
        It’s your country. Decide and do for yourselves.

        10

  • #
    Raving

    It’s a grand old game of büllshït

    70

  • #
    PeterS

    That’s another reason why going nuclear is the right choice, in spite of many here who reject it. It would avoid all this carbon trading BS. Energy prices would plummet if we went nuclear. Those who refuse to accept that fact are clueless. As long as we use coal, which under normal circumstances ought to be the primary source of power here in Australia, we will continue to see higher energy prices. WAKE UP!

    80

    • #
      TdeF

      Unlike most countries, we are rich in uranium and coal and iron ore and Thorium and many more, certainly in relation to population. It comes from 1/350th of the world population occupying an entire continent. So it makes sense to use our uranium for power and our coal for export. Or v.v.

      But according to the Greens, we should mine nothing, make nothing, go nowhere and stop agriculture and not defend ourselves. As with diesel submarines with nerf guns for weapons. That’s what happens when you get unrealistic middle class public servants in their own cocoons (is that a racist word?), as in Canberra and Washington. And post modernist experts as expert advisers, as with the front page news this year that the serious advice to the government is that Climate Change is the greatest military threat facing Australia. According to US Chairman of the joint chiefs of staff Chief of Staff, General Milley the greatest threat to Western Democracy is Donald Trump, followed by Climate Change and Transgender rights.

      90

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        The greatest threat to General Milley would be the return of Trump.

        50

      • #
        PeterS

        There will always be voters who support such extremists parties like the Greens. As long as they remain minor I don’t have a big problem with them remaining in the political scene. Their extremist views can help to wake people up and prevent similar extremists views from ever becoming too popular in major parties. Sadly though it’s not working that way any more. Some of the extremist views have already surfaced even in the LNP as we all know so well when Turnbull came to power. In time though things changed, but have they really? No they have not! They are still arguing over whether we should stop using coal or not, not just to reach a net zero target but also because coal is becoming a dirty world all around the West and only in the West. The bottom line is the major parties have lost the plot. I don’t see a solution out of all this mess, other than some of the more decent minor parties joining to force the next government if it fails to win enough seats to govern in its own right, to make them change their energy policies; more specifically to subsidise new coal and nuclear power stations, and let the market pick which way to go, if not both.

        50

        • #
          TdeF

          The Greens only seem a minority party because they have almost no seats, except in the Australian Senate. And only one seat in the House of representatives in a preferential system. However in many electorates they often achieve 25% of the vote which is why they have so much control in the Senate. And without their preferences, Labor would be wiped out. Very few Labor politicians won absolute majority where most Liberals do.

          Ultra Green Malcolm Turnbull saw it as the greatest opportunity in Australian politics so he tried to form his own party, welding the Liberals to the Greens and destroying both the Nationals and Labor. He would have flipped most Labor seats to a crushing majority of seats for ‘Turnbull’s Liberal’ which he trademarked. Where it blew up was that most Green voters are middle class Labor voters who would fight that and Di Natalie trashed the how to vote cards the day before and like Gillard before him, Turnbull survived by only one seat.

          But as the Greens destroy manufacturing and attempt to destroy farming and mining, the unions are vanishing except in the public service, including nursing and teachers. That may also be true of shop assistants as the world moves to internet shopping. So as the blue collars and uniforms give way to desk jobs and an often public service middle class, the Greens with have a good swathe of voters who have no idea of the fundamental beliefs of outright communist dictators like Adam Bandt and Daniel Andrews.

          It is becoming more obvious though when violent Union leader Setka and friend Premier Daniel Andrews set the Victorian police on the builders laborers union members in Melbourne. 300,000 Labor/Green voting Victorian families out of a job on the Premier’s whim.

          Now Green voters are increasingly lacking direction and now that they have suffered at the hands of Comrade Dan may well support Nuclear power. That supports the rise of a strong fourth party as with Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, which is also what Clive Palmer calculates.

          20

          • #
            MP

            Beware of the wolf in sheep’s clothing.

            Palmer is not what he makes himself to be. Professor Clive Palmer

            Finally, we would like to thank Prof. Clive Palmer for his continuous support to the Club de Madrid, and in this case, for generously sponsoring this gathering.
            http://www.clubmadrid.org/building-a-more-resilient-pacific-in-the-21st-century-world-order/

            Who is in the CoM (Club of Madrid)
            Clinton
            Gorbachev
            Rudd
            http://www.clubmadrid.org/who-we-are/members/

            Maybe Craig Kelly is still good.

            20

            • #
              PeterS

              Clive Palmer is an extremist of another flavour – fat capitalists, who all they care about is money at the expense of people. I wish Craig Kelly joined another party, such as One Nation as I do find him OK. I prefer more down to earth types like Pauline Hanson. Trouble is she is a terrible speaker. Mark Latham though is much better. He made the right choice a long time ago to leave the ALP.

              20

              • #
                MP

                Palmer is a member of the Billionaire boys club. The CoM is an off chute of the Club of Rome. Same people in both and the CFR, Bilderberg’s, WEF.
                Globalists.
                At our A Stand in the park meet a couple of weeks ago we had a talk on who really owns our private property by an Ex Senator from the One Nation party, had a coffee with him after and he enlightened me on the goings on in the PHON. He had an axe to grind, so there is that.

                Pauline is a terrible speaker and her leadership would be the same level, Malcolm Roberts is the exception, maybe Craig Kelly.
                https://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/page/30/

                10

          • #
            truth

            And some Greens are posing as Independents to get into parliament…eg Indi..Warringah…Mayo etc….and some of those with money to burn now campaigning en masse as some sort of alternative conservatives in Liberal[conservative] seats are closet Greens IMO.

            The Greens are adopting some sort of hybrid of China’s asymmetric strategies and the Fabian Socialists’ Gradualism….all highly-funded by corporate money.

            At every successive election especially since the 2015 coup…there are more attempts to defraud voters…to get their vote by deceit and default.

            The next one will be the worst…desperate times….not really any incentive to vote at all since it’s now quite clear that almost all of the honest conviction politicians have been purged by the Left …so the only choice in most electorates is between the Left and the WetLeft…ie as far as where the votes actually end up when preferences are sorted.

            One good thing emerges from this…we now know the Left…in all its iterations and in whatever sphere it operates …just lies routinely and with abandon…even to the extent of teaching what they know are egregious lies to our kids throughout their indoctrination posing as education.

