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

Australian Intelligence Chief to assess climate threat but ignore risk of running country on windmills and batteries

Cunning Plan: New Australian PM to set up an Office of Climate Change Threats, but not an Office to study the Threats of Climate Action

Admiral Chris Barrie will be paid to worry about how seas rising by 1mm a year might affect our supply chains, but not about how making electricity ten times more expensive might destroy manufacturing in Australia.

If we had to actually build our own nuclear submarines will China still be happy to sell us the steel? Will we have an aluminum smelter left in the nation, and how long can we run that on solar panels and batteries? Are 2,000 kilometer long high voltage lines an easy target for hostile forces? Will electric vehicles be easier targets for cyber hackers or EMF weapons? Could dust bombs sabotage 2GW of solar panels? Would paint bombs be worse?

If we managed to build one nuclear submarine by 2040, will it be the most reliable baseload generator left in the national energy market and should we plug it back into the grid so we can build another sub?

So many questions…

Anthony Albanese to order intelligence chief to examine security threats posed by climate crisis

The Guardian

Anthony Albanese will ask Australia’s most senior intelligence chief, Andrew Shearer, to personally lead a review of the security threats posed by the climate crisis.

In a document submitted to the UN outlining Australia’s new 2030 emissions target, the Albanese government confirmed it would order “an urgent climate risk assessment of the implications of climate change for national security, which will be an enduring feature of Australia’s climate action”.

The exact scope and terms of reference are currently being drawn up, but the assessment was expected to consider options such as setting up an Office of Climate Threat Intelligence. If created, that office would update the threat assessments on a rolling basis.

Threats will be updated as funds roll in. Imagine if someone was paid to find out if unreliable expensive energy made us an easy target?

Former Australian defence force chief, retired Admiral Chris Barrie… said climate threats and costs would affect Australia in many ways, including disruptions to vital import and export markets and supply chains. He also cited increasing demands on the health system, degraded and lost natural systems, and escalating adaptation needs.

Given that the only known mammal extinction in Australia so far was one brown rat on a 3m high sand bar in the Torres Strait, there might be bigger issues the Australian Defence Force needs to worry about.

“Globally there will be regional conflicts over shared resources, climate-change enhanced famine, breakdown in social cohesion, forced displacement of populations, and state failure, including in our region,” Barrie said.

Since no islands with people living on them in the South Pacific are actually shrinking how many refugees do we expect? Is that 50 million more or less than the 50 million the United Nations told us would come by 2010 but which never came? And since climate change apparently causes global hurricanes to not get worse in 40 years, can we just wait another 40 years, and worry about nations that already have hypersonic missiles, nuclear weapons, launch cyber attacks and start space wars instead?

The missing hot spot is still missing. The fingerprint distinctive threat from anthropogenic climate change is undetectable. The real threat to our national security comes not from our coal plants but from The United Nations, ABC, CSIRO and BoM which have been so wrong about so many things they are practically working for the enemy.

9.9 out of 10 based on 81 ratings

178 comments to Australian Intelligence Chief to assess climate threat but ignore risk of running country on windmills and batteries

  • #
    crakar24

    This is like getting the defence force to work in covid wards or the latest claim they should collect luggage from a plane, sorry not qualified and not qualified to calculate a climate risk.

    It’s a joke and defence personell are sick and tired of being used by gov. in this way.

    China could take this country in days why bother look beyond that for threats?

    580

    • #

      ? Shearer works in the PMO and Barrie is retired. Where is the abuse of the defense force?

      330

      • #
        crakar24

        Beyond telling you you spelt defence wrong I refuse to respond to your gibberish

        271

        • #

          Interesting lack of responce.

          320

          • #
            crakar24

            For the love of God, do you understand the purpose of an intelligence agency?

            It’s purpose is to collect intelligence on Australia’s adversaries.

            For example what military capability does China have in the South China sea?

            Can their long range bombers now reach Australian shores?

            Is China assembling assets on these islands in readiness to launch an invasion.

            The list is endless…..

            AGW does not appear on the list because:

            1, AGW is not an adversary
            2, AGW is not a sentient being and therefore cannot plan an attack
            3, you cannot gather Intel from AGW
            4, you cannot declare war based on Intel against AGW
            5, AGW is not trying to gather Intel against you
            6, whatever if any affects AGW has against you it has against your adversary

            Etc, etc, etc

            331

            • #
              Ian

              Why do you say I refuse to respond then do so in spades?

              318

            • #
              Forrest Gardener

              Sorry crakar but GI is a master bater. He/she/it lives for moments when they provoke a response.

              And for the record your response is correct.

              101

              • #
                GlenM

                A bit like Roger the cabin boy. Anyway who shagged the milking Goat.

                10

              • #

                Gee clever – master etc.

                Crakar seems to think that threats to our country just pop up out of nowhere and we shouldn’t spend any effort looking to see what might be coming next. Maybe AGW will cause no change in anything much that is a threat but maybe it will and we’d want to know about it if it did.

                115

              • #
                crakar24

                GA,

                Your opening statement is the antipode of intelligence gathering showing all here that you know nothing about this subject.

                In regards to knowing what level of threat AGW is/was/will be, this has already been established over two decades by various scientific bodies.

                What additional input could intelligence agencies provide at this point?

                I suggest it is a pathetic attempt by an incompetent government to add credentials to their climate crusade, what it also shows it this governments preparedness to abuse it’s powers of office

                131

              • #

                I’m not questioning your assessment just pointing out that identifying emerging threats is something that governments have been doing for a long time.

                Since they think that AGW exists and since they think it can cause changes in food and resource security and/or access to habitable land, AND they know from history that these things are triggers for conflict, then, logically, they should investigate the forward risks from AGW.

                You don’t agree with the starting point that there is a potential risk from climate change, but that is the starting point they are using.

                112

              • #
                b.nice

                “but that is the starting point they are using.”

                Thus showing a complete lack of intelligence, from the start.. and by design !

                111

              • #

                ” Since they think that AGW exists and since they think it can cause changes in food and resource security and or access to habitable land , AND they know from history that these things are triggers for conflict then logically they should investigate the forward risks from AGW ”

                Leaf Motif since 1960 as the world has warmed, crop yields have increased to record levels . Risk assessment analysts have 50 years of repeatedly failed predictions of ecological collapse and resource depletion at their disposal ever since Paul Ehrlichs Population Bomb jeremiad and the 1970’s global cooling scare. The starting points were 40 -50 years ago . According to a 2004 Pentagon document Britain was supposed to have a ‘Siberian climate” by now! Snowfall was to be a thing of the past prophesied David Viner ..Our dams and river systems would never fill again warned Tim Flannery Manhattan and the Maldives should have drowned by now Before Joe Bidens maladministration ,the Covid 19 pandemic interruptions and the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the world had plentiful food supplies. Access to habitable land has not diminished at all .80% of Pacific atolls are stable or accreting in size . There is no AGW precedent in ‘history’ and moreover it is known from history that warming periods such as the Roman and Medieval Optimums are salubrious times of relative prosperity and higher agricultural production .The worst demographic crashes and climate induced conflicts occurred during the cold periods Then again you are the same man who evidently believes rain downpours and floods are ” the same thing “

                41

              • #

                I was not talking about what I think about climate predictions, I specifically pointed to what the instigators of this move by the government think. Thanks for your insights.

