Freedom is steak and cars. Picnic at Albert Park Lake, Melbourne 1974 | by Rennie Ellis | NLA
How much is The Planet worth?
Polling shows Australians don’t believe there is much of a climate crisis. If they thought the planet would boil, they would surely be willing to spend more than $20 a week.
When it came to other climate-punishments to save the planet, the average person rated giving up meat as the worst option, followed by giving up petrol and diesel cars, and appliances.
The Greens were willing to pay more, but they weren’t so happy about giving up their overseas flights. Doesn’t that say everything? Which will it be, no more polar bears or no more skiing trips to Chamonix?
The truth laid bare in this poll is that Australians have no idea what the real cost of NetZero fantasies are. If they had any idea what the true price was, they’d be livid.
The great success of the green parasites has been to hide the costs of wind and solar schemes
The big message here for the Coalition is that all they had to do to win the last election was talk about the hidden price tag of “Net Zero”. Of course, having brought in the target themselves, probably bullied by the Big Banker cartel, they could hardly campaign on what a stupid policy it was or how expensive it would be to fix the global weather. It would have been a gift…
Most Conservative voters (which is ultimately half the country) were not willing to pay even $5 or $10 a month in energy bills for the nation to reach the NetZero target by 2050. According to the Daily Telegraph, Labor voters were supposedly willing to spend $20-$40 a month more — possibly because Labor voters are now living in wealthier electorates than Conservative voters are. Greens voters, who are generally even wealthier still were theoretically happy to spend $40-$80 per month.
All figures appear inflated though without seeing the questions (which don’t appear to be available). Only a year ago, when asked what they wanted to pay each year in a survey done by the IPA, fully 40% of Australian voters said “nothing” and only 8% of voters were willing to spend $10 a week.
Poll finds $20 a month the tipping point for voter support on net zero
Daily Telegraph
Overall the tipping point at which support for net zero turns negative is a jump of $10 and $20 in monthly energy bills.
Australians don’t want the government to add any more restrictions, especially on their meat:
It also tested how people would react when they were told reaching net zero would mean eating less meat, getting rid of petrol and diesel cars, and household gas appliances by 2030, and jumping on fewer planes.
The pollster also asked people about their attitudes to trade-offs that might be required for Australia to be removed from what Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has called “the naughty corner” of countries rejecting climate change.
The most popular position was there be “no additional restrictions on how Australians live”, while the least popular “limits on consumption of meat and other carbon-intensive proteins”.
For the average person taking “slightly fewer flights” by 2030 didn’t seem as bad as giving up beef and cars. For Greens voters it was the opposite.
Restrictions on the consumption of meat led to the largest drop in support for net zero from Coalition and Labor voters.
But for many Greens it would seem flying to Europe each winter was a net zero deal breaker, with restrictions on flights their biggest turn-off.
Polling was done in May by Freshwater Strategy. Please anyone, let me know if you can find the questions and data.
h/t Kesten
The World Economic Forum (“Davos Club”) members should pay for everything they recommend.
450
Net Zero?
So two years ago.
It’s ABSOLUTE ZERO now.
Being mostly carbon, I’m getting nervous.
By next Davos, it will be Double Ultra Absolutely Absolute Negative Zero.
( I don’t think they like carbon.)
In fact , it should be illegal to use the concept of ‘zero’ except in reference to carbon.
Otherwise we will all die.
If brown, even more deceased.
170
So we banning Diamonds Honkr?
My favourite factoid from Prof Pilmer is that down under we are already sinking 500% of our “Carbon” production by way of the vast sea.
Meat is fundamental to optimal human nutrition. The modern dietitians lineage has been traced back to 7th day adventist vegetarian religious zeal and the “visions” of one woman FFS.
The great demonisation of Saturated fat and Cholesterol can be traced to Ancel Keys, who used fake graphs to push his thesis which has been falsified time and again but is just now taking its stertous final breaths.
To be sure there is gain in derailing the smooth progress of society in order to implement fixes that empower and enrich the wealthy elite behind out “WWF” warrior pollies.
300
For the “Ancel Keys Collection” –
“How Ancel Keys Brainwashed the Masses Into Fearing Meat (He’s Wrong)”
https://carnivoreaurelius.com/ancel-keys/
“Records Found in Dusty Basement Undermine Decades of Dietary Advice”
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/records-found-in-dusty-basement-undermine-decades-of-dietary-advice/
150
Anti-meat is based on junk science.