            Such an inherently unstable chaotic situation surely can’t continue for too long without total and catastrophic collapse…whether of individuals…systems…institutions….governments…the world.

            20

            • #
              KP

              “so the only choice in most electorates is between the Left and the WetLeft”

              So what we need are some parties on the hard Right! Oh, wait, they’re domestic terrorists now and have been made as popular as someone expounding the benefits of Ivermectin at a medical conference.

              I just laugh- people have got the society they voted for! Once the guns were gone any fear the politicians had of an uprising went with them, so now they can do just what they want.

              10

  • #
    robert rosicka

    So if if we need to achieve net zero on the grounds of national security what other fictional things will we go after next ? The tooth fairy or maybe Santa with his radar evading sleigh that slips into and out of any country without warning ? And how long is it going to be before we start watering our crops with sports drinks ?

    30

    • #
      truth

      I think the next demand….and there will always be more…will be open borders everywhere a la Biden’s Southern border…a Camp of the Saints situation…and the label of racist and probably cancellation for anyone or any country objecting or trying to prevent it.

      Once the Left has had success with blackmail of sovereign nations…had the frisson of holding countries hostage and achieving the ransom demands …they’ll know they’ve got the democratic world by the throat and can do just about anything….so we can kiss goodbye to democracy.

      00

  • #
    David Maddison

    I agree Jo.

    Rational thinkers were caught off guard.

    When Australia dumped Turnbull’s absurd diesel submarine deal we thought Australia had finally come to its senses and was accepting modern technology.

    Instead, we now discover it was a ruse to satisfy rational thinkers but then catch us off guard with a commitment to civilisation-destroying random energy.

    With the commitment to random energy there’ll be nothing for the submarines worth connecting anyway.

    Either way, the Left have handed victory to the Chicomms.

    90

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      I wonder if we should change tactics on this? Years of pointing out that AGW theory is nonsense, and that warming isn’t happening haven’t had much effect, although I think that many people older than 30 now have doubts about the government policy. That won’t change as it is supported by the bureaucrats secure in their world of continuous employment and rising remuneration so long as they “don’t rock the boat”.

      I suggest we try to raise some doubts by calling for financial reductions in the costs of public services (Yes, that old one, always ignored) but this time from the angle of Net Zero. Point out that economic growth will suffer and a reduction in resources means that it is only right that some reductions are made. Less demand on resources increases the chances of Net Zero. The assumption of politicians is that the economy will grow and grow, but by using Green doctrines about The Limits to Growth etc. would we be able to sow some doubt in the Colony Mind in Canberra? A little nervousness might be unsettling.

      40

  • #
    David Maddison

    Protecting not connecting. An unnoticed and unauthorised change by the spelling checker.

    00

  • #
    David Maddison

    Under Obama there were huge illegal leaks of US military and other technology to the Chicomms, Trump largely stopped this, but I assume the technology transfer has resumed under Bejing Biden as part of his plan to destroy the United States and empower China and other aspirants to world domination such as Russia.

    40

  • #
    Simon

    The reality of anthropogenic global warming is accepted across the political spectrum in the rest of the world. Australia’s government and the US Republican party are outliers. There are opportunities in the restructuring towards a circular economy and those who are out of step will miss out.

    118

    • #
      el+gordo

      Just because the rest of the world believes in AGW doesn’t mean its true. My guesstimate is that the Nats will hold firm and Morrison will seek wiggle room in Glasgow.

      Did you miss my memo on how the world has entered a cooling phase? CO2 continues to rise yet temperatures remain flat, does this concern you?

      90

      • #
        OldOzzie

        Glasgow climate summit in chaos, says businesshttps://www.theaustralian.com.au/world/the-times/glasgow-climate-summit-in-chaos-says-business/news-story/362134263aa7e33e6cf17503fc3aaea4

        Russia has offered to “rescue” Britain from high gas prices and said it is in no hurry to reach net zero.

        President Vladimir Putin has not decided whether to attend next month’s COP26 climate conference in Glasgow, Russia’s ambassador said on Sunday, in the latest downbeat assessment of the event.

        The organisers are embroiled in a spat with their sponsors after companies attacked COP26 as “mismanaged” in letters to ministers.

        Blue-chip companies that have spent millions to sponsor the conference have attacked “inertia” and “shifting goalposts” in government planning, The Guardian newspaper said.

        A letter to the event’s organisers from leading sponsors complained of delayed decisions, poor communications and inexperience among the officials planning the event.

        Sky, Sainsbury’s, NatWest and Unilever – as well as four ­energy companies, Hitachi, ­National Grid, Scottish Power and SSE – are among 11 main sponsors of the event, whose payments are being used to offset a £250m ($465m) policing bill.

        A source said that planning was “deeply frustrating”, telling the newspaper: “They had an extra year to prepare for COP due to Covid, but it doesn’t feel like this time was used to make better progress. Everything feels very last minute.”

        The source criticised organisers’ “top-down public sector approach”, saying: “Many of them have very little experience managing relationships in the private sector, or even experience attending a COP event.”

        One COP veteran hit back, suggesting that companies were more concerned about visibility of their logos than the climate. “It feels like some of these sponsors have forgotten the actual reason we’re in Glasgow,” they said. “COP isn’t about branding, it’s about tackling climate change.”

        COP’s organisers insisted that most sponsors were ­“delighted with the support, ­despite the operational complexities of bringing 25,000 people to Glasgow from almost all the countries in the world.”

        After Prime Minister Boris Johnson was told that Chinese President Xi Jinping would not attend COP26, Andrei Kelin, Russia’s ambassador to Britain, said that his President may not be present either. But Mr Kelin promised a “very high level” delegation of more than 200 people from Russia.

        Asked on BBC1 whether Russia should aim for net zero faster than 2060, Mr Kelin said: “We are not very much in a hurry, we do not want to jump. We do not believe that putting artificial goals and not very much calculated goals will help.”

        Ministers believe that Russia is exploiting a global gas shortage to force the EU to approve a pipeline under the Baltic. Mr Kelin denied that his government was withholding supplies “for political reasons”.

        Although only about 2 per cent of Britain’s gas comes from Russia, Mr Kelin offered to help deal with a quadrupling of prices in recent months. “If it will be an opportunity we will come to ­rescue, we will do what we can of course to alleviate difficult conditions which are now being ­created,” he said.