                01

              • #
                b.nice

                Yes, gee, we should look at the threat from the Easter Bunny, the big bad wolf, the wicked witches, and all those other little fantasies.

                We must set up the whole defence force to deal with them. !

                91

              • #
                b.nice

                Of course, we need to change uniforms, ships, tanks, vehicles, jets etc to rainbow colours first, though.

                For camouflage purposes. 😉

                111

              • #
                Forrest Gardener

                See above. And try not to be such a [Snip]AD

                01

              • #
                Forrest Gardener

                Works just as well either with the word or the snip 🙂

                21

            • #
              Don A

              CLASS ACTION!
              #Free CO2
              We must start a class action against the IPCC for falsely claiming anthropogenic CO2 is doing harm.
              Millions would join and fund it.
              How to get started?

              11

              • #
                John R T

                IIRC, UN agencies’ reports use no alarming terms, e.g., ‘catastrophic’. Media headlines and hyperbolic assertions reflect some researchers’ opinions.

                00

          • #
            b.nice

            “Interesting lack of responcse.”

            Usual total lack of content from ga.

            11

          • #

            Joanne is right : there is no detectable anthropogenic climate change threat. The 2004 Pentagon report turned out to be a farce . Andrew Shearer would be well advised to simply examine the UNDRR database that clearly shows climate disasters and extreme weather events have globally decreased by 10 -11% this century as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have soared…Or the global hurricane series that showed last year was the lowest hurricane frequency year since 1987 or 1981. It is much the same with the NASA Observatory fire chart : a 24% worldwide decrease in burned area since 2003 .How might multiple downward trends constitute evidence of a non existent climate crisis ” ?….Of course if Mr Shearer does not deliver the result Anthony ” I am going to end the climate wars ” Albanese and the Labor Party want he will be pilloried in the media or replaced with a more compliant public servant ..Now if one would like to understand what the real climate hazard to Australia and the Indo Pacific region is read Mike Baillie’s 2006 book ” New Light on the Black Death : the Cosmic Connection ” and Ted Bryants paleo tsunami research

            31

      • #
        Ronin

        Have you forgotten covid already.

        40

      • #
        b.nice

        Tell us Gee, why should any part of the defence forces be in anyway interested in a fantasy.

        They should have absolutely nothing to do with AGW.

        121

    • #
      Ian

      “This is like getting the defence force to work in covid wards or the latest claim they should collect luggage from a plane, sorry not qualified and not qualified to calculate a climate risk.”

      Hopefully many commenters here will be seeking a position in this new venture as unlike, the defence force, they are experts in calculating climate risk.

      221

    • #
      • #
        el+gordo

        They talk a lot of waffle to secure more funds for DoD and they take global warming as a fait accompli. Not good enough.

        31

      • #
        b.nice

        All based on this fantasy of CO2 warming, which is built into fantasy computer games.

        DOD need funds to allow them to paint all their ships rainbow, and change all their uniforms to match the leftist gay bent !

        21

      • #

        ” The US Department of Defense seems to disagree ” Under Joe Biden’s administration The UK Ministry of Defense is on the same reputationally damaging climate crisis bandwagon and it makes not a jot of difference to reality

        Do you understand what the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy is “Simon” ? Have you forgotten the wild predictions of the embarrassing 2004 Pentagon report ?

        11

    • #
      Mullumhillbilly

      Perhaps the purpose of doing this via the defence forces, is to be able to say ‘we can’t tell you exactly why we have to degrade the national energy systems, and pay our maaaates to put up windmills, because secrecy in the national interest”. If pressed there will be some BS rationale like ‘terrorism’ and ‘system resilience’ and ‘allies’.

      10

  • #
    b.nice

    The US is also playing climate war games..

    https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/06/22/us-navy-to-hold-a-climate-change-war-game/

    I wonder how far sea level has to rise before their boats sink !

    I wonder if the fact that there is no sign of “climate change” in either the US or Australia, will have any bearing on their deliberations and game playing apps.

    If Andrew Shearer has even one iota of intelligence, he will look at reality and say that THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS.

    461

  • #
    David Maddison

    Any such inquiry and further expenditure of vast amounts of borrowed taxpayer money should first address the following questions:

    Produce actual scientific evidence that:

    1) Trace amounts of CO2 in the atmosphere cause warming.

    2) That the increase in CO2 in the atmosphere is of substantially anthropogenic origin.

    3) That the increase in CO2, for whatever reason, is harmful in any way.

    4) That global temperatures have meaningfully increased in recent decades based upon a non-fraudulent dataset.

    5) That any increase in temperature, for whatever reason, is harmful in any way.

    6) What is the scientific basis for excluding from CO2 emissions targets the world’s largest CO2 emitter, China.

    If they are not prepared to ask or answer these questions, then it has nothing to do with science but involves purely the promotion of a Green-Left, Western Civilisation-destroying political ideology.

    451

    • #
      Pauly

      Sadly, as I point out in my comment at #7, none of what you ask is likely to happen.

      Firstly, it is not the function of intelligence agencies to deal with science per se. Secondly, the Commonwealth agencies that are responsible for climate research got into bed with the IPCC long ago, and have never provided an independent review of Anthropogenic Global Warming theory. Thirdly, and perhaps most disappointingly, we had nearly a decade of LNP governments who chose to do nothing about the advice and data coming from these agencies, despite numerous well credentialed scientists highlighting obvious problems with the way both agencies were behaving.

      No “red team/blue team” debates. No review of the science. No external audit of Australia’s temperature data set. Almost as if our LNP politicians had no qualifications in STEM subjects, so didn’t even know how to identify that there were problems, let alone know the right questions to ask in any sort of external audit.

      So now, we have an ideologically driven government, with legislative control in the upper house firmly in the hands of the even more ideologically skewed Greens. George Orwell should have written a follow-up book, titled “2022 – the year the world went crazy”.

      391

      • #
        Ian

        “George Orwell should have written a follow-up book, titled “2022 – the year the world went crazy”.”

        Isn’t that rather exaggerating Australia’s role in climate change which as you yourself point out has been minimal in the last decade

        119

        • #
          b.nice

          Thanks for agreeing that the whole idea of “climate change action”, is totally crazy.

          Glad we are finally on the same page.

          Yes, the Labor government, (and the previous governments) are/were totally crazy to go down the net zero, or even down the CO2 emission reduction path, in any way at all.

          Crazy to even consider it.

          But, with Albo, Greens, Teals in Australia, (and governments in many other countries) are now ramping up this climate hysteria idiocy, destroying their own countries….

