Australia's policy on climate change is completely inconsequential

[Grin]

Whether we do or dont it makes no difference. China, India and the US dont give a s**t what we do or what anyone else does.

All we are doing is hamstringing ourselves economically and making poor people poorer.

The word to describe this sort of action is: insanity

If we want to do useful things we should control pollution. Ensure water security. Have sensible immigration plans to keep population growth under control.

Useful measures that are effective now. Not measures which Tim Flannery said will take 1,000 years to make a difference.

So your contribution can be to put a 'F off we're full' sticker on your car.
But please stand aside so the lifers among us can work towards transforming and modernising our economy.
Oh, and don't forget to be like Barnaby Joyce and put your hand out, angrily demanding the tax payer do more to cary you as climate change begins to directly affect you.

 

[Kram]

So your contribution can be to put a 'F off we're full' sticker on your car.
But please stand aside so the lifers among us can work towards transforming and modernising our economy.
Oh, and don't forget to be like Barnaby Joyce and put your hand out, angrily demanding the tax payer do more to cary you as climate change begins to directly affect you.

 

[Deliverance]

One of many false analogies being cited.

We have a legislated tax scheme imposed on all Australian residents that sets out the required amounts to be paid. The scheme is backed up with a compliance system and penalties for non-adherence.

The Paris agreement is a voluntary scheme, where the highest emitters are either not signatories or will increase their emissions. Each country sets it own targets. There is no compliance system or penalties for not meeting targets.

Here you go then

The Australian Greens - What are they Doing?

Also that article doesn't claim anything to do with the Greens. Classic meds trying to blame anyone he doesn't like. Surprised you haven't blamed Sadiq Khan and muslims. Ignorant as usual. Green opposition to fuel reduction via burning and grazing in national parks. Ditto opposition to...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[HardcoreGeelongFan]

What about hating gays as a political party then recruiting them into your young faction.
Completely inconsequential? I think not!

 

[TimmeT]

What about hating gays as a political party then recruiting them into your young faction.
Completely inconsequential? I think not!

Have you got good evidence of that

 

[HardcoreGeelongFan]

Have you got good evidence of that

Well it's all a matter of perspective. I consider someone dying consequential despite their sexual orientation.

 

[Kwality]

The stone age didnt end when we ran out of stones.

We will progress when the replacement is better. Forcing it early for political reasons just hurts people.

&&

What effect would the average person’s donation to the overall bushfire appeal have? Should they all just stop?

Great analogy, but whilst doing nothing is not acceptable NOR is wrecking the economy for our children to allow our country to be a latter day Greta, maybe we should demand Qantas relocate too, taking the jobs overseas too,

If the coal replacing us on the world scene is Indonesia, perhaps we should negotiate FIFO jobs for those redundant in Australia & flown by Qantas as part of Garuda.

Does that suit the purpose ?

 

[Kwality]

Have you got good evidence of that

No wonder HardcoreGeelongFan ignores Tim Wilson?

Liberal MP Tim Wilson marries partner Ryan Bolger

Wilson, who argued for marriage equality in Australia, tweets photo of pair, saying ‘11th of March is a special day’

www.theguardian.com

Is it really ignorance or a feeble replay of an issue long gone.

 

[HairyO]

I agree with what you're saying but I think the reality is renewables are currently cheaper than coal. Early would've been 20 years ago but not now. Renewables are cheaper and these idiots are suggesting building new power stations! No idea about turning off all existing stations tomorrow and replacing it with new green infastructure I'd imagine that would be expensive. But these idiots actually want to pay more to pollute when there's no need.

The need is they're literally coal lobbyists on the companies pay roll

New coal maybe. But we are shutting down cheap coal. 4c per kwh generation vs far more for renewables which are far less reliable.

 

[Kwality]

So says geelongHardcoreFan :

'I think the reality is renewables are currently cheaper than coal. Early would've been 20 years ago . ...... Renewables are cheaper and these idiots are suggesting building new power stations! '
(end quote)

I think you say, these idiots are China & India & they have renewables too, yet are pumping $US mils into new coal powered power stations & we are arguing over one, thats us !
Now the whole subject is so hopelessly politicised in Aus that we cant even agree where subsidies are paid until they are taken away.

Both countries want to buy our coal, ship it over & burn it, yet we dont want it to happen here claiming renewables are cheaper (sounds logical).

Why isnt coal power generation more expensive in China &/or India .... ?
Cue the think music! Both countries have renewables, they choose coal?

I dont believe the numbers we are fed in Aus on either side (my bills have rocketed for years now), nor do I believe China or India are idiots, maybe the idiots are us?

 

[Patrick Bullet]

 

[Kwality]

China is why Australias policy on climate change is inconsequential - not that we should not do nothing, its the reality that the local climate change preachers deny.

The country (China) has failed to develop a strategy for moving away from coal given about 6000 coal-fired power plants still operate in the power grid. Adding to concern is that clean energy investment fell to just $US30bn ($43.5bn) in the first half of 2019 from over $US75bn for the same period two years earlier.