        The Times

        30

        • #
          OldOzzie

          From the Comments

          They can’t even organise a conference yet lots of idiots expect them to organise our future.
          Putin’s got their measure.

          Russia and China are playing us like fish with climate change

          Every climate talkfest has ended in farce. Looks like Glasgow is a farce before it even starts. What did business think would happen?

          No fan of Putin but glad he is exploiting these fools. Just maybe a few more business leaders now realise that reliable power is important and renewables can’t deliver.

          250,000 delegates, FLYING in from all over the world? What will their carbon footprint be for this garrulous Glasgow gabfest? Oh, the farce of it all.

          One can only hope that there will be a monster storm and all the power will fail in the middle of it.

          30

      • #
        Simon

        There is no evidence of ‘cooling’, there is however evidence that the rate of warming may be increasing: https://tamino.wordpress.com/2021/10/18/an-honest-appraisal-of-the-global-temperature-trend-part-2/

        29

        • #
          clarence.t

          Tamino is a “data torturer” true believer.

          An “honest” appraisal of temperature data is beyond him.

          An honest appraisal would indicate that warming in the last 40 or so years has come in two step, one at the 1998 El Nino and one at the 2015.

          Hence, the warming has absolutely zero coincidence with atmospheric CO2

          Don’t let Tamino’s data torturing fool you into constantly denying the fact that there is no actual science that supports the baseless conjecture of warming by atmospheric CO2.

          30

        • #
          clarence.t

          “There is no evidence of ‘cooling’,”

          It is far cooler now than it has been for nearly all the last 10,000 years

          The only period cooler than now was the Little Ice Age.

          Thankfully we have had some minor warming since that coldest of times.

          30

          • #
            clarence.t

            Last line typo fix..

            Thankfully we have had some minor cooling warming since that coldest of times.

            [Fixed. :- ) – J]

            00

        • #
          el+gordo

          Its not significant or anomalously weird, there is historical precedence.

          ‘All except HadCRUT4 show evidence that global temperature increased faster since the year 2000 than it did during the interval 1980-2000, but that the evidence doesn’t reach “statistical significance.”

          20

        • #
          el+gordo

          The cooling has begun and over the next decade temps will be subdued like 2000-10. The mechanism is the same, the PDO will drift into its negative phase.

          https://www.drroyspencer.com/wp-content/uploads/UAH_LT_1979_thru_September_2021_v6.jpg

          20

          • #
            Simon

            Subdued is not the same thing as cooling. Note Tamino’s final paragraph:

            Other note: before adjustment, the error bars for satellite data are much bigger than for surface data. This is because they respond so much more dramatically to those known fluctuation factors, El Nino and volcanic eruptions.

            24

            • #
              el+gordo

              We could take out ENSO and volcanic eruptions to find the AGW fingerprint. I had a look but can’t find a graph, maybe you can do better.

              00

            • #
              clarence.t

              All the slight warming this century caused by solar factors.

              That is what real science tells us.

              https://climatechangedispatch.com/2001-2019-warming-driven-by-absorbed-solar-radiation-increases-not-ghg-emissions/

              During the latter half of last century, solar energy was been highest in a long time

              https://i.postimg.cc/FFDD8LWc/Solar_Proxy_paleo_BE.jpg

              Still no scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.

              20

            • #
              el+gordo

              Subdued is a conservative estimate, but i’m confident there will be a plateau and cooler trend in the coming decade.

              00

            • #
              Interested

              ‘Simon’, October 19, 2021 at 8:59 am: “There is no evidence of ‘cooling’, there is however evidence that the rate of warming may be increasing”.

              ‘clarence.t’, October 19, 2021 at 9:10 am: “It is far cooler now than it has been for nearly all the last 10,000 years
              The only period cooler than now was the Little Ice Age.
              Thankfully we have had some minor warming since that coldest of times.”

              ‘Simon’, October 19, 2021 at 10:28 am : “Subdued is not the same thing as cooling.”

              Can we see what’s wrong with this picture?
              Simon, in common with all practising warmists, remains blissfully unaware of the temperature graph covering all of our current interglacial period, the Holocene. [See it here: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fkLY-_22bsE/VXN8r4Y5WPI/AAAAAAAAA4M/LlHUGm6pDm8/s1600/Climate-Optimum.jpg ]

              ‘clarence.t’ neatly summarised just a few facts which completely destroy the warming alarmists’ case … but it had no effect on “Simon’ and his warming alarmism position.
              Did ‘Simon’ go to the freely-available graphs which show ‘clarence.t’ is perfectly correct? Apparently not.
              Is ‘Simon’ even vaguely aware that the Little Ice Age (roughly AD1300-1700) was the coldest period of the last 10,000 years? Apparently not.
              Is ‘Simon’ aware of the glaring and insurmountable flaw in his case that the current (welcome) warming started in about 1700 – long before manmade CO2 could possibly have made any difference to the global temperature at all? Apparently not.
              Is ‘Simon’ aware that most of the present interglacial period – the Holocene – was several degrees warmer than our modern era; that the Minoan Warming, the Roman Warming, and the Medieval Warming were all warmer than today? Apparently not.
              Can he explain any of these long periods of warmth in terms of manmade CO2? Absolutely not!
              And since he can’t, can he please explain why the mild warming since 1700 must necessarily, in his opinion, be due to human industry?

              The problem here is that warming alarmists do not seem able to evaluate clear and available evidence. They also appear unable to comprehend history earlier than about AD1800. From this it seems an inescapable conclusion that the concept of history measured in units as large as millennia is therefore beyond their comprehension entirely.
              This is why we’re wasting our time arguing from scientific data while they are arguing from a very claustrophobic and fear-based world which chooses to ignore those data.
              I’ve been closely involved in applied science most of my life and I never thought I’d live to see the day when this would happen.
              To me, it’s a tragedy.

              40

            • #
              clarence.t

              Tamino is probably the very last person to cite for accurate information.

              “much bigger than for surface data.”

              That’s because they are smeared and averaged and homogenised until the are basically a straight line.

              Any real information in the surface data has been well and truly erased.

              It is basically just a meaningless fabrication.

              20

            • #
              KP

              ” the error bars for satellite data are much bigger than for surface data. ‘

              A decade or two back when the surface temperatures were shown for the fallacious pile of crap they were, from bad instrument sites to complete fabrications, suddenly satellite measurements were the bees knees for the warmists as they showed some slight warming at the time.