It’s therefore no surprise that far more Leftists than conversatives are vegan/vegetarian although I do know one conservative who is a vegetarian for reasons of personal choice. He is not anti-meat however. There are some other conservatives that are vegetarians as well but they keep it to themselves and don’t need to scream it from the rooftops and are not offended by carnivores.
301
To paraphase JP Sears, plants are not food, they are my food’s food, LoL.
151
What I took from that SA article is that we should eat what we like. Health is more likely to be associated with quantity consumed and level of activity. Obesity is the disease we are facing these days and it does not matter how it happens. Casual observation says it is under activity and over consumption of carbohydrates.
200
I am surprised that the now fully woke and fully dumbed-down Scientific American published that.
70
You don’t need meat. This person just proved the overwhelming benefits of a vegan diet:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/real-life/article-12358835/Vegan-influencer-Zhanna-Dart-dies-starvation-exhaustion-switching-restrictive-tropical-fruit-diet.html
20
https://climateadaptationplatform.com/delivering-absolute-zero-emissions/
41
The anti-civilisation lobby is not even pretending that they are not calling for a dramatically reduced standard of living (for non-Elites).
90
Look at their claims of “restraint” at the link. Sorry but that restraint will kill millions or billions.
We need fertilisers, we need fossil fuels to harvest and plant crops, and we need lots of power 24/7 to process crops into food. All of which need fossil fuels not a few windmills or solar panels which only generate 30% of the time.
Their restraint is another word for starvation and privation.
30
Half (or more) of the country may be conservative voters. Unfortunately there is no mainstream conservative party.
In terms of the larger parties there is only Green, Liberal and Labor, all different factions of the Uniparty.
The pretend conservatives, Liberals, haven’t been conservatives for decades and believe in much the same things as Greens or Labor. All Uniparty factions believe more or less the same such as:
-Few or no limits on government spending.
-They have/had the same ideas on covid mismanagement and control and censirship of the medical and scientific professions, covid vaccine mandates and banning of IVM etc..
-They are all fanatical subscribers to the anthropogenic global warming fraud. In some cases the Libs propose even more extreme measures or targets than the Green/Labor faction as happened in the last Vicdanistan state election or views of Matt Kean in New South Wales. Federal Liberal “leader” Dutton has stated his support for unreliables. All terrified of CO2.
-They all pursue much the same foreign policy or defence policies.
-They are all subservient to China, despite pretending to be occasionally opposed to Chicomm policies. They are all terrified of “offendibg” the Chicomms.
-They all support WEF/UN objectives of high density living and “compact cities”.
-None fully support the private motor vehicle.
-They all support destruction of the electricity grid. E.g. shutting of power stations.
-They are all clueless (except the invisible Elites that tell them what to do and think).
-None support free speech and all support censorship.
-Liberals pretend to oppose the racist and divisive “The Voice” but many backbenchers support it.
-No Uniparty faction will remove freedoms and rights removed during covid.
-All Uniparty factions are supporters of UN and WEF decrees.
-Almost no Uniparty members are honest, trustworthy or morally virtuous and absolutely do not care about you or the country.
Ultimately, the only hope Australia has is in the small conservative-oriented, non-WEF and non-UN subservient parties such as:
— United Australia Party. E.g. Senator Babet. See https://youtube.com/@senatorbabet
— Liberal Democrats*
— One Nation
*The Morrison Government challenged their name in the High Court and won so they have to change names. But it is complicated, see https://antonygreen.com.au/loophole-allows-liberal-democrats-to-retain-party-name/
380
Unfortunately there is no mainstream conservative party.
I know what you mean as it is just the same here in the UK.
20
Love the reference to Chicoms. Had not heard that used since the Vietnam war….
00
Great article Jo. We are the people who are zero dollars for net zero plans. If I ever faintly believed in any of the communistic/green “science” Albanese would have finished me off. He harps on endlessly while jumping on the next plane to the other side of the planet doing who knows what. His “voice” document was written by self confessed communists and I have always thought that he was and is. Question: when do conservative people ever send death threats like I have read from Jacinta Price in her newsletter and Warren Mundine in the Sunday Mail? Every thing the left is doing is to tear our country apart and I firmly believe hidden behind the voice document is a republic and worse.