          … he world really is going crazier this year.

          “2022 – the year the world went totally crazy”

          181

    • #
      b.nice

      1. No evidence at all

      2. define “substantial”. looks like we may be responsible for 10-20% of the increase in CO2.. well done us.

      3. No, CO2 is totally beneficial to the planet in any atmospheric concentration we can ever possibly reach

      4. Minor warming since the coldest period in 10,00 years.. thank goodness !

      5 No warm , only benefits

      6. China, India are irrelevant when it comes to CO2 emissions, only developed western countries 😉

      211

      • #
        David Maddison

        b.nice, regarding point 2, I thought the CO2 of anthropogenic origin was around 4%, not 10%-20%.

        53

        • #
          b.nice

          Harde points to a very gradual build up of anthropogenic portion.

          So I’m talking long term

          About 10-15% of the change from 280ppm to 420ppm

          10

      • #
        Ian

        “6. China, India are irrelevant when it comes to CO2 emissions, only developed western countries 😉”

        They’re certainly not irrelevant but their emissions are are not considered as they are developing countries

        316

        • #
          b.nice

          OMG, wake up !

          111

          • #
            crakar24

            He can’t, even if he wanted to he could not wake up

            China just launched its third aircraft carrier, it is expanding exponentially into the South China sea, it is aggressively challenging our military aircraft in international waters,bit us aggressively challenging us in international trade, it is aggressively threatening both us and Taiwan.

            But yet at the same time it is a developing nation.

            He can’t wake up, and neither can millions like him

            91

            • #
              Ian

              “He can’t, even if he wanted to he could not wake up”

              Fair enough but even so I’m more awake than your good self. China is classed, by itself,as a developing nation using the criteria of the World Bank and the UN. There are other criteria for a developing which China also meets

              A criterion for a developed country is a gross national income (GNI) of $US12,535 per capita. China’s GNI is $US10,500 per capita which makes it a developing country based on that criterion.

              Read mark and learn crakar24. When you wake up of course

              19

              • #
                crakar24

                Are you flipping serious? China has one of the largest economies in the world, they have one of the largest and most formidable militaries in the world, they extend this power throughout Asia and are constantly challenging nations in the area they could steam roll Australia in less than a week. But you claim they are a developing country based on population only.

                Once again you are fast asleep and unable to wake up.

                61

              • #
                b.nice

                China’s CO2 output is some 28 times Australia’s.

                But it doesn’t matter wrt “climate”…. why is that ?

                Because the farcical anti-CO2 agenda IS NOT ABOUT CO2.

                Its about the downgrading of Western Society..

                You know, that society you hate so much, and don’t want to be part of.

                81

    • #
      GlenM

      What really gets me is that they say that the difference between isotope C12 and C13 is crucial – you know they can make the distinction between the two. Given that there is only one neutron between them, how can you say that man made CO2 is causing a problem. Making the case for CO2 is important in its present status as a proscribed pollutant.

      121

      • #
        GlenM

        People are flabbergasted if you point out out that well over 95percent of this trace gas is of natural origin. I would suggest the rest is natural as well.

        221

      • #
        Forrest Gardener

        The claimed significance of the different isotopes is that it assists in tracing carbon through the carbon cycle.

        I believe their claims about as much as I believe claims based on tree rings.

        41

    • #
      Peter Fitzroy

      just one for you David,

      1. Can you prove that the moon is not made of green cheese?

      26

      • #
        b.nice

        What a moronic Q, even from you PF !

        People have been to the Moon.. No there is no green cheese.

        Just another of your petty fantasies that even a 5 year old knows is fake.

        41

      • #
        b.nice

        You do have a point though.

        The evidence levels for the moon being green cheese, and CO2 causing warming, are about the same.

        71

      • #
        Peter Fitzroy

        so no proof then

        33

        • #
          b.nice

          “so no proof then”

          PF is correct, (accidentally)

          There is no proof that the moon is made of green cheese, plenty of proof that it most certainly is not.

          And as he has shown many times, there is NO PROOF that CO2 causes warming, and plenty of proof that it doesn’t.

          11

      • #

        Yes Peter Fitzroy , astronauts have visited the moon and returned samples …Imagine being that sort of pestering provocateur who has no intelligent arguments

        51

  • #
    Ronin

    “The real threat to our national security comes not from our coal plants but from The United Nations, ABC, CSIRO and BoM which have been so wrong about so many things they are practically working for the enemy.”

    They are not so much working for the enemy…… they actually ARE the enemy.

    361

  • #
    • #
      GlenM

      The same scenario applies here. Just travel around the continent and look at the flood plains; the braided Diamantina to the Burdekin delta and further to the eastern flowing rivers in NSW that have extensive alluvial flats that were scored and deposited over a million years. Point is that you haven’t seen anything if you didn’t witness those massive events so many years ago.

      101

  • #
    David Maddison

    Not so ago, subscribing to what was then regarded as a radical Leftist Marxist ideology would have been a concern for “intelligence” agencies. Now probably 90% of our members of parliament and more public serpents, including intelligence agencies, subscribe to such an ideology to greater or lesser degrees.

    221

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Yes. There has been a great inversion in so many areas. Remember when free speech was a big thing in the universities? Or when Labor politicians told us that big business was the enemy of the working class.

      41

  • #
    Pauly

    In reality, this direction from our new Prime Minister shows just how little he understands of the purpose and intent of Australia’s intelligence agencies. The intelligence cycle is a deliberate planning process:
    https://irp.fas.org/cia/product/facttell/intcycle.htm

    As the agencies themselves have no expertise on “climate change”, at best, this will require a redistribution of limited resources to undertake this work. But who will ask which ball will have to be dropped?

    The risk, with no expertise and limited resources, is that all this direction will provide is a non-specific rehashing of generic statements already in the public domain. In other words, the report will be heavily biased towards information that is available in greater quantity.

    However, the next step will be even more sinister. Having the intelligence agencies confirm all the climate change threats, the PM will then direct Defence to update its next White Paper to deal with these “newly discovered” threats. Or perhaps, the PM and the Defence Minister will simply direct Defence to start the next step, which is to develop a plan to deal with these threats.

    This is likely the first step in justifying a massive redistribution of Government funding from Defence, because somehow, the Government must find the money to keep paying for all its grandiose election promises.

    211

  • #
    David Maddison

    Now that “climate change” is the hands of “intelligence” (sic) agencies, what happens to anyone, such as most bloggers here, who question the official narrative of anthropogenic global warming?

    Will we be declared “enemies of the state” for asking scientific questions?

    Don’t forget, as mentioned by Pauly above, an “intelligence” (sic) agent will not be questioning or even understand the science. They will just assume it is true, as per the Official Narrative.

    I am not joking.

    251

    • #
      Ronin

      One would reasonable expect that scarce intel resources would be directed to the gorilla in the room, e.g Communist China.