              So now its the time of the surface temperatures again?

              00

        • #
          clarence.t

          And yes , it has been cooling since the peak of the 2015 El Nino

          https://rclutz.files.wordpress.com/2020/06/hadsst052020.png

          The Arctic is no warmer now than it was in 2000 and Arctic sea ice is well above the 15 year mean

          https://i.postimg.cc/85Gt0HqZ/UAH_Nopol_2021.png

          Antarctic has cooled markedly since 2006.

          https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780128045886000070

          Solar Cycle UV down markedly.

          https://i.postimg.cc/YqSkVcR2/Solar_UV_cycle_25_4.png

          Definite signs of cooling that anyone who is interested in the actual real data cannot deny.

          00

        • #
          MP

          There is no evidence of ‘cooling’, there is however evidence that the rate of warming may be increasing:

          May, might, possibly, could. yep evidence.

          10

        • #
          Richard+C+(NZ)

          Simon >”There is no evidence of ‘cooling’ ”

          Yes there is:

          https://climatereanalyzer.org/wx_frames/gfs/ds/gfs_nh-sat1_t2anom_1-day.png

          +0.4 World

          +2.8 Arctic
          +1.0 NH
          +0.2 Tropics
          -0.2 SH
          -0.9 Antarctic

          Half the planet is cooler than the 1979 – 2000 normal.

          10

        • #
          Richard+C+(NZ)

          Simon >”There is no evidence of ‘cooling’ ”

          Yes there is.

          Monthly Mean Southern Hemisphere
          Last decade, Absolute (K)
          https://psl.noaa.gov/tmp/ncl8dBtyTXYgq.tmpqq.png

          Trend -0.0236025 per year (-0.24/decade)

          From:

          Web-based Reanalysis Intercomparison Tool: Monthly/Seasonal Time-Series
          https://psl.noaa.gov/cgi-bin/data/testdap/timeseries.pl

          The ocean dominates the Southern Hemisphere i.e. the first place to look for cooling.

          00

      • #
        MP

        I think Morrison said he can go without the Nat party as he has the Red and Green on board.

        10

        • #
          el+gordo

          Morrison would be foolish to grandstand on the world stage and then lose the next election without the support of the Nats.

          00

          • #
            MP

            Except, that is what Morrison said on the news last night, he does not need the Nats to get this across.

            They are just playing good cop bad cop. They are all in this together.

            10

    • #
      John+R+Smith

      Reality by definition is neither accepted or denied.
      Although it’s existence may open to debate.
      Reality would not care about your acceptance.
      Just like science doesn’t care about consensus.
      Just like ‘anthropogenic’ cannot be separated from all the other pogenics.

      40

    • #

      The political spectrum has no clue about what they accept. What to accept is what lobbyist tell them.
      What these guys “accept” has no value and doesn’t represent facts as you may believe.

      50

    • #
      Ronin

      It is accepted because their woke advisers told them to accept it,

      40

    • #
      Travis T. Jones

      “circular economy” …

      … more left turns than a Daytona 500.

      If you go around in ever decreasing circles, you are in danger of disappearing up the fundamental.

      30

    • #
      David Maddison

      Simon, are you trying to say that science is about consensus?

      Please demonstrate how that is consistent with the Scientific Method.

      One Hundred Authors Against Einstein was published in 1931. When asked to comment on this denunciation of relativity by so many scientists, Einstein replied that to defeat relativity one did not need the word of 100 scientists, just one fact. … It became obvious to Einstein that his life was in danger.

      40

      • #
        David Maddison

        Actually, it is unfair to call the anthropogenic global warming fraud “science”. It is nothing but a fraud, as described.

        40

    • #
      robert rosicka

      Simon says “circular economy” i says “code for socialism” .

      60

    • #
      clarence.t

      ” a circular economy”

      One that goes round and round… going absolutely nowhere… a standard leftist/marxist meme… stagnation..

      Admittedly far better than the huge negative leaps and derriere-landings of the current regressive socialist infected US economy under the non-compos-mentis puppet clayton’s-president.

      10

  • #
    clarence.t

    The reality of anthropogenic global warming is accepted across the political spectrum”

    Calls to a politically imposed con-sensus…. Is not science or proof of anything.

    You remain devoid of actual science.

    There is no reality about AGW, it exists only in conjecture and in failed models.

    We are still waiting for your actual real science that shows atmospheric CO2 causes warming.

    And I know we will always be waiting.

    40

  • #
    Travis T. Jones

    “As Emissions Minister Angus Taylor has said, net zero doesn’t mean you can’t create carbon (sic) emissions, but you have to offset those emissions to get back to zero.”

    Woke net zero targets will weaken us – Matt Canavan

    https://notzero.substack.com/p/woke-net-zero-targets-will-weaken

    Fact check for Angus Taylor, the ‘Emissions Minister’: Carbon (sic) offsets are a total fraud …

    Greenpeace call for end to carbon (sic) offsets

    https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/reuters-impact-greenpeace-calls-end-carbon-offsets-2021-10-06/

    30

  • #
    Ross

    I think I’m getting this now. It’s all window dressing. So Australia is blackmailed to sign up for AUKUS based on NET ZERO. Scotty from marketing says yep, no worries. What does it matter – it’s years away in 2050, he’ll be long gone. He goes to Glasgow and makes some wishy washy statement on Australia’s role on climate action. We waste hundreds million $ on nutty green projects like hydrogen, wind power, EV’s and grid batteries, but it looks good. He makes sure he doesn’t sign us up to any more economy restricting treaties. Meanwhile we dug up and export as much coal as we can, build a few gas fired electric generators to back up the electrical grid. Perhaps in the lead up to the next election he pledges to build a HELE coal fired plant in Qld based on the potential CO2 savings from those nutty green projects. The fact that we have been blackmailed into AUKUS ( and now the public know that) means S from M can just use that as an excuse for the next 12 months. So basically Australia will be like all the other countries who pledge reductions in CO2 emissions, but then do squat.

    80

    • #
      Great+Aunt+Janet

      Yeah, that was Jo’s alternative suggestion for how this could be handled – he agrees to whatever, and winks at the voters and does nothing about it.