460
Agreed Dave,
1). Good article but we must be careful not to get too involved in discussing fantasies e.g. “Are there fairies at the bottom of the garden”.
By applying the Keep It Simple Stupid principle, NetZero™ = Net Poverty. I encourage greenies to check out South African English language newspapers.
2). You mention “…to tear our country apart”. I couldn’t agree more. Hitler was smart when he divided middle Germany with alienation of Academics, Jews, Free masons etc. He then addressed each opposition as only a minority and with support from the dim-wits who fell for his ruse.
The voice thing, Net Poverty, Land Rights for Gay Whales etc are all distractions from where we need to focus our energies.
110
One problem I see with the question of “how much WILL you pay for net zero” ignores the fact that we are already paying a ridiculous amount for emission reduction. We have already made electricity so dear manufacturing has closed down or moved offshore. Our electricity has already gone from world’s cheapest to dearest. Work out what people are already paying and then ask them do they want to pay even more. Most people don’t know what the renewable scam is costing them now. The Opposition and One Nation should put a figure on it and shout it from the rooftops.
130
Something is wrong with “democracy” when unpopular policies and those who support such are not eventually voted out, and polis are not even worried about losing elections. But this has been the case in the Democratic Republic of Kalifornia for the last four decades. Yeah it smells.
A free press and a free market are what we all need.
340
I wonder if in the Glorious People’s Democratik Republik of Kalifornia election fraud has been systemic for decades? Surely Kaliforniastanis can’t be that stupid?
Although, people can be so stupid. In Vicdanistan, Australia, they have “voted” into office possibly Australia’s most repulsive politician, Dan Andrews, three times already
270
From what I understand the cities support democrats and that is where most votes are or where they can be most easily “adjusted”. Regional areas of California are strongly Republican as is the case in Oregon and Washington hence the idea of a Greater Idaho incorporating regional areas of Oregon.
50
After the last election which Trump “lost” I was interested to see a map of US counties across the country. With the exception of such cities as LA, NY, Washington, Chicago, etc, the majority of counties in the US were coloured red, ie, they voted for Trump. It would probably be a similar picture here, with all country and far outer suburbs of the cities voting for any party but Labor or Greens.
80
There is a move for the creation of New California that would encompass the majority of the current state leaving just the coastal rump to the DemoTwats.
10
The “free press” are DRIVING this madness. The “opinion-shapers” want to be the ultimate, unaccountable King-makers AND King BREAKERS.
Watch and learn.
50
Only Australians ? 😀
Certainely not 😀
280
From the Freshwater report late 2022 in the UK.
The overwhelming majority of Brits (76%) agree that the threat from man-made global climate change is real and could have a devastating impact. Just 8% disagree.
However, a sizeable minority of Brits, about one third (32%), also agree that economic growth should always be prioritised over the environment. In particular, Leave voters (43%) and Conservative voters (46%).
Vast majority of Brits (79%) willing to pay something additional for the UK to achieve net zero by 2050, but willingness varies substantially, depending on financial circumstance, age, and political views.
a. Freshwater Strategy estimates that on average, a majority of British adults would be willing to pay up to £8.50 per week^, almost £450 per year, in order to ensure that the UK achieves net zero carbon emissions by 2050
b. It is estimated that around 10% of Brits would be willing to pay up to £40 per week, around just over £2,000 per year
c. Approximately one in five Brits (21%) suggest they would not pay anything extra for the UK to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050, and may even require bills to reduce in order to accept that the UK should achieve net zero emissions by 2050
d. Analysis suggests those who are more willing to pay include, those on higher incomes, younger people, and Liberal Democrat supporters
So 76% of brits believe in AGW.
The light’s on for just 8%.
An interesting phrase from Freshwater’s homepage:
“Deploying empirical strategies, we shape opinion, manage risk, and identify opportunities in shifting environments to help our clients gain a competitive advantage in commercial and political spheres”
A market research company shaping opinions.
The whole paragraph sounds WEF-like.
50
Sounds like the research found exactly what it wanted to find. That did not include people’s true feelings. Do most of Brits really want to dump their current, efficient and relatively cheap heating systems so they can pay 10000 pounds to install a heat pump. They didn’t ask that question not the one about 15 minute cities or dumping their cars for public transport. Such a survey is completely worthless.
60
John
A retired professor is a friend of ours, and she specialised in surveys in the latter part of her career. She tells us that its all in the wording, or in face to face surveys how the interviewer poses questions.