      A degree or two of warming here or there will be either welcomed or not noticed on the whole.

      161

      • #
        John R T

        Extended 2022 ski seasons, in both Europe and Oz: meteorological artifacts suggesting, what?
        Also: Lennox reported ~30% reduction in projected earnings from Mid-West USA air conditioning operations, a couple of years ago.
        Commerce data not supporting current perceptions.

        00

    • #
      GlenM

      Military intelligence is a contradiction in terms.

      134

      • #
        It's all BS

        Not necessarily. It comes down to why the intelligence is being gathered and assessed and for whom. If it is gathered without prejudice and assessed and presented likewise, it is generally useful to a high degree of confidence. If, as this instance is most likely the case, Command has already made up their mind and are looking to confirm their preconception, well, that is what gives rise to the contradiction…

        111

      • #
        KP

        Yes! In the endless wars America has been involved in since 1950, the ‘Intelligence’ has been dead wrong! All they’ve ever done is provide cover for politician’s desires to keep the Yank’s greatest export going.. weapons!

        So far they’ve been dead wrong in Russia-Ukraine too, playing their usual game of a retired military expert trotted out to push the official narrative, as per the Socialist Morning Herald this week.

        We don’t have a need or a use for a military, so Govts just use them as toys to whip up the plebs and perform useless duties the parasites want done. I’d swap them all for people who truly believe in Australia and an assault rifle behind every back door.

        70

        • #
          crakar24

          Don’t get confused between Intel collection which is an effort to establish fact and Intel analysis which can be wrongly used to shape public perception eg Saddam’s nukes

          11

        • #
          It's all BS

          I served 20 years and I truly believe in Australia. We do have a need for our armed forces. What you espouse is an armed rabble.

          20

          • #
            It's all BS

            Collection can be incorrectly directed too. Command is what orders where, how and when the collection is conducted based on the intelligence requirements.

            30

  • #
    Ronin

    O/T.. but,

    “With the threat of blackouts a reality amid higher prices and demand, Origin’s general manager of e-mobility Chau Le said the network would struggle once EVs became more popular.”

    No sh%t Sherlock, I think most thinking folk are aware of this.

    211

  • #
    Lawrie

    Every time we reach peak stupid along comes something even more idiotic. We desperately need a disaster on the grid; not for an hour but days.

    181

  • #
    Philip

    Of course they will be assessing the benefits as well ?

    81

  • #
    Neville

    I think this so called climate threat review should be sent Willis Eschenbach’s “Where’s the climate Emergency” article from Wuwt and save Aussies endless millions $ and a lot of wasted time.
    BTW here’s a quick response from Alex Epstein trying to educate the AOC loony about the combined problems of Energy and poverty in Puerto Rico.
    Best of luck Alex trying to enlighten this delusional donkey.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=59bL2OnwdvA

    71

  • #
    rowjay

    Reply from the Citizens’ Office of Climate Change Threats Assessment

    Prime Minister Albanese

    The threat of climate change action has been examined in detail by citizens on this blog. The consensus is that all actions taken to date on climate change have been:

    – unsuccessful
    – detrimental to the Australian economy
    – is lowering our standard of living
    – is causing severe mental stress to sections of the population
    – greatly weakening our ability to defend our nation from potential aggressors

    We therefore recommend that you halt any further climate-related actions until our nation has recovered from previous attempts, and adopt a rational and considered plan that takes advantage of new technologies once they have proven to be commercial and cost-effective.

    191

    • #
      Forrest Gardener

      Yes and I particularly agree with your last paragraph. Government should not be picking winners in races before the horses are even in the starting gates.

      51

  • #
    yarpos

    So,

    The grid is crumbling

    China is sabre rattling

    We run with a couple weeks fuel reserved and an ever diminishing refining capacity

    so of course Albanese wants to look at the risk of “climate change” and will only accept the most hysterical document they can conjur up.

    Cant do things right. Doesnt do the right things.

    241

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Mater’s Mischief #9: Seems Apt ATM

    Energy, education, health…

    Is there currently any aspect of life where this doesn’t seem to apply?

    From the Comments

    Bruce of Newcastle says:
    June 23, 2022 at 7:28 am

    Unfortunately they’re in charge of the data sources. Increasingly these datasets are “adjusted” to support the vibe whatever it happens to be at the time. That’s occurred for a long time now in the climate space, but was also pretty apparent in the Covid fiasco.

    Not having real data to guide you makes it almost impossible to get an empirically true and workable answer to problems, nor even to discern whether something really is a problem or not. I am sad that my profession has gone down the rabbit hole of Lysenkoism like this.

    161

  • #
    RickWill

    Could dust bombs sabotage 2GW of solar panels? Would paint bombs be worse?

    This is an interesting question with regard strategic defence decision making.

    A century ago metals such as lead, zinc, steel and copper were strategic metals. The siting of the Risdon zinc smelter on the Derwent put it a long way from the then strategic threat from the north. And Tasmania enjoyed low cost hydroelectric power in abundance. The Port Pirie lead smelter and Whyalla steel works were closer to the threat but still a continent away from a northern attack.

    By the second world war, aluminium had joined the list of strategic metals. When the Kitimat smelter was built in BC Canada starting in 1951, the siting offered some strategic benefits. The Kemano hydro power station is actually built 1km below ground level but still 10m or so above sea level. It is safe from nuclear attack.

    Those strategic risks no longer exist of course since the UN has been so effective in preventing armed conflict globally! In a woke world, wealthy nations are obliged to lower their standard of living to prop up poorer nations like China so they can catch up and become woke as well. The only beneficiary are the UN dictators who cream off their margins from the “climate ambition”.

    Wouldn’t is be great if Admiral Barrie was asked one simple question – IN ALL YOU YEARS AT SEA, HAVE YOU EVER SEEN OPEN OCEAN WATER WARMER THAN 30C? Then point out that back in 2000, all climate models predicted ocean surface temperature above 30C by 2020 and none have yet exceeded that hard limit.

    141

    • #
      Ronin

      “Could dust bombs sabotage 2GW of solar panels? Would paint bombs be worse?”

      Or a Nuclear winter caused by a nuclear exchange or a hit from an asteroid, also the threat hanging about of a CME or ‘Carrington Event’ from sunspots, all these transmission connections for dilute, casual, part time power farms are just a huge antenna to collect coronal mass ejections.

      101

    • #
      Thomas A

      I believe the Israelis have a bomb composed of lots of strands of carbon fiber. Drop that on substations and high tension lines and the short circuits will be weeks getting fixed.

      31

    • #
      Curious George

      Can a solar panel withstand a sonic boom of a low flying fighter?

      01

  • #
    Dennis

    Same as UK Labour when Prime Minister Tony Blair was in office, the Labour Government asked the chief scientist to review the IPCC climate modelling (mathematician Christopher Monckton around that time had audited the modelling figures and data and reported that the modelling was badly flawed). Whatever the chief scientist of the UK Government reported was not revealed and the head of treasury was asked to report on what the future economy would look like based on the UN modelling without questioning the data.

