Abbott and the Enviroment

[Mofra]

I think you will find the opposition is theoretical rather than based on a scientific belief that the proposal puts Benthic Habitat at actual risk. I do get that. The Barrier Reef is iconic and I'd prefer tight constraints an any development within the marine boundary. However that should also be weighed programtically, against socio-economc realities. Not blind opposition to everything

Given the Marine Authority have identified alternate lower impact sites already, I don't see how you can infer that anything that doesn't agree with a modelled study (and having been invovled with government processes, I admit I have little faith in "modelling" as it is used by government) is somehow a blanket opposition to everything.

 

[Xsess]

Given the Marine Authority have identified alternate lower impact sites already, I don't see how you can infer that anything that doesn't agree with a modelled study (and having been invovled with government processes, I admit I have little faith in "modelling" as it is used by government) is somehow a blanket opposition to everything.

I see you dont agree with the accuracy of oceanographic modelling of plume dispersion. Fair enough. However it would take a complete reversal of prevailing metocean conditions (ie currents) plus the laws of physics (as it relates to the suspension of sediment in the water column) for sediment from sea dumping from this proposal to end up on the coral reefs 80km away. It still wouldn't hurt the corals. Because plume generation from sea dumping is intermittent... corals still recieve an appropriate amount of light to survive. Think about it. You sail out to sea once a day dump the spoil and then return to the dredging site to refill the hopper. In th emeanwhile the heaviest substrate inthe plume (the stuff that might make a plume thick enough to block all sunlight and potentially hurt corals) resettles almost immediately. It would take a permanent plume generating source to do that - you'd have to be dredging in a confined space, in fines (clay) materials right up against the reef for that to happen.

 

[Gough]

http://www.salon.com/2014/06/22/how_rupert_murdoch_created_the_worlds_newest_climate_change_villain/

Australia, the sunburned country, is uniquely vulnerable to the dangers and risks of global warming. Whether it is the severe effects of flooding, unseasonal heat waves, devastating bush fires or decade-long droughts, Australia’s people, economy and natural environment have all keenly felt the impact of extreme weather and climate change.

Australia’s national scientific organizations have been raising the alarm for more than a decade, and the previous government accepted that scientific consensus and enacted a cap-and-trade scheme in 2012. But after a divisive election last year — one that saw native-born Rupert Murdoch exercise his considerable influence in Australian media markets to disastrous effect — the country is now governed by a deeply unpopular Liberal-National government, crafted in the image of the most climate-denying elements of the Tea Party. And its position on climate change has significant impacts on global efforts to reduce carbon emissions: Australia is not only the chair of the G-20 group of nations, but also holds a place on the U.N. Security Council.

The rest of the world saw this ideology on full, embarrassing display with the recent visit by Prime Minister Tony Abbott to Canada and the United States. A week after President Obama’s introduction of substantial policy reforms to reduce carbon pollution, and China’s first-ever pledge to cap carbon emissions, the Australian prime minister stood next to his Canadian counterpart and scoffed at the idea of global warming, saying that climate change is “not the only or even the most important problem that the world faces” and that measures to reduce carbon emissions would “clobber” the economy.

Good read on Abbott, Murdoch and the politics of climate change deniers.

 

[Gough]

Also pleased to see it took UNESCO all of ten minutes to reject the bid to unlock parts of the Tasmanian forests, with delegates describing Australia's submission as "feeble". They might be able to bullshit Australians but on the world stage this government is embarrassing itself.

 

[Gough]

Maybe Tones can pocket himself 10k? He thinks ACC is bullshit, now he can prove it and turn it into a tidy little earner at the same time.
http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/06/23/3451810/physicist-offers-climate-denier-reward/

When not refuting the 97 percent of scientists who believe in human-caused global warming, climate change deniers often draw upon the conspiracy that it’s is a fabricated theory invented by those in a position to gain financially or otherwise from efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A Texas-based physicist is turning that notion on its head by offering $10,000 of his own money to anyone who can disprove mainstream, accepted climate science.

Dan26 you should have a go at this, I'm sure you could do it easily.