I would have no faith at all in these results. They were almost certainly achieved via the way the survey was constructed.
50
Is it really the money, or is it the people you are giving the money to? Personally, I have a fairly low opinion of the political class that I see around the world.
GL
230
I for one do not want to give one cent for net(nut) zero.
I want to eat more red meat and be able to drive when and where I want. The Liberal Party need to get rid of the Leftards and be real centre right party to give a choice rather then the uniparty we have now.
330
“Australia is not a real country. It’s a U.S. military base with marsupials”
https://consortiumnews.com/2023/07/31/australia-agrees-to-build-us-missiles-us-dismisses-australian-concerns-about-assange/
😉
[How is this related to the Topic of Net Zero ?? – LVA]
51
The influence of the US on Australia is vast. Before Morrison and Frydenberg told us we got NetZero because of threats of a 1.5% interest rate hike, I wondered if Net Zero targets were the price of the AUKUS security deal.
It’s still a fair question to ask and reminds us that if Trump was President there would probably be fewer Net Zero targets around the world.
Yes, and Free Assange. Where is the Australian government…
140
As I previously commented, the impacts on global CO2 emissions from Oz, and UK, is insignificant. Therefore, the net zero agenda in these countries is entirely political, and the influence on politics is mainly external, the WEF, the USA and EU. Politics and net zero is linked, go figure.
40
These questionnaires are just a propaganda piece to Make net zero look cheap. Asking if you would pay $10.00 for net zero.
The real cost of net zero is a 90% reduction of the population through energy, health and food sHostages/elimination. Further carbon reductions beyond that through crazy schemes and spraying the air are about destruction of the environment.
This whole environment movement is just another mass formation Psychosis just like the Covid nonsense.
This madness still has a fair way to run
250
That’s why I want the question phrasing. I suspect the real data shows a lot more resistance. Think about the convoluted phrasing in this story and the lack of a data sheet.
50
Interestingly, the same poll done last year said the same thing, the only change is the amount people are willing to spend
After the catastrophic northern summer, I would suggest that attitudes have changed
036
You say that with conviction Peter, as though you believe it to be actually true.
Summers are hot, some are hotter than others, and the heat is not “unprecedented” to use a favourite term of the anti-civilisation lobby.
And it doesn’t help when people quote actual ground temperatures rather than air temperatures and pretend they represent true temperature measurements.
320
Good points David, but I still don’t understand why the lefties hate the Human flourishing since 1950 and their barking mad solutions that would guarantee our return to a much lower standard of living?
200
Thank you Peter. The fact that the IPA survey and the Freshwater survey last year were only a few months apart yet got vastly different answers tells us “it’s all in the question”. Why don’t Freshwater supply their questions and data?
90
So Peter can you tell us how you will change the NON OECD countries attitude and convince them to change to TOXIC W & S etc ASAP?
Why not travel to all the Asian countries + Africa or parts of Sth America, because that’s where 95% of all the EXTRA Human co2 emissions increase have come from since 1988?
IOW tell us your solutions and why you would want to end Human flourishing anyway?
170
And Peter, when you do travel to those massive CO2 emitting countries like China to tell them to stop, please tell them to stop throwing their plastic and other rubbish into the rivers. Hint, when you speak to them, call it carbon dioxide, they might not understand the incorrect term “carbon” in reference to said element’s oxidation product.
Because of China and similar nations wreckless attitude to pollution, the anti-civilisation lobby in the West have, or are in the process of, banning plastic disposable items like plastic bags, cutlery and plates in the West, at huge inconvenience and no effect because we dispose of our rubbish correctly. But people like you have collectively punished the thinking community.
Why should the civilised world be punished for the massive CO2 emissions and improper rubbish disposal of China and similar countries?
170
We are told banning plastic disposable items like plastic bags, cutlery and plates keeps them out of landfill. We now know the real reason for keeping such items out of landfill. It’s because landfill is needed for used solar panels, wind turbines and the like.