    Obviously Albo Labor is desperate to support the international climate hoax.

    71

  • #
    David Maddison

    The Australian Government and its intelligence (sic) agencies are “fiddling while Rome burns”.

    I think the citizen-bloggers here have a superior understanding to them that there is no problem of anthropogenic global warming, even if it were truly happening although no non-fraudulent evidence has ever been presented to prove it scientifically.

    The true threat to Australia and allied nations comes from traitorous politicians who are prepared to destroy the country due to the false claims of the anthropogenic global warming fraud.

    An additional threat is the attempt of global domination of the Chicomms and we know we have their agents embedded in government and politicians who have greater loyalty to the Chicomms than they do to Australia and what it once stood for.

    We do indeed face an existential threat but it is due to economic and social destruction caused by the de-electrification and de-industrialisation of our countries and the global domination of the Chinese Communist Government and the loyalty of many of our politicians to them.

    81

  • #
    David Maddison

    Now that President Trump, the only restrauning influence there was against this Marxist civilisation-destroying garbage, has been removed from office, this is what has become of the US military.

    This is a critical analysis of an official US Navy training video by a former US Marine.

    I’m sure the Chicomms are terrified.

    https://youtu.be/7lSbfM10fSY

    71

    • #
      b.nice

      I must say that I don’t give a carp about if these people “feel disrespected”… they don’t deserve respect.

      They don’t respect the fact that there are only two genders and that I don’t have to recognise any other fabricated genders.

      He and she, male and female.. get over it!

      Nor do those rainbow non-entities respect the fact that their whole video makes my skin crawl.

      I even find their tone of voice and their condescending sycho-phantic attitude highly puke-worthy.

      71

  • #
    exsteelworker

    This is the ALPs 2nd coming Tim ( its never going to rain again) Flannery appointment. Set up a whole new big scary climate change alarmists goverment division, with the head honcho and his dozens of minions below him being paid insane taxpayer dollars for nothing. Get ready for power outages Australia, guaranteed.

    131

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Driving law changes: All home EV chargepoints will need smart chargers from next month

    MASSIVE law changes are coming into effect at the end of June which will require all home and workplace electric car chargers to have smart charging capabilities.

    The Government regulations come into effect on June 30, and are intended to help manage the strain on the National Grid with thousands of electric cars charging at once. These set out minimum standards for all home and workplace chargepoints sold in England, Scotland and Wales from that date, whereas previous rules had only applied to units funded by OZEV grant schemes.

    60

  • #
    David Maddison

    You know the really scary thing?

    I don’t think your average voter knows what the carbon cycle is or that plants consume CO2 (and consume O2 at night, a little known factoid).

    81

    • #
      Annie

      Most haven’t a clue about the carbon cycle, the water cycle, photosynthesis, basic info. about the sun, the planets, especially the gas giants, etc. etc,
      What happened to basic schooling? (Don’t ask silly questions Annie).

      91

      • #
        Annie

        I’ve never forgotten that our eldest grandson was told by a teacher that CO2 made up 5% of the atmosphere. I made him do some basic research. He also announced that he was no good at maths. After a change of school he discovered that he was perfectly ok with maths and in due course he ended up doing astrophysics and cosmology. I hope he makes sure his son is well taught!

        131

      • #
        another ian

        Annie

        Isn’t the carbon cycle a modern racing bicycle?

        I’ll grab my hat.

        30

    • #
      Ted1

      For 15 years it was the National Party which kept the AGW scare at bay. Now they have lost the battle. Battle number two has now to begin, and it is a life or death issue. And it’s all about ignorance of the carbon cycle.

      The original proposal for an Emissions Trading Scheme refused point blank to allow credits for the sequestration side of Agriculture’s carbon cycle. They intended to tax Agriculture’s recycled “emissions” on the same basis as fossil emissions. This was grossly inequitable.

      With only Agriculture and Forestry having a carbon cycle, the electorate had very little comprehension of sequestration.

      It was Barnaby Joyce, the only working accountant in the parliament, (others had his letters, but none his expertise) who enlightened the coalition to the fact that the proposed ETS would quickly bankrupt Australia’s entire grazing industry, to be soon followed by the rest of the Agricultural sector.

      In the resulting uproar, Agriculture was shunted into the too hard basket while other matters were considered, but the inequity was never acknowledged. So, now that the Marxists appear to have control of both houses of parliament, we can expect to see it revived.

      51

  • #
    rowjay

    From the Citizens’ Office of Climate Change Threats Assessment
    Prime Minister Albanese.
    Since coming to office, your Government has committed Australia to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 43% from 2005 levels. The following national emissions data is taken from the industry.gov.au website:
    End March 2005 : 616.6 MtCO2e
    End March 2021 : 494.2 MtCO2e
    New target 2030 : 351.5 MtCO2e (43% reduction from 2005 levels)
    Therefore, a further 142.7 MtCO2e reduction is needed from current emissions to achieve that target. Emissions in MtCO2e from the main sources for 2021 are summarised below:
    Electricity…160.1
    Stationary….99.8
    Transport…..89.5
    Agriculture…75.1
    Fugitive…….48.4
    Industrial…..32.1
    Waste………13.8
    LULUCF? …..-24.7

    Can you please advise which sectors will be targeted so that we can further assess threats to the nation.

    81

  • #
    Neville

    Again here’s Lomborg’s 12 January 2022 article in the WSJ and Climate Depot has provided us with a copy of the full article.

    https://www.climatedepot.com/2022/01/12/lomborg-todays-soaring-energy-prices-are-only-the-beginning-net-zero-plans-will-cost-many-trillions/

    Here’s the transcript of the Lomborg article and the cost of their so called Net ZERO in TRILLIONs of $. What a disaster and meanwhile China, India and other developing countries continue to build hundreds of new Coal power stations for their future energy needs.
    Lomborg: Today’s Soaring Energy Prices Are Only the Beginning – ‘Net zero’ plans will cost many trillions $

    By: Admin – Climate DepotJanuary 12, 2022 8:24 AM

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/soaring-energy-prices-only-the-beginning-climate-change-net-zero-renewable-wind-electricity-11641417084

    “By Bjorn Lomborg”

    “Energy prices are soaring, and it’s likely a sign of things to come. The rise can be blamed on a variety of things, including the demand rebound after the lockdowns ended, a drop in renewable electricity output from a lack of wind in Europe during most of 2021, and increasingly costly climate policies. But while the pandemic will end and the wind will blow again, climate policies to achieve “net zero” emissions will keep hiking prices.

    Barack Obama acknowledged in 2008 that electricity prices “would necessarily skyrocket” under his proposed climate policies. He was more candid than many of today’s politicians and advocates. Limiting the use of fossil fuels requires making them more expensive and pushing people toward green alternatives that remain pricier and less efficient.