      The fly in our sunscreen is that Morrison’s party will probably not get re-elected (why bother? they did what their opponents wanted anyway, despite an obvious huge mandate not to pursue renewables idiocy). Then, which ever political replacements get elected would claim the denigration of our country had already been agreed to, so…

      I don’t see a good ending for any of this. I’m old, but I do feel sorry for the young: their future is not the rising oceans/ overheated world they claim we have made for them, but cave or gulag dwelling starvation and early death after a life of misery and lies. We made that future too, I suppose.

      20

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Scott Morrison’s national security argument for net zero

    Simon Benson Political Editor – Geoff Chambers Chief Political Correspondent – Greg Brown Journalist

    Confidential modelling under­pinning Scott Morrison’s plan to meet a 2050 net-zero target shows gas, resources and agricultural ­exports will continue to grow and exceed current levels by mid-­century, as the Liberals and ­Nationals edge closer to securing a deal on a Glasgow climate change package.

    The Australian can reveal ­detailed analysis provided to cabinet projects the nation will remain one of the world’s leading energy exporters in 2050 at the same time as achieving the government’s long-term net-zero emissions-­reduction strategy.

    Senior government sources said rolling meetings between the Prime Minister and Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce, focused on the junior Coalition partner’s ­demands for more information on economic modelling and a long-term guarantee for the agriculture sector, were expected to be finalised within days.

    If all demands and clarifications from the Nationals are answered, a deal could be reached by Sunday pending majority support from the Nationals’ partyroom.

    At a partyroom meeting on Monday, Nationals MPs drew up a list of demands in response to modelling that forecasts a boom in regional jobs, new industries and low-emissions technologies, ­questioning whether assumptions about the development of hydrogen and other green energy sources were achievable.

    Mr Morrison on Monday said he would take a net-zero target to the UN climate change conference in Glasgow, but ruled out changes to Australia’s 2030 Paris agreement in a bid to win Nationals support and avoid a damaging Coalition split.

    At a Liberal party room meeting on Monday, the Prime Minister told MPs that climate change action was central to strengthening alliances with western powers and that the long-term emissions reduction strategy would include a “nationally determined commitment” to achieve net zero by 2050.

    After securing the AUKUS military pact with the US and UK, Mr Morrison said Australia needed to rely on western alliances “now more than ever” and a net-zero commitment was important for the nation’s standing in the international community.

    The Australian has confirmed the government’s 2050 net-zero plan shows agriculture, resources and gas exports to be higher by both volume and value in 2050 than current levels. Strong demand is also expected to continue for high-quality coal over the coming decades.

    The assumptions, briefed to Nationals and Liberal MPs, set up a political clash with Labor by giving assurances to regional communities that traditional industries will continue to grow while satisfying demands for a net-zero emissions target.

    Energy and Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor said the plan positioned Australia to take advantage of new economic opportunities while continuing to serve traditional markets and blue-collar jobs.

    “We’ve built some of the world’s largest and most important energy and resources supply chains into strong, fast-growing export markets across our Indo-Pacific region,” Mr Taylor said.

    “Australia will continue to take action in a practical, responsible way that is in our national interest. We will not put industries, regions or jobs at risk … We will focus on net zero, not absolute zero emissions, recognising the important role of traditional industries and Australia’s natural carbon sinks.”

    Mr Taylor said Australia was “blessed” with natural resources across traditional energy sources.

    Australia is the world’s fourth largest energy exporter, behind Russia, Saudi Arabia and the US and was expected to remain so under the government’s 2050 net zero plan.

    Despite speculation over multi-billion-dollar packages, senior government sources said no final deals had been made in meetings between Mr Morrison and Mr Joyce. But it was increasingly likely that, if a majority of Nationals and Liberal MPs supported the net-zero plan, it would be approved by cabinet before Mr Morrison travelled to the COP26 summit, which starts on October 31.

    Ahead of Tuesday’s joint Coalition partyroom meeting, Mr Morrison said “the government’s decision on the government’s commitments for Australia in relation to COP26 will be made by the government in cabinet”.

    The net-zero plan will not be legislated, meaning a vote of the joint Coalition partyroom is not required.

    Mr Morrison said investing in technology allowed greater emissions reductions in the “longer term”, lashing out at Labor’s 2019 election policy for a 2030 target of 45 per cent.

    “At the last election, we rejected a 45 per cent emissions reduction target followed by those opposite, and it wasn’t just us who rejected it, the Australian people rejected it,” Mr Morrison said. “They supported our policy of 26-28 per cent to meet that target and beat that target.”

    Ahead of Glasgow, the government will release updated ­medium-term emissions reduction projections showing Australia is on track to beat its Paris commitment, likely reaching 32-36 per cent by 2030.

    Amid anxiety among Nationals and conservative Liberals, moderate Liberal MPs said they understood that adopting a new 2030 target would be electorally difficult for the Coalition and were happy with a compromise of net zero by 2050. Conservative Liberals said their hope was that Labor would differentiate itself by adopting more ambitious 2030 targets.

    Anthony Albanese refused to rule out Labor recommitting to Bill Shorten’s 45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 and said the Morrison government “can’t be taken seriously” unless it legislated a net-zero emissions target.

    “We need a ‘net zero by 2050’ target that is legislated. We also need interim targets that show the pathway to get there,” the Opposition Leader said.

    Nationals deputy leader David Littleproud, who is understood to be in favour of adopting a 2050 net-zero target, said this was a chance to bury the climate wars “once and for all”.

    “There is fatigue out there. People just really want us to get on with a solution,” Mr Littleproud said. “Zealots from both sides really need to [email protected] off.”

    Mr Taylor told MPs the pathway to net-zero would be “jobs positive” in every state and territory if Australia had proactive policies. He said it would be “jobs negative” if Australia did not prepare for the transition.

    There were cautionary questions raised about the net zero plan in the Liberal Party room meeting by Gerard Rennick, Tony Pasin, Rick Wilson, Rohan Ramsey and Eric Abetz.

    30

    • #
      OldOzzie

      Meanwhile – So far, hydrogen isn’t the winner it’s cracked up to be

      Judith Sloan

      Here’s a quiz. Who said this? “Hydrogen fuel technology: a cleaner and more secure energy future.” Could it be businessman Andrew Forrest or Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk?

      Let me give you more clues. They also said: “For too long, environmental policy has been dominated by a sterile debate between those who believe that pollution is the price of progress and those who believe that we must limit and scale back our progress.” They claimed that by 2020, “(cars) could be powered by hydrogen and pollution-free”.