140
David, have you actually been to China or are you relying on the lies of some Democrats in USA? I was on a Wendy Wu tour there a few years ago (before covid) and I could recommend it as eye opening. We were free to walk down the streets and talk to people. We started in Beijing- clean no pollution no smells, saw the Great Wall and walked kms along it to forts (talked to Nigerian students from Beijing Uni), saw the red square,the forbidden city. We flew to Xi’an to look with Chinese tourists (very few white people)the Terracotta warriors. Then flew to Lhasa in Tibet walked the streets and talked to locals (who did not like the Han from China) climbed up the Palace. Then flew to Chendu (Panda Research Station)-the city has 4 universities and 4million people. Went in a bus to Chongging (one of the largest cities in the world with 33million). I saw some very modern and clean (no pollution) cement works. We went on a boat through the three gorges and then down through the dam (the largest in the world 22,000MW all very clean). Down the Yangste river we stopped at Yichan where I saw a Nuclear power station and a closed small coal fired station on the other side. We then went on to Wuhan where we took a plane from the new very modern international airport to Shanghai. No where in the Yangste did I see any rubbish; no where in any city in the local markets, streets, or hotels did I see any rubbish around, no where did I see any polluting smokestacks. In Shanghai I traveled on the fastest train at the time reaching 433km/hr to and from the airport (but mostly for tourists trips and little used by local as the station in Shanghai is not convenient). I saw that nearly everyone had mobile phones, At one of the airports people were shouting and very cross about delayed planes (in Oz the police would have arrested them). I think the Chinese government wants the west to think they do not have a modern economy. In some manufacturing (eg cement& concrete, car production, nuclear power etc) they are ahead of western countries such as Australia. I should add not once did I see a windmill, or solar panel.
20
Attitudes have changed? Gone from $4.75 a week to about $20 a month?
The only thing that has changed is someone brought up significant figures at a meeting.
140
Gone from $19 to $20, yep all good.
30
What, a small fire in Greece and some hot wind blowing in from Africa.
100
‘I would suggest that attitudes have changed.’
I don’t think attitudes will change because of MSM hype.
To fully understand this NH summer we need to have a robust discussion on meandering jet streams. When did it begin and is it unprecedented?
51
Indeed; hence bits of N America and Europe/Asia contiguous with the hot bits are exceptionally cold – as waves in the meridional flow of the jet stream imply. The Austrian alps have recently had massive snowfall – in July! UK is very cool – temp wise.
50
Blocking high pressure in both hemispheres is caused by this meandering, resulting in unseasonal weather.
01
We are looking at Rossby Waves.
https://optimizeias.com/rossby-waves/#:~:text=The%20meandering%20jet%20streams%20are,due%20to%20rotation%20of%20earth.
02
3 Mar 2023 88% of humanity lives in the Northern Hemisphere. 82% lives in the Eastern Hemisphere.
The southern hemi is cold. Heat island anyone?
30
Proves what we have thought for years, Green voter have more money than sense. Even the ones on the dole.
180
I don’t think these polls ask the right questions.
The reason the typical green/lefty doesn’t want to pay is that they have been told endlessly that green power is cheaper and the fossil fuels are subsidised, so they personally shouldn’t have to pay anything extra. Indeed CSIRO is claiming they will have cheaper power, so it’s just a matter of political will. They don’t have to pay….
That is the typical mindset.
210
On the contrary, the people creating the polls ask the questions which will give the answers which they seek to have validated. To their mind, the questions are “right”.
20
Less than $5.00 per week! I’m surprised it’s that high.
150
They would if they new that
A story that Google Chrome thought I would want to read.
“STORY HIGHLIGHTS
A new study by a group of researchers from Niels Bohr Institute at the University of Copenhagen has suggested that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could halt as early as 2025…An ocean current system responsible for transporting heat from the tropics to the North Atlantic may shut down much earlier than previously thought, with potentially catastrophic consequences for Earth’s climate. ”
Is all there is if you click on it. What I remember from criticism at WUWT, there is a single computer model at odds with actual measurements and other studies that pooped out a 95% Confidence Interval of collapse between 2025 and 2095.
The scientific ignorance of journalists is mind boggling.
150
Come back in 20 years and see how well the story ages!
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver
120
Thankyou. Needed that laugh.
Did it ever occur to the journalist that the report was suppressed because it was drivel?
40
They’ll still be saying that in 2095 with 25% certainty.
60
If opposition leader Peter Dutton is genuinely interested in nuclear & sorting this net zero nonsense for good he needs to :-
Plan for a nuclear power generation future…have consultants start planning sites for modular nuclear steam generation, publicity to prove safety, publicity regarding spent fuel recycling
and or disposal, construction of HELE coal generators for areas not conducive to nuclear,
Get rid of GREEN SUBSIDIES, let free market conditions decide energy costs.