“I think most people agree climate change is one of the gravest problems we face but a very big problem here is that we do not really rate it as an urgent issue to address,” said Lin Boqiang, director of the China Institute for Studies in Energy Policy at Xiamen University, at the UBS Greater China Conference in Shanghai on Tuesday. “We feel the urgency.

“The public are talking about it but in reality they still prioritise economic growth.”

Coal still dominates China’s energy mix with about 59 per cent of generation, with renewables including nuclear and biomass accounting for just 6 per cent of supply, according to Mr Lin.

NoCookies | The Australian

www.theaustralian.com.au

 

[TommyD13]

Is removing the entire mining and coal industries a serious policy contender? I'm not seeing too many people arguing for that but perhaps I'm looking in different places from you

Do you see any new jobs being be created in the process of identifying alternative ways to generate energy? I'd be surprised if the coal/mining jobs were not replaced by other jobs. Might require people to retrain though which isn't ideal but it's pretty much how all industries work these days as tech very quickly changes how we do things.

I get your point, and your right they will have to retrain, and not all are guaranteed to get a new job. We also will not have a huge demand export wise for our new energy sources, which means that the economy will start to feel it, and we all know what happens then.
I'm also not saying it's a serious policy contender. But, if we remove ourselves from coal power to more renewables unustainably and too quickly, there could and likely would be a drastic economic impact, causing people to lose their jobs indirectly.

 

[Patrick Bullet]

I get your point, and your right they will have to retrain, and not all are guaranteed to get a new job. We also will not have a huge demand export wise for our new energy sources, which means that the economy will start to feel it, and we all know what happens then.
I'm also not saying it's a serious policy contender. But, if we remove ourselves from coal power to more renewables unustainably and too quickly, there could and likely would be a drastic economic impact, causing people to lose their jobs indirectly.

Thanks for your response. After reading it, I suspect we're largely in agreement. Perhaps we may disagree on the speed in which a transition away from coal to renewables would ideally occur but you seem open to the prospect of such a transition. I would like it to happen sooner rather than later but I'd also like due consideration to be given to the workforces in these industries. Too often the workers get left behind in major economic transitions and I suspect it's because organisations and governments are not as upfront with the workers as they ought to be about the realities of these changes (e.g. the need for retraining, potentially having to move away to a different location where the new resources are being mined / renewable energy infrastructure being set up).

I also worry that if we don't change quickly enough, the chicken will come home to roost through big international 'sticks' that will force changes more drastic than we'd like. The world has been watching ScoMo's performance during the bushfire crisis and it is way more aware than it was before of Australia's addition to coal and the Coalition's denialism of the realities of climate change.

 

[Frank Bunn]

Has anyone thought deeply about how cement, steel and aluminium is made? These three commodities are very carbon intensive, and crucial to our daily lives. Our living standards come with a cost.

There is no solution.

Some in the finance sector are pushing for decarbonisation because there's trillions to be made.

Mark Lewis, head of sustainability at BNP Paribas Asset Management says ...

His bank has geared its whole €440bn portfolio to a Paris-compliant model, starting with an exclusion of thermal coal starting from January.​

​

“We’ll be looking at the carbon intensity of every company across our investable universe, and that includes steel, cement, and manufacturing. The fashion industry is going to get a lot of attention over the next year because it has a horrendous environmental footprint,” he said.​

Of course with the recent fires, climate change is currently in people's thinking. But come election time, will people vote for parties that want to end mining jobs, ban petrol/diesel powered cars/trucks/trains, set an expectation that reliable electricity is not guaranteed, ban international flights, restrict meat consumption, curtail the fashion industry?

To paraphrase the Chinese guy in Kwality's post - the public are talking about it but in reality they still prioritise economic growth and lifestyle.

 

[Kram]

Has anyone thought deeply about how cement, steel and aluminium is made? These three commodities are very carbon intensive, and crucial to our daily lives. Our living standards come with a cost.

There is no solution.

Probably a fair bit in your average gas guzzling 4wd and SUV but you can make up for it in other ways like having a water tank and a worm farm.

 

[its free real estate]

Some in the finance sector are pushing for decarbonisation because there's trillions to be made.

Mark Lewis, head of sustainability at BNP Paribas Asset Management says ...

His bank has geared its whole €440bn portfolio to a Paris-compliant model, starting with an exclusion of thermal coal starting from January.​

​

“We’ll be looking at the carbon intensity of every company across our investable universe, and that includes steel, cement, and manufacturing. The fashion industry is going to get a lot of attention over the next year because it has a horrendous environmental footprint,” he said.​

Of course with the recent fires, climate change is currently in people's thinking. But come election time, will people vote for parties that want to end mining jobs, ban petrol/diesel powered cars/trucks/trains, set an expectation that reliable electricity is not guaranteed, ban international flights, restrict meat consumption, curtail the fashion industry?

To paraphrase the Chinese guy in Kwality's post - the public are talking about it but in reality they still prioritise economic growth and lifestyle.

These are fake numbers imo. CDOs for carbon credits.