    In the U.K., real electricity prices have doubled since 2003, after dropping fivefold over the 20th century. British climate policy had already added more than £10 billion annually to the national electricity bill by 2020. Even before last year’s energy price hikes, 50 million to 80 million people in the European Union couldn’t afford to heat their homes sufficiently. That’s likely to get worse, as this year European energy bills are expected to increase by almost $400 billion. And in the U.S., gasoline prices soared to a seven-year high in October, while gas heating is predicted to be 30% more expensive this winter than the previous one.

    Costs will continue to rise if politicians remain bent on achieving net-zero emissions globally. Bank of America finds that achieving net zero globally by 2050 will cost $150 trillion over 30 years—almost twice the combined annual gross domestic product of every country on earth. The annual cost ($5 trillion) is more than all the world’s governments and households spend every year on education. Academic studies find the policy is even costlier. The largest database on climate scenarios shows that keeping temperature rises to 2 degrees Celsius—a less stringent policy than net zero by midcentury—would likely cost $8.3 trillion, or 3.3% of world GDP, every year by 2050, and the costs keep escalating so that by the end of the century taxpayers will have paid about $1 quadrillion—a thousand trillion—in total.

    These estimates are based on the heroic assumption that climate policy costs will be spread efficiently, with big emitters China and India cutting the most. New Delhi says it will only keep moving toward net zero if the rest of the world pays it $1 trillion by 2030, which won’t happen. Other developing nations are showing the same understandable reluctance. This means that achieving global net-zero emissions by 2050 will be impossible. Those cuts that are enforced will most likely occur in rich countries, taking a smaller notch out of global emissions at high cost.

    Though the EU, the U.K., the U.S. and others have adopted national net-zero emissions goals, few have undertaken rigorous cost estimates. The official independent assessment done in New Zealand shows achieving net zero by midcentury will cost 16% of its GDP annually by 2050. That is more than its entire current budget for social security, welfare, health, education, police, courts, defense and the environment—combined.

    For the U.S., one recent study in Nature found reducing emissions only 80% by 2050 will cost more than $2.1 trillion in today’s money annually by midcentury. That is more than $5,000 per American a year. The cost of achieving 100% reductions would be far higher. And this study assumes reductions will be carried out in the most efficient way possible—namely using a single national, steadily increasing carbon tax—but that’s unlikely, and with less-than-ideal policies, the price would be still higher.

    Climate activists may not want to acknowledge these costs, but voters will force them to eventually. If you divide Bank of America’s annual cost for net-zero emissions globally, it comes to more than $600 a person—including the world’s poorest, in India and Africa. Even in a rich country like the U.S., most voters are unwilling to give the government more than about $100 a year to fight climate change, and a couple of hundred dollars is the limit for a majority of voters in many other countries, such as China and the U.K. France has already seen sustained protests against gasoline price hikes of only 12 cents a gallon. Imagine the backlash against policies enforcing net-zero emissions”.

    41

  • #
    It's all BS

    Chris Barrie was a horrible Admiral and the reason the RAN has not has a Chief of the ADF since his tenure ended in 2005. He has been on this bandwagon for a long time, I suspect for his own grandeur. He would have lobbied very hard for this job. He has been a politician for a long time as most senior officers become. The Canberra bubble is killing the ADF.

    101

  • #
    Philip

    The guardian 2005. Scientists say “A total of 213 communities in Alaska are threatened by tides that creep three metres further inland each year”.

    It is now 17 years later. 17×3=51. How did that linear projection turn out ?

    81

    • #
      Ronin

      Conveniently ignored and forgotten.

      51

    • #
      Ted1

      Alaska? Just have a look at NOAA’s sea level records from tide gauges in the Gulf of Alaska,

      The sea level there is FALLING at a rate that would alarm the bedwetters if they knew it was happening.

      This means that the land there is rising.

      Which raises the questions: When is the earthquake coming? And will it cause a tsunami that wipes out all the low lying land in the Pacific?

      21

  • #
    el+gordo

    Admiral Chris Barrie nominated Andrew Shearer to do the report, should be alright he has an Arts degree. The Coalition government did a reasonable job in holding back the green tide, but in Opposition they’ll be outstanding.

    ‘Barrie said those risks would “continue to escalate in the absence of far stronger climate action than we have seen thus far, globally and here”.

    ‘He accused the previous government of having “seriously eroded the capacity of key climate change research and public institutions, such as CSIRO and the BOM”.

    51

    • #
      Ronin

      Sounds like Cdr Barrie is a ‘friend of the left’, appointing some clown with an arts degree to ‘do the report’.

      61

      • #
        el+gordo

        In his spare time he writes for the IPA, that is the benefit of an Arts degree.

        https://ipa.org.au/author/andrewshearer

        21

      • #
        el+gordo

        Best not jump to conclusions, he may turn out to be an honest broker.

        ‘When Andrew Shearer was appointed head of the Office of National Intelligence in 2020, the Labor Party said the pivotal role had been given to a “partisan operative” totally inappropriate for such a sensitive position.’ (AFR)

        10

        • #
          another ian

          Likely more in theory in this era than in practice –

          The first part of any review is A REVIEW OF LITERATURE, which should bring up all sides of the subject and the review go from there. No matter what the reviewer’s background.

          And that requires a lot of persistence, a lot of curiosity and even at times a lot of luck in tripping over important items. My personal best of that was walking down the shelves of a library, seeing a title of which I was unaware, on the subject of interest at the time and having the volume fall open at a quote that was appropriate for my use in that review.

          However at the end of my official career as a research scientist I was appalled at the number of new graduates that had a very limited idea of what a review of literature was, and of how to do it.

          10

  • #
    Neville

    Here’s the June 2022 Sky News Outsider’s interview with Alex Epstein and he is probably the sharpest data expert on planet Earth.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rW0YWmwYXrc

    20

  • #
    OldOzzie

    Tesla Model S catches fire three weeks after getting sent to junkyard

    Firefighters ended up submerging the car in a water-filled pit

    In what sounds like the automotive equivalent of The Walking Dead, a Tesla Model S caught fire three weeks after it was involved in an accident and sent to a junkyard. Firefighters had a difficult time putting out the blaze, and they ended up having to submerge the battery.

    Posting on its official Twitter account, the Metro Fire Department of Sacramento explained that it sent crews to extinguish a vehicle fire in a wrecking yard. When they got there, firefighters found a burning Model S that had been wrecked in a non-fire-related accident about three weeks before. Why the electric sedan caught fire after sitting for nearly a month is unclear, but Metro Fire says the Tesla put up a fight.

    “Crews knocked the fire down but it kept re-igniting/off-gassing in the battery compartment,” it wrote on Twitter.

    61

    • #
      yarpos

      I love a good junkyard visit and regularly visit a couple of Pick a Part type places in Melbourne to find bits for my older club cars and occasionally for my daughters Subie. Not of the cars are presented with batteries present or fuel in tanks. The idea of send any kind of EV or hybrid to a junkyard with its battery intact seem immensely stupid and asking for trouble.