The electorate will also be able to see how genuine the LNP is when it comes to net zero!!
Are they only paying lip service to LNP supporters or are they Uniparty acolytes.
Show us your true colours Mr Dutton!!
Let’s have a referendum & let the people decide on their futures. Let’s get rid of the divisive policies of green minority & greedy green promoters of expensive unreliable energy.
Not to forget getting rid of the Wind & solar monstrosities scarring our countryside & destroying wildlife & arable agricultural land!
I have no doubt that the ALP / Green coalition will fight like hell against a referendum they know will be in favour of a nuclear / HELE future!
200
Great stuff GR.
1). Add to that a nuclear fuel industry to sell reactor fuel to all those nations looking at the Rolls Royce consortium SMRs.
Also, add in some rapid-start-up gas turbine Combined Cycle power stations to utilise our massive gas reserves.
2). A referendum is a problem when more than half the nation is scientifically illiterate. Recently I had to explain to some lovely well-meaning lass that methane at nearly 2ppm of the air is the same ratio as 2 millimetres per kilometre.
This stuff about meat eating and climate needs shooting down for it’s lack of scientific foundation. Engaging in a pre-referendum discussion might only give it a semblance of credibility.
70
Compared with some of the truly scientifically literate posters at this site, including its host, 99.something % of Australians are cave dwellers. Me included. It’s the reason this site is so valuable (grunt).
110
We know that the CSIRO even understands that the ENTIRE SH is already a co2 SINK and of course is already NET ZERO.
So if nearly 1 billion people are not responsible then I’ll be happy for the 7 billion NH SOURCE of the Earth’s so called Human co2 emissions to do their proper share and suffer the consequences.
But why do people have such a high life expectancy today, including a huge reduction in child mortality, even in the poorest countries on the planet?
AGAIN Human life expectancy was about 45.5 years in 1950 ( just 2.5 billion pop) and yet today 8 + billion people enjoy a life expectancy of 73 years?
And poor Africans’ life exp was just 36 years in 1950 ( 227 million pop) and yet today 1460 million Africans have a life exp of 64 and a higher % are URBAN dwellers today.
This Human flourishing is because of the safety net provided by FOSSIL FUELs and yet our clueless MSM, Pollies, Bankers and other parasites etc want us wreck our power grids and rely on the TOXIC UNRELIABLE, DILUTE W & S lunacy.
So why don’t these clueless parasites understand the solid data since 1800 or 1950? And why do they continue to lie to the voters and why don’t voters understand any of this VERIFIABLE DATA?
Anyone can find the DATA in a few minutes online ,so why can’t our elected parasites etc understand? Are these donkeys really that stupid?
141
china the biggest producer of polutants has left the paris climate aggreement ! why are we still paying into this scam? why are we even talking about climate change previously known as SEASONS! are our pollies and their advisors so blinkered that they do not know what is happening in the real world.
170
So why do these clueless parasites refuse to understand the horrendous mining + environmental disasters that will be the result of their crazy quest for NET ZERO?
Just add up the full ENVIRONMENTAL horrors that they want to inflict on the poorest countries and in time all Humans living on the planet will suffer as well.
Their NET ZERO lunacy = a GLOBAL disaster.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2023/07/31/cobalt-carnage-child-labor-and-ecological-destruction/
130
Here’s Nick Cater talking to Mark Mills about the disaster of their NET ZERO LUNACY.
https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/mark-p-mills-the-energy-transition-delusion/id1434174636?i=1000584570537
61
The renault in the picture is a fair bit beat up on the left side. Is this a cunning stunt?
50
A symbol of what happens when you veer too far to the left.
80
Yes, you end up in a Renault – or if you veer further, a Citroen.
80
20$ per Australian makes about $520mln. That would buy you roughy 400MW of installed wind energy capacity.
Good luck with NutZero, if all electricity has to come from that. ;-p
90
Dillberry Albo says it proves labors climate policies are working because the GBR hasn’t been put on the endangered list.
How deluded can you get.
110
What a dill.
00
Francis Menton has been trying to bring people up to date on the Crooked Biden family and he’s used a couple of recent updates.
So what has China received for these payments?
Hopefully this may help to throw a spanner in the dirty DEMs hold on the biggest economy on Earth and start to wreck their NUT ZERO lunacy as well.