 

[TommyD13]

Thanks for your response. After reading it, I suspect we're largely in agreement. Perhaps we may disagree on the speed in which a transition away from coal to renewables would ideally occur but you seem open to the prospect of such a transition. I would like it to happen sooner rather than later but I'd also like due consideration to be given to the workforces in these industries. Too often the workers get left behind in major economic transitions and I suspect it's because organisations and governments are not as upfront with the workers as they ought to be about the realities of these changes (e.g. the need for retraining, potentially having to move away to a different location where the new resources are being mined / renewable energy infrastructure being set up).

I also worry that if we don't change quickly enough, the chicken will come home to roost through big international 'sticks' that will force changes more drastic than we'd like. The world has been watching ScoMo's performance during the bushfire crisis and it is way more aware than it was before of Australia's addition to coal and the Coalition's denialism of the realities of climate change.

It is good to have a chat about these issues with someone who doesnt get angry at the drop of a hat! I 100% agree with your first paragraph, I say we move to renewables as quickly as possible without being stupid about it. The only disagreeance I have is that I think this current Coalition government are taking this appropriate action and is doing so in a responsible manner without creating too many issues for the workers and others economically. I just think there is no need for urgent action on our behalf due to our minimal contribution, and a slower and more responsible effort is a better course of action. I think the Coalition currently offer this, but feel like on the left ridiculous and extreme emissions reductions may do more wrong than right.

 

[Kwality]

Probably a fair bit in your average gas guzzling 4wd and SUV but you can make up for it in other ways like having a water tank and a worm farm.

Had a worm farm & water tank for 10+ years & a SUV, no cigar?

 

[Kwality]

These are fake numbers imo. CDOs for carbon credits.

If we buy carbon credits, we are being dudded .... we have no control over where that money goes, just a piece of paper.

 

[Kwality]

they will have to retrain

To do what?
Remember we've got none of the economic activity around mining, not only in the mining areas, in the cities, in transport. No taxes , no royalties to pay for the training ...

All for nothing in terms of emissions, you've delivered generational change because thats the timeline on a very optimistic basis.
Who gets anything out of your theory?

 

[CD Xbow]

Australia is in a group of about 20 countries which emit 1-3% of CO2 from fossil fuels. Together they make up about 25% of world C02 emissions. Now if all those countries reduced there CO2 emission by half in a decade, then more in the longer term then that would be a very significant benefit. Many of them, such as the European countries have made significant progress in decreasing CO2 emission over the last decade, but not dear old Oz.

We also export significant amounts of coal and gas, making us responsible, in one way or another, for about 5% of total CO2 produced by fossil fuels. Electricity is now much cheaper from renewables compared to coal so economics will reduce coal use irrespective of 'philosophy'. Fossil fuels are more expensive, are not sustainable, dangerous to workers and environmentally damaging compared with renewables.

Changing the economy over hydrogen/renewable electricity is practical as outlined in Alan Finkels plan and would easily soak up the 32,000 people involved in thermal coal mining.

It is estimated that world energy demand will double in the next decade or so, let's get in at the start and be a leader in the clean energy revolution. Now before anyone uses the N word, nuclear, that is about the most expensive way to generate electricity, about 3 times the cost of coal and about 8 to 9 times the cost of renewables. While it produces little CO2, it does have very heavy environmental impact and prone to the occasional disaster.

 

[Kwality]

Electricity is now much cheaper from renewables compared to coal

Certainly thats what we are told so why are the Chinese building coal fired power stations, it is not as if they'd not have done the numbers.
Why would India go for coal not recyclables, its nothing to do with ideology, its about bang for the buck.

Interested to see the calculations (Aus) on renewables given the number of renewable sites unable to access the grid, was that even costed in?
A proposed $370 million expansion of the electricity grid in western Victoria, which would unlock up to 6000 megawatts of new wind and solar farms ..

'Reckless' Vic renewables targets requires $370m grid upgrade

The upgrade would deliver $300 million of net benefits to consumers, the market operator found.

www.afr.com

 

[Deliverance]

Certainly thats what we are told so why are the Chinese building coal fired power stations, it is not as if they'd not have done the numbers.
Why would India go for coal not recyclables, its nothing to do with ideology, its about bang for the buck.

Interested to see the calculations (Aus) on renewables given the number of renewable sites unable to access the grid, was that even costed in?
A proposed $370 million expansion of the electricity grid in western Victoria, which would unlock up to 6000 megawatts of new wind and solar farms ..

'Reckless' Vic renewables targets requires $370m grid upgrade

The upgrade would deliver $300 million of net benefits to consumers, the market operator found.

www.afr.com

Could be something to do with big business influencing government. The new Adani mine wouldn't even be financially viable if it weren't for Indian and Australian government subsidies.

 

[Kwality]

Could be something to do with big business influencing government. The new Adani mine wouldn't even be financially viable if it weren't for Indian and Australian government subsidies.

Thats the claim ... I'm happy to be convinced, will these subsidies claimed be on going or do they relate to the infrastructure?

Given India has its own coal, it imports our coal as it has a higher calorific value than its local coal - effectively burns less coal.