      51

  • #
    Zane

    There are only two weeks left to save the planet… sarc.

    41

  • #
    Serge Wright

    All roads lead to China.

    – Direct military threat
    – RE dependency creating a reliance on all energy needs from China
    – Economic threat from Chinese sanctions
    – Political interference and infiltration
    – CCP support from many local people of Chinese origins and many left wing non-Chinese.
    – Climate change threat (if it exists) because China emits a third of all GHG.

    31

  • #
    John in Oz

    What is the threat to Oz when weather causes low wind and/or 10/10ths cloud across most of the country and we are relying on ruinables for most of our power?

    21

  • #
    another ian

    Worth an O/T IMO

    “EXCLUSIVE: Health regulator to PERMANENTLY mandate vaccines”

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVn8vVC8GBI

    (My bold)

    31

  • #

    Good stuff Jo.

    Rather than get Defence people who have no qualification in this area, and will just call on other (incompetent) “experts” we need to have a proper debate about whether CO2 based climate change is in fact a reality in the first place.

    And before we stupidly rush to push intermittent and unreliable power generation on our grid we must have engineers to provide proper input here. We have complete idiots like Zali Steggall today claiming that intermittent supply can replace baseload. Where is the storage? How much storage is needed? What is the actual cost of propping up unreliable generation? What about backup for when the batteries are not enough?

    Lots of questions and no proper debate or answers. We have no proper assessments and reviews being done and no clarity on where we are going here, other than to a very bad place where power is astronomically priced and we will have wasted vast sums on useless infrastructure, money that would have been better spent allievating poverty…

    61

    • #
      Len

      Having been involved in the Intelligence community, we were often tasked to find out about things beyond our experience. We quickly carried out the necessary research to more than understand the subject. In the case of Climate Change we would have discovered very early it was a complete hoax.

      41

  • #
    DLK

    1. climate change modelling uses projections, not predictions.
    2. projections are not falsifiable so climate change ‘science’ is not falsifiable.
    3. it is impossible to asses the ‘threat of climate change’ on the basis of un-falsifiable ‘evidence’.

    41

    • #
      Ross

      Modelling is just estimated guessing. Which at the end of the day – is just guessing. As my late grandmother would say” Might as well ask the cat”.

      21

      • #
        Pauly

        Ross,
        Not true. Modelling is not guessing. It is a means of simplifying complexity. The challenge is to ensure, when describing complex reality with a simplified mathematical construct, that the model continues to adequately map to reality.

        Problems happen when the model becomes over-simplified, or if the choices in mathematical constructs do not match what really happens. Which is why all models should undertake independent verification and validation testing before they are used. Verification determines use of correct mathematical constructs, and validation checks that the model matches reality.

        None of the global circulation models used by the IPCC have ever undertaken IV&V. So the scientists who use them have no idea how accurate or inaccurate those models are. Instead, the IPCC relies on hundreds of different models producing widely divergent results, and then creates an “ensemble mean”. Those divergent results are the actual temperature values the models produce, which the IPCC conveniently ignores when it only publishes model results as temperature “anomalies”.

        Both mathematically and from a modelling perspective, there is absolutely no utility in the concept of an ensemble mean of temperature anomalies. Averaging 100 wrong answers from invalid climate models is not equivalent to some sort of Delphi technique.

        31

        • #
          Kalm Keith

          Yes, yes and yes.

          Those things are not modelling climate.

          They are Not models, they are the essence of Deception on a grand scale.

          11

        • #
          Ross

          Modelling is indeed guessing, because all models have underlying assumptions. Those assumptions are “guesses”. In the case of the climate models nearly all the assumptions are guesses. Hence, it is no surprise they are wildly inaccurate and after about 20 years of field testing, its time to throw them out and start again. This is not some academic exercise, this is real life and unfortunately the climate models are driving government policy.

          11

          • #
            Kalm Keith

            Hi Ross,
            In engineering and industrial chemical processing the use of “models” is a very useful and rewarding process where no guesses can be entertained.

            True, in some peripheral inputs to an overall process there may be approximations but these are never the core process which must be clearly quantified.

            In the case of climate change caused by atmospheric CO2 there must be a clear cause and effect relationship between atmospheric temperature and CO2 levels but there is none.

            Ask any physicist, atmosphere scientist or whoever to produce that core detail and you are met with deafening silence. By honing in to the fine detail of the atomic/molecular behaviour of CO2 in a laboratory the real world activity of CO2 in the atmosphere has been completely pushed out of the public debate.

            This has been a very real and dirty process which shows how powerful the manipulators are.

            The so called “models” for Climate Change are pure and deliberate obfuscation to hide the truth from those being ripped off and Arhenius would be turning in his grave if he knew how his name had been used to propagate this deceit.

            Despite this scientific truth we are still virtually imprisoned by this unscientific deceit.

            10

  • #
    David Maddison

    I think the war against Western Civilisation has been won by the Left.

    We now face a most horrible future which will be a dystopian society somewhat akin to a terrible combination of Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty Four” and Well’s “The Time Machine” with a society ruled by Morlocks.

    31

  • #
    SimonB

    If it wasn’t so ridiculous this sentence would be hilarious:
    ‘Anthony Albanese will ask Australia’s most senior intelligence chief, Andrew Shearer, to personally lead a review of the security threats posed by the climate crisis.’
    Intelligence Officer? Wouldn’t an ‘intelligence’ officer ask how the climate is instigating espionage on Australian soil…..literally?
    A Miscellaneous Workers Union bureaucrat on the other hand would of course say; “Yes, Prime Minister, how many billion can we expect to increase our budget for each year and how many more MWU members can we add to our new tax payer funded Empire, because of course this is a clear and present threat but will go on for AT Least another generation’
    Critical thinkers need to pace themselves, we’re only a month into the woke Marxist utopia. You just need to be ready to apprise the useful idiots of the links to the facts of their failures, no point arguing, as there aren’t any intelligence officers in that group!

    21

  • #
    Daffy

    Let’s think. The risk of mild warming as we emerge from the ‘little ice age’ or other periodicity at work…so far, nil. Risk of poor forestry, lack of dams, porous irrigation systems, pretend ‘environmental flows’ impoverishing all the less pecunious, creating economic dead weights by unproductive investments in unreliable energy and over-extended grids, Oh, and double energy needs while we electrify everything currently powered by oil. Catastrophic.
    Meanwhile…the models fail, the sea level keeps up its long term almost undetectable rise/land sinking, and why does Fort Denison look the same as it did a century ago.

    11

  • #
    DOC

    What on Earth has anthropogenic global warming got to do with national Security and not be left to normal policing is disquietening.

    Taking it on face value, the first thing National Security should then have to do is to seek the reproducibility of the theory in testing proof of theory before making a determination about whom it needs to keep an eye on; the supporters of the theory, or those that defy the theory, based on history and the science the advocates refuse allow debate upon.