      The answer is US president George W. Bush in his state of the union address in January 2003. At that point the Bush administration committed $US1.7bn to research into hydrogen. Bush was adamant: “Hydrogen is the key to a cleaner energy future.”

      This didn’t happen in the US and the government money for research was gobbled up with virtually nothing to show for it.

      To keep the quiz going for a minute, who said this? “Today’s $3bn green hydrogen strategy is nation leading, world leading and sets up our state for future success. We know the world is moving toward a renewable energy future and we want our state at the cutting edge to be the leader of the pack.”

      That would be newly installed NSW Premier Dominic Perrottet, speaking last week. He is probably blissfully unaware of Bush’s previous hydrogen adventure.

      Given all the recent hype about hydrogen as an emissions-free source of energy and its potential to assist Australia reach net-zero emission by 2050, it is worth asking: is hydrogen a real opportunity or a pipe dream? It’s important we get to the bottom of this question because a lot of taxpayer dollars are being thrown at hydrogen that might be used for other purposes.

      The potential for hydrogen as a source of energy has been known for a long time. While it is the most abundant substance on Earth, hydrogen mostly exists in compound form, such as in natural gas, coal and water.

      This creates the first barrier to using hydrogen as a source of energy: you need to use energy to extract the hydrogen before the hydrogen can be used. There’s no overcoming the laws of thermodynamics. It’s one of the reasons the use of hydrogen has been relatively limited to this stage.

      That’s right: hydrogen is colour-coded. There’s at least green, blue, pink, grey, brown and black, depending on the source of the compound from which the hydrogen is extracted and the process used. The two main options for Australia at this point are green, which is hydrogen produced from renewable energy, and blue, which is hydrogen produced from natural gas with the emissions captured and stored.

      Note that Perrottet has nominated only green hydrogen for taxpayer dollars. But there is a hydrogen pilot being conducted in the Latrobe Valley using brown coal deposits and funded by Japanese interests. The Victorian government has taken the sensible route of having an open mind about the type of hydrogen development it will support.

      Japan has been interested in developing hydrogen as a source of energy for more than 50 years. As a country with virtually no energy of its own, it’s hardly surprising that it would take an interest in its development. But it has been slow going. South Korea has taken a more recent interest. There are some clear impediments to the development of hydrogen as a source of energy, including the cost of separating the hydrogen in the first place. It is widely acknowledged that unless these costs can be brought below $US2 ($2.70) a kilogram, then hydrogen will be a difficult sell.

      Energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie has taken the view that this could be achieved by 2040. By contrast, Forrest, a key promoter of hydrogen in Australia, clearly thinks this price point can be achieved much earlier.

      There are also the challenges of transporting hydrogen, particularly given how light, flammable and potentially explosive it is. There are three options: in bespoke pipelines for domestic use; in liquid compressed form (LH2), which requires a lot of energy; and in ammonia. For international transport, the last option is favoured by Forrest.

      It is possible to add small quantities of hydrogen to the generation of electricity by gas-fired power plants, thereby reducing emissions produced, before 100 per cent hydrogen generation is achieved. In the longer term, it will be possible to use hydrogen for heating and cooking, although households would need to invest in new appliances.

      When it comes to road transport, there is a vigorous debate going on about the relative advantages and disadvantages of electric vehicles versus hydrogen-powered vehicles or vehicles powered by hydrogen fuel cells.

      EV maker Tesla owner Elon Musk has strong views on the matter, claiming hydrogen-powered cars are “mind-bogglingly stupid”. Certainly, in numbers, EVs are winning hands down, with a small number of hydrogen-powered vehicles being sold mainly in Japan. Toyota has produced a second version of its hydrogen-powered car, the Mirai, and there is a lightly used network of hydrogen outlets in Japan.

      There appears to be more scope for heavy goods vehicles to use hydrogen, given the weight of batteries and the short charging time for hydrogen vehicles.

      Back in Australia, former chief scientist Alan Finkel continues to promote the cause of hydrogen, claiming hydrogen could result in an export industry worth $1.7bn by 2030 (which, by the way, is trivial; coal currently generates more than $50bn a year) and create 2800 jobs, mainly in regional areas. Note here that green hydrogen takes up a great deal of (additional) land and the renewable energy installations are relatively short-lived and create a disposal problem.

      The bottom line is we can’t be sure at this stage that hydrogen will be the affordable circuit-breaker in the path to net-zero emissions by 2050. It is not a proven technology at scale and there are significant technical, safety and economic considerations still to be worked through. There are also many countries seeking to get in on the act, including the US, Canada and France, including in export markets.

      The prudent course of action is to accept that fossil fuels, particularly natural gas, will be required as part of the transition. We also should consider nuclear power as a proven technology.

      50

      • #
        another ian

        I heard that a certain department has a test hydrogen vehicle.

        My reply was “Well that will need a name. How about “The Hindenburg”?

        10

      • #
        KP

        “EV maker Tesla owner Elon Musk has strong views on the matter, claiming hydrogen-powered cars are “mind-bogglingly stupid”. ”

        The man who has made NASA look stupid? Good enough for me! Imagine a gas leak explosion in an apartment building piped with hydrogen..! Of course a hydrogen tanker ship going up in a harbour would rival Beruit… nah, they’ll have lots of foolproof safety features, all akin to Takata airbags.

        10

  • #
    Ronin

    If we are going to get net zero slammed on us, how about we get told how much CO2 will it eliminate and what storms, cyclones, droughts, floods , bushfires etc, it will reduce, we deserve to know, either that or ratify it AFTER the next Federal election.

    90

  • #
    Richard+C+(NZ)

    Jo >“Build solar farms…”

    May actually be a grain of wisdom in that:

    ‘2001-2019 Warming Driven By Increases In Absorbed Solar Radiation, Not Human Emissions’

    “Three new studies affirm the increase in absorbed solar radiation associated with decreased reflection by clouds (albedo) has been the “root cause” of the positive Earth Energy Imbalance and global warming since the early 2000s.

    00

  • #
    Neville

    Even the CSIRO (our top Aussie Science organisation?) tells us that the SH is the planet’s NET co2 SINK and the NH is the NET co2 SOURCE.
    Yet China + India + Other countries etc get a free pass and the EU + USA combined haven’t increased co2 emissions since 1970 or 1990.
    Here’s the Wiki graph AGAIN showing the world’s TOTAL Human co2 emissions since 1970 and ending in 2018.