 

[Borry]

I thought the earth was warmer than when Jesus was a boy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Maggie5]

Another great article by Michelle Gratten.
https://theconversation.com/grattan...s-obsessed-with-the-carbon-tax-as-he-is-28514
For those you that don't want to be informed, here is a few lines:

"The Abbott government seems in a parallel universe – and a never-ending election campaign".
"Take its absolute obsession with the repeal of the carbon tax. Monday had Abbott, in fluro jacket, at a cold storage centre in Melbourne. This is ridiculous. The election is over; the next one not in sight".
"The pain is everywhere, and it keeps coming. On Thursday the government announced it is ceasing “the dementia and severe behaviours” supplement".
"Ministers have been in “he-man” mode: beat chests and bang on about “debt and deficit”. That not only looks arrogant but doesn’t work in practice when you don’t control the Senate numbers. It’s another manifestation of failing to make a proper transition from electioneering to governing".
"Presuming all goes smoothly, in July the carbon tax will be repealed. If the Coalition keeps talking about it after that, however, it’s unlikely the public will be listening".
"But the unpopular budget will still be in the news, as measures struggle or die in the Senate, and the government will need a lot more than bombast if it is to minimise the revenue loss and the depletion of its political capital even further in the months ahead".

 

[Floor Pie]

Another great article by Michelle Gratten.
https://theconversation.com/grattan...s-obsessed-with-the-carbon-tax-as-he-is-28514
For those you that don't want to be informed, here is a few lines:

"The Abbott government seems in a parallel universe – and a never-ending election campaign".
"Take its absolute obsession with the repeal of the carbon tax. Monday had Abbott, in fluro jacket, at a cold storage centre in Melbourne. This is ridiculous. The election is over; the next one not in sight".
"The pain is everywhere, and it keeps coming. On Thursday the government announced it is ceasing “the dementia and severe behaviours” supplement".
"Ministers have been in “he-man” mode: beat chests and bang on about “debt and deficit”. That not only looks arrogant but doesn’t work in practice when you don’t control the Senate numbers. It’s another manifestation of failing to make a proper transition from electioneering to governing".
"Presuming all goes smoothly, in July the carbon tax will be repealed. If the Coalition keeps talking about it after that, however, it’s unlikely the public will be listening".
"But the unpopular budget will still be in the news, as measures struggle or die in the Senate, and the government will need a lot more than bombast if it is to minimise the revenue loss and the depletion of its political capital even further in the months ahead".

It's a bit short sighted of me, but in a way, I want the carbon tax to be repealed.
Just so then, when no costs go down, taxes still increase and utopia doesn't arrive, people will realise how badly they have been tricked.

 

[Partridge]

It's a bit short sighted of me, but in a way, I want the carbon tax to be repealed.
Just so then, when no costs go down, taxes still increase and utopia doesn't arrive, people will realise how badly they have been tricked.

Glad you do; I don't.

But part of me has "checked out", as George Carlin would say. I'm starting to understand why he enjoyed catastrophes.

 

[Partridge]

I thought the earth was warmer than when Jesus was a boy.

Nope. It's the warmest now it's been in at least 800,000 years.

 

[Maggie5]

It's a bit short sighted of me, but in a way, I want the carbon tax to be repealed.
Just so then, when no costs go down, taxes still increase and utopia doesn't arrive, people will realise how badly they have been tricked.

There is absolutely no way I am going to be $550 better of - another lie.
My most recent electricity acc. (60 days) has the following lines:
Carbon charge: $29.53
Carbon credit: $29.53

 

[Maggie5]

I thought the earth was warmer than when Jesus was a boy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Source?

 

[Floor Pie]

Glad you do; I don't.

But part of me has "checked out", as George Carlin would say. I'm starting to understand why he enjoyed catastrophes.

C'mon, you understood my post.

 

[Partridge]

C'mon, you understood my post.

I do. Absolutely.

 

[Borry]

Source?

Tony Abbott, who else?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Pie eyed]

I thought the earth was warmer than when Jesus was a boy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Jesus was never a boy.