    When advocacy has the police scared for their own safety, hightailing it away from advocates holding training camps in the bush, then I think the first people to be closely scrutinised are advocates such as those. They remind me of the folk involved in the University of East Anglia emails fracas, that beginning of the end of the scientific method. Manipulations of traditional scientific methodology exposed both the corruption of peer review and even personal interference in the conduct of the trials to prove the theory – such as the tree rings scandal.

    We have so far seen political and social media harm done to those disagreeing with the theory, and we have seen big business joining in the game after demanding and receiving confirmation that the government wouldn’t suddenly change course. Maybe Security might ensure politicians know it will also take a close look at their own personal documentations to ensure matters are totally decided upon and actions taken in the best interests of the nation. The obstinacy against reversing course on climate actions when the disaster of the present course is fully on display in Germany and Denmark, has to have a logical and defendable explanation.

    As Adam Creighton in today’s ‘The Australian’ acknowledges, ‘experts’ on any topic have diverse and often opposing views on many matters.

    This is a major point unrecognised by most of the public, especially a public pre-educated from the cradle that their world faces a horrible overwarming disaster from which they can’t flee (even though the theory is unproven as recognised by the advocates right at the start. The actions are all ‘just-in-case’) Most teachers, from parent (infancy) to University (include the AGW story in most courses) have all told the students the same story of doom. In most major policy making now, only the expert supporting the side is ever allowed to be heard and is presented as speaking for all. The rest are socially vilified to the point of losing their jobs if they comment adversely.

    41

  • #
    Phillip Sweeney

    Australia’s four Aluminium smelters use 9% of all electrical power in Australia – these must be the first to go to meet Albo Easy’s 43% reduction in harmless CO2 emissions by 2030.

    They ae being propt up by taxpayers alrealy at recent electrical prices and much higher subsidies will be required as electricity costs do a moon shoot.

    51

  • #
    Ross

    We’re cooked – seriously cooked. I was reading an article the other day which summarised the Australian Defence Force ( ADF ) ability to defend the country. So a combined analysis of the navy, airforce and army. What a bloody shambles!! Equipment stuff ups, lack of personnel, poor leadership, political interference up the wazoo. Then, the government wastes money on this initiative. Talk about dud priorities.

    51

  • #
    Philip

    The threat from the climate crisis is actually very true and real. The main effect is western society has decided to end the era of energy supply and the rest of the world didn’t. Once China sees the west has finished the destruction, they will turn the screws and invade. That is a very real security threat.

    Imagine if the Chief delivered that in his report.

    41

    • #
      Zane

      It seems to me more likely that a globalist cabal is trying to enrich themselves by gaining a monopoly on global energy supplies. The usual suspects. The owners of the Economist magazine, certain New York billionaires, and the original oil baron family.

      31

  • #
    Anton

    It’s worse than it sounds. Climate change dissenters within Australia will be identified as a Fifth Column.

    10

  • #
    Anton

    It’s worse than it sounds. Intelligence will be required to identify climate change dissenters as a Fifth Column.

    10

  • #
    Ronin

    Prediction is something that is deduced from existing or given set of facts. It is like an assumption of a pattern or a cycle that you have based on certain given and existing facts. The cycle can, always, alter itself due to various uncontrollable external factors. Since it is more or less an alignment to the existing patterns and studies based on existent or known events, they may or may not be true. We use predictions when there are external factors that can alter the course of whatever result we are looking for and they cannot be controlled or prevented.

    Projection, on the other hand, is also based on facts that are existent, given and true, but they are based on calculations and numbers. Projections are always based on calculations and nothing is assumed. It is always kind of quantitative and analytical. The result is more or less numeric and then the conclusion is based on it.

    10

  • #
    another ian

    Another threat (/s)

    The King of obsolete reports on Starlink from the wilds of northern Manitoba

    “first i would like to thank elon musk for his mother being canadian which means he remembered about us canadians at the end of the world paying for high speed internet that was not high speed or not even close. the staff got elon musk’s starlink internet dish a week ago and told me i had to get one. i thought they were all the same with big promises and no speed. well i was wrong and ordered a dish for the Kingdom. last night after the staff hooked up the new high speed dish, i made my daily tik-tok video of 3 minutes which only took 3 minutes to up load compare to the 90 minutes it took on the xplornet dish. when loading up on the old dish, i usually cooked and burned supper for the guard dogs and me and did other things in the house not to be on the internet that would slow the upload speed. now i am not sure what to do with all this extra time i will now have not waiting for things to load up since the starlink dish is so fast. ”

    http://www.kingofobsolete.ca/King_today_webpage2.html

    10

  • #
    another ian

    And that review could include

    “In praise of Carbon”

    http://www.numberwatch.co.uk/Carbon.htm

    00

  • #
    Tomster

    Excellent article.

    There is a catastrophic effect of the CAGW theory, and it is entirely related to the self-harm we are wasting trillions to inflict.

    11

  • #
    William

    Hi Jo, my background is security threat and risk, both with government and in the private sector. I would like to put something together about this but it will take me some time.

    00

  • #
    UK-Weather Lass

    And so ‘baseload’ is the latest word to be redefined by political greenies simply because they know they cannot argue the case against ‘intermittent energy’. That argument says intermittent energy generators are unable to reliably supply the electricity demanded on the grid at all and any times because we don’t have enough big batteries with sufficient power to support baseload with the switching sensitivities required.

    Indeed the only ‘reliable and controlled baseload batteries’ we do have are called reservoirs and carry a huge weight of water which creates an enormous force when faced with the power of falling downhill. Engineers have looked for other ways of storing electricity for a long, long time and the best they have come up with has been pumped hydro and that was four decades ago. Baseload is powerful and not a word to be abused by people who don’t know what they are doing or talking about. The reason it is there is because it was found to be only efficient way to run a grid not because its originators had energy to throw away and money to burn. They had customers to care about and keep prices down for unlike our contemporary green politicians who just don’t have a clue about anything other than looking virtuous. And they didn’t sit around telling the rest of us how to live our lives.

    If the political greenies believe baseload can be supplied by wind and solar alone let them demonstrate it to us under agreed conditions as soon as they are ready to do so but don’t, whatever you do, hold your breath.

    31

  • #
    Zigmaster

    When the grid fails and the Chinese waltz in I hope we are addressed with the right pronouns. The inappropriate use of pronouns is something the great armies of the world must avoid. Such priorities make me feel so safe.

    21

  • #

    Climate Change is getting worse. One degree of Global Warming in two hundred years, but in Britain it is ten degrees hotter than it was six months ago. Its even worse than that because in the last twelve hours it has increased by another ten degrees. This finding should be sent to the intelligence agencies and Greta. I am not joking. Ten degrees in twelve hours is a threat to national security. But then I have an IQ of 164, so unlike Andrew Shearer, I might be joking. If joking about it is still illegal.

    11

  • #

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>