    BTW I’ve added up all the Countries etc + Int Aviation + Int Shipping and it does seem to be 100% of all Human co2 emissions. So how many decades before we could expect a DECLINE in the China, India or other countries SOARING co2 emissions? Certainly well after 2050 and even China’s BS forecast of 2060.

    As I’ve said before COP 26 is just another clownish COMEDY festival and seems designed to hurt OECD countries while China etc are free to emit for another 40 years. At least.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions#/media/File:World_fossil_carbon_dioxide_emissions_six_top_countries_and_confederations.png

    40

    • #
      Ross

      Neville, have a look at my comment #29. Basically, it’s all a charade, smoke and mirrors. It’s all the last 25 of these gabfests have been anyway. CO2 levels will just keep increasing because we know man has no effect on atmospheric gases like CO2, CH4. The real shame for me is that Australia could have been a small industrial paradise in the Southern Hemisphere for all sorts of small to medium type companies. We could have maintained really cheap electricity in addition to our benefits of a great climate, stable government, skilled workforce etc. Even Toyota wanted to stay here and keep manufacturing cars here at one stage.

      20

  • #
    Geoff Sherrington

    Thermal coal has roughly the same number of atoms of hydrogen as carbon. Coal fired electricity is already a hydrogen economy. Geoff S

    30

  • #
    Turtle

    I’m still astonished by the good will of the believer on the street. They really go along with all this with a warm heart. Lambs to the slaughter. There’s no talking them out of it with reason. They are addicted to whichever brain chemical is activated by altruism, and good intentions are all that are necessary to activate it. Good intentions are to good deeds what onanism is to reproduction. Yet lab mice given a chance to reward their mind with the chemicals that result from sexual stimulation will do nothing else till they die. That’s what we are doing with altruism.

    10

  • #
    David Maddison

    Are the Australian people really so stupid as to accept expensive and useless random energy generation whilst thinking it’s OK for China to consume as much coal as they want? Are they not aware that many Chicomm cities are far more technologically advanced than many or most cities of the West? They can hardly be described as a developing country.

    Anyone who thinks Leftists aren’t either malicious or stupid for supporting this must be one themself.

    60

  • #
    Brenda Spence

    I am as sick of hearing about climate change in the media as I am about covid!

    Same people running the agenda = same rubbish “science”.

    80

    • #
      PeterS

      That is all so true but sadly too many don’t see it that way. They see both issues as the most important issues facing mankind without realising they are being fooled. Yes, one day we will get a really catastrophic climate change and catastrophic pandemic but the present ones are really of no consequence. The elite and their puppet politicians are just taking advantage of the current issues to give themselves tyrannical powers over us, and they are doing it in such a way most people are thanking them for it! Just prove the point I’ve been making for so long now that most people are clueless, don’t give a damn or on the side of evil. That leaves a minority of people who are awake and understand what’s really going on, and watching things gradually unfold. What eventually happens won’t surprise them but it will surprise the vast majority.

      30

    • #
      MP

      Exactly the same people different lab jackets, all the way to the UN and those who control the UN.
      Australia will except whatever the honest media and governments tell them to except.

      The day after COP26 ends, the hurt will start.

      Big mistake DM to think this is stupid running the show.

      40

  • #
    David Maddison

    Twelve voices were shouting in anger, and they were all alike. No question, now, what had happened to the faces of the pigs. The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.

    George Orwell, “Animal Farm”

    40

  • #
    Popeye26

    “Net Zero” exactly the same as “Covid Zero”

    Not possible and NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!!

    I don’t care what they do, say or try – CO2 will ALWAYS be around. (Note: I DON”T call it Carbon emissions) as carbon dioxide is a tasteless, colourless, odourless, life essential trace gas which is 97% NATURAL and WITHOUT which the entire earth as we know it PERISHES.

    So good luck with that ScoMo – you are about to lose balance of power at the next federal election.

    Cheers,

    90

  • #
    Richard+C+(NZ)

    ZH – “Today’s Net Zero reality”

    ‘One Bank Reveals The Dismal Truth About The $150 Trillion Crusade Against Climate Change’

    “The bottom line: no less than a stunning $150 trillion in new capital investment would be required to reach a “net zero” world over 30 years – equating to some $5 trillion in annual investments – and amounting to twice current global GDP.”

    “BofA was kind enough to share its calculation of just how inflationary this billionaire pet project would be: the “full monetization” scenario, where central banks inject $5 trillion in liquidity every year via QE for 30 years, would result in incremental 3% of inflation for a good decade. This is inflation over and above whatever is already coming down the pipeline.”

    At this point alarm bells should be going off even among the most brain-dead progressives because for all its touted benefits, the costs are starting to emerge and – at least when it comes to the next two or three generations – they will be absolutely crushing for the middle class, while allowing the top 1% to plunder and pillage virtually all the world’s assets. Think of it as the biggest mandated theft in world history, and suddenly one can understand why every private-jet setting billionaire is oh so very vocally in support of a “net zero” world.

    It gets worse” >>>>

    https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/one-bank-reveals-dismal-truth-about-150-trillion-crusade-against-climate-change

    This is not stoppage – just mitigation.

    30

    • #
      Richard+C+(NZ)

      ZH above – “the net zero theater of the absurd”:

      “In other words, the net zero theater of the absurd is one where the actors’ motives clearly diverge – when only a convergence from the start could make it work – yet where even a best case scenario of complete cooperation has no chance of actually stopping the problem, just mitigating it.

      Oh, and meanwhile, the world is set to incur some $150 trillion in costs.”

      10

  • #
    Rupert Ashford

    Amazing the cynical game the Chinese plays, and it appears Western governments and institutions are just to happy to let them have their way: “Do as I say, not as I do”, but it all started with Obama and Greenspan’s “QE” and “QE2” to keep up appearances and where China basically bought up all the US bonds and now have the US by the proverbials. I see China is jumping up and down about the waste water from the Fukushima Nuclear plant that Japan wants to release into the ocean – apparently it will damage the environment. Pot? Kettle? And the useful idiots will dance to that tune as well…

    30

  • #
    Cookster

    I have voted for the Liberal party for 38 years. I even voted for them when Turnbull was their leader. No more they are finished with me. But what makes this worse is big business. The Business Council of Australia (BCA) represents Australia’s biggest companies by market cap. The BCA has jumped head first into this nonsense. The BCA even submitted a “blueprint” claiming to provide a pathway for Scott Morrison to this net zero mythical land. It does nothing of the sort. 60 odd recommendations for subsidies, new regulation and higher taxes. A massive increase in the size of government.