 

[swingdog]

Just in case you the government thinks it is going to slow down the spread of renewables:

http://www.theguardian.com/commenti...n-power-stations-couldnt-compete?view=desktop

 

[swingdog]

The really odd thing is that, if they were smart, they'd realise that the fastest uptake of solar is in the swinging voter, outer suburb belt of young families.

 

[madmug]

The really odd thing is that, if they were smart, they'd realise that the fastest uptake of solar is in the swinging voter, outer suburb belt of young families.

It appears that Power consumption via the grid is going down in Australia. With the uptake of solar power on roof tops & the demise of manufacturing, its easy to see why. The future of power is in this country is from renewable sources, whether the dinosaurs like it or not.
No state Government is going to spend the billions on new coal fired power stations. So the sooner they move away from the inefficient dirty old ones the better.
Indeed if the Libs like Royal Commissions, how about one into the massive power price rises that have happened in the last 6yrs or so. Someone should answer to that because it had SFA to do with the Carbon Tax.

 

[swingdog]

4 Corners tonight covers some of the reasons why the utilities are in a death spiral, tonight at 8:30.

 

[swingdog]

Just watched - it must be terrible being Greg Hunt.

His career is the definition of the Faustian bargain and you can see it on his face that he doesn't believe a word he's saying.

 

[Power Raid]

Great article.

It's interesting that so many people who call for less Government control, and call for free market, and call for people to support themselves.... also hate the idea of solar power...

If we had every household monitoring their own input, output, rate, variance and totals, that would comply 100% with what they want.

But... Because solar power is "green/leftist/non profit/small gov/hippie", they argue against it, and decry it's value.

why do you think that is? I will give you a clue

“Negative pricing” moves, as they are known, are not uncommon. But they are only supposed to happen at night, when most of the population is mostly asleep, demand is down, and operators of coal fired generators are reluctant to switch off. So they pay others to pick up their output.

So we have no reduction in CO2 as the coal stations still need to keep the boilers operating, which is still on-costed and then we have the double cost burden of solar.

Until solar replaces coal, it is in fact part of the problem and not the solution.

 

[swingdog]

Solar is adding to supply and as demand has declined, the wholesale price has dropped.

This is good for consumers. In any other field (e.g. think petrol prices if we had a glut of oil), the government and its supporters would be celebrating, but because it's solar, they don't.

The overwhelming reason for high prices for consumers is a result of bad investment decisions by utilities. It's nothing to do with pure market economics.

 

[Maggie5]

It seems that the language around the $550 savings is now changed, the are now saying 'average' of $550.00. If someone here receives more, I would love to know. This government is so untrustworthy!

 

[Power Raid]

Solar is adding to supply and as demand has declined, the wholesale price has dropped.

This is good for consumers. In any other field (e.g. think petrol prices if we had a glut of oil), the government and its supporters would be celebrating, but because it's solar, they don't.

The overwhelming reason for high prices for consumers is a result of bad investment decisions by utilities. It's nothing to do with pure market economics.

I certainly agree with the mismanagement of the power industry but I sense that is a combination of a lack of competition, poor government contracting and poor pricing controls and uncertainty over regulation and the carbon tax leading to poor investment decisions.

Solar has not and can not reduce the price of power yet, rather through subsidies it has moved the cost and actually increased the cost. I think solar will play an important part of the energy mix long term but is actually part of the problem today. Our energy industry needs a wholesale fix not band aid solutions.

We have some of the most expensive energy in the world which is leading to the closure of manufacturing in Australia. Some will say great as we export our pollution overseas but we also export our jobs. What concerns me is some people are not designed to be doctors, lawyers or accountants. Some people are best suited to manufacturing work which means we rob these people from a chance of suitable work.

I think it is pretty dumb to think solar is the "solution" when we still need to keep our coal power stations running (boiler response time) meaning we still have the same CO2 footprint even when solar is working, which also means we pay for coal power station costs on top of solar costs leading to high power generation costs, resulting in the closure our manufacturing industry because of the higher electricity costs, resulting in higher and structural unemployment as factory workers aren't suitable to certain jobs and then back slap each other on a job well done. How stupid are we?