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/
.
70
In reference to that picture at the top showing Albert Park Lake in 1974, you can’t even now park there free because of the obsessive, woke, anti-car, anti-human policies of the City of Port Phillip council. And many local streets are filthy plus lots of graffiti crime about that needs to be erased but it didn’t stop the council giving $13 million of hard earned taxpayer money to an LGBTQXYZ++++ centre along with an additional $15 million from the state government. Obviously an extreme minority group is considered more important than street cleaning and maintenance, a seemingly core function of local government which affects everyone.
110
Might be the result of a survey but how does that translate to politics? Question should be, at what point will you take action? Answer is, never. Why?
Because most Australians earn pretty good money. Most get between 1000-2000 dollars per week. Many households x 2 with no children. So if electricity prices go up by 1000 per year from here, the middle class would absorb it and continue to vote for Liberal and Labor – The UniParty. How do I know? Well because they’re already doing it.
AS the survey says, most don’t want to pay a cent extra. But they do.
70
Peter Dutton says, “we are all in favour of renewables…” I’m not.
Why am I not in favour of renewable energy? Simply because, you always need 100% back up of that intermittent system, so it will always be more expensive, more complicated, less centralised, more transmission lines, and less reliable. Always.
I don’t really care about birds being chopped, rotting windmills, landscape, landfill, chinese, increased mining, child labour, environmental damage, etc etc. I don’t care.
But I do care that the system is fundamentally flawed so will always get flawed results.
140
Have you considered a career in politics?
40
Yep the Liberals know what Australians want, that’s why they are in opposition. Mr. Potato head will continue to repeat that until even he believes it.
21
Say no to “net zero”.
Say “Eat meat. Be a hero!” instead.😁
Tell Schwab to BUG OFF!
P.S. nice b&w opening pic Jo.
An Aussie bbq 1974. Or is it 1963? 😁
Call that a bbq? It’s un-Australianly small, minute in fact.
It’d cook a small sausage for a Chihuahua, which is about what the WEF will let you have per week…
50
One minute Scott Morrison was carrying a lump of coal into parliament then it seemed the next minute he was holding a flyer titled ” Fastest way for Australia to reach Net Zero”. Then I knew the CC madness was complete. There might be some conservative LNP voters but there sure as hell are very few conservative LNP politicians. There’s a big club, there’s a Uniparty and we’re not in it.
60
Im not prepared to pay as much as $1 per year for “net zero”.
The whole thing is a farce and scam designed to make a few elites richer
at the expense of the rest of us.
70
Jo, you should cover this:
https://nonvenipacem.org/2023/07/30/why-are-oceans-boiling-and-heatwaves-everywhere-hint-its-not-man-made-climate-change/
21
There is no such thing as ‘greenhouse gases’!
If you look at hot deserts the temperature can drop by 30 centigrade or more overnight, every night, in 12 hours or less. Deserts have the same amount of CO2 and methane as anywhere else. Absolutely no signs of any greenhouse effect whatsoever. It simply does not exist.
This would be true over the whole Earth if there was no other influence, but there is : water and water vapour. This acts as an insulator smoothing out maximum and minimum temperatures, clouds in particular.
Look at the Moon – surface temperatures range from 100C to minus 150C. It is obvious ‘something’ is keeping the Earth cooler and warmer than these extremes.
The Milankovitch Cycles can be used to predict global climate with some accuracy, but moderated by the current solar cycle and oceanic oscillations. All ‘predictions’ by the ‘man-made [insert name of disaster here]’ crowd have always failed.
Bad weather was called an ‘act of God’, and the new religion now calls it ‘act of Man’. These zealots will never accept any science as evidence that they are wrong.
Incidentally in the 1950s it was shown that the ‘greenhouse effect’ does not exist in greenhouses. Any warming is just isolation from the outside environment and is equally true of solid brick buildings or any form of shelter.
The only ‘greenhouse effect’ I can think of is at the centre of the Sun. Hydrogen is opaque to light which is why it takes over 100,000 years for light to travel from the centre of the Sun to the surface!
10
Wow. I’ve just learned so much.
10
Same here, but that last paragraph could do with a bit more illumination.
00
It is about the mean time energy (not necessarily literally light) spends bouncing around helium molecules before it gets to the surface and can move unhindered into space. It was actually the statement that was closest to the truth in that whole post.
00