    The BCA’s “solution” for farming is a raft of handouts to farmers and regional communities – bribes? It is scarcely believable that a business body could endorse such garbage. These fools might sign up to the impossible at Glasgow but they have lost me. And I will vote carefully so whoever holds power will need to negotiate with the few politicians who still have their heads screwed on straight.

    Thanks to Jo for keeping up the fight.

    80

    • #
      Dennis

      In 2019 during the Federal Election campaign the Business Council of Australia opposed net zero emissions and produced figures showing the economic damage that would result from it.

      20

      • #
        Rupert Ashford

        So something must have changed. I’m sure it’s not the economic damage that it will cause, so there must be “something in there for them” now. Or they are being blackmailed…

        10

  • #
    John in Oz

    Scomo (or his handlers) sent this to me after I reminded him that the Southern Hemisphere is a carbon sink according to the CSIRO

    Ref: https://www.csiro.au/en/research/natural-environment/atmosphere/Latest-greenhouse-gas-data):

    the Northern Hemisphere is a net source of carbon dioxide, the Southern Hemisphere a net sink

    The reply is almost word for word the response I received in December 2020 when I made a different point – I suspect they have a pro-forma response to both the CAGW luvvies and the ‘sceptics’ that they trot out for all replies.

    I noted that there is no direct mention of the CSIRO statement that the Southern Hemisphere is a net sink.

    Thank you for your correspondence raising concerns about Australia’s actions to mitigate climate change.

    I appreciate you sharing your views with me. However, I must honestly and respectfully disagree with the premise of your argument.

    The Australian Government actively contributes to the global scientific reviews organised by the Intergovernmental on Climate Change, and accepts the findings of our own science agencies and the global scientific community. Our goal is to reach net zero emissions as soon as possible, and preferably by 2050. We are playing our part and meeting our commitments by helping business and households to adopt new, clean technologies – not by applying taxes that hurt jobs and the economy.

    Australia has a strong record of meeting our emissions reduction targets. We beat our Kyoto-era targets, and are on track to overachieve on our 2030 target. Our 2030 target, reducing emissions by 26 to 28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030, is a responsible one.

    Achieving our 2030 target will see emissions per capita fall by almost half, and our emissions per unit of GDP by nearly two-thirds.
    But it also represents an exciting challenge for Australia to support and grow jobs through smart investments in our industries and regions. As the world moves to a new energy economy, we need to invest in the technologies that will support our industries and jobs into the future, with lower emissions energy. We want to make clean energy more affordable and reliable.

    Our $1.6 billion package of new investment through the 2021-22 Budget demonstrates the Government’s unwavering commitment to reducing emissions through technology, not taxes. New initiatives will support new and emerging low-emissions technologies prioritised under
    the Government’s Technology Investment Roadmap, foster international collaboration on achieving technology breakthroughs, lower energy costs and create more than 6,000 jobs, especially in our regions.

    These investments in future technologies complement existing policies, including the $1.9 billion commitment in low emissions technologies announced in the 2020-21 Budget, our $3.5 billion Climate Solutions Package and the $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund. So far under the Emissions Reduction Fund we have secured over 200 million tonnes of emissions reductions, with over 80 per cent to be delivered in the land sectors to support our farmers and regions.

    We are charting our own course to ensure Australia is well placed to prosper in the new energy economy, consistent with strong action on climate change. Australia is already on track for around one-third of our electricity needs to be met by renewables in the early 2020s. Australia now has one of the highest rates of per capita investment in renewable energy technologies in the world. In 2020 Australia deployed new renewable energy over seven times faster per capita than New Zealand, Japan and the global average, and nearly three times faster than the United States, China and the European Union. We have the world’s highest uptake of rooftop solar – one in four households have rooftop solar systems.

    To support the deployment of renewable energy, the Government is investing in the energy storage and infrastructure of the future. This includes a $1.38 billion equity investment in the Snowy 2.0 project, which will be the largest energy storage project in the Southern
    Hemisphere, and backing new microgrids in regional and remote communities to deliver affordable, reliable power. The Government has also committed to working with state Governments to accelerate priority transmission projects that support the integration of
    renewables into our energy system. The Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the world’s most successful green bank, has mobilised over $32 billion in new investments in our economy.

    Our practical, job-creating approach will support businesses and strengthen our economy while meeting our emissions reduction targets.

    Thank you again for writing to me.

    Yours sincerely
    SCOTT MORRISON

    10

    • #
      Dennis

      A typical evasion reply.

      And that angers me, they are our elected representatives, we should be treated with respect and answered truthfully.

      10

  • #
    KP

    “And that angers me, they are our elected representatives, we should be treated with respect and answered truthfully.”

    Bahaha!! Seriously? That’s the sort of thing my TV-watching ABC-listening older uncles would say! If you believe that Dennis, I’d say you are the only person in these comments that does! The rest of us know they are just conniving self-serving parasites who treat us with contempt, and we feel only the same for them! Only when we embrace anarchism, or citizen-voting on every law, or voluntary taxation, or something that rips the power out of their hands will anything change.

    Democracy is just a charade for the dumb peasants, those in power know it and exploit it, no matter which “side” they say they are on. That meaningless gobbledygook epitomises a politician completely!

    10

  • #
    CHRIS

    And I bet the nit-wit politicians (like my local member ScoMo) don’t even understand what NET zero emissions means. As we all know on Jo’s website, ‘Net zero emissions’ refers to achieving an overall balance between greenhouse gas emissions produced and greenhouse gas emissions taken out of the atmosphere. The sooner these morons understand this, the better (although, with the Glasgow Summit SIT 26 – SIT = Snouts in Troughs Fest coming up, I doubt the above definition will sink in),

    00

  • #

    […] I said a week ago —the Net Zero pledge was apparently tit-for-tat for nuclear submarines. We get their subs; they get our promise to cripple-our-grid. Which sounds bizarrely unlikely, […]

    00