Australia's policy on climate change is completely inconsequential

Remove this Banner Ad

But you vote. And you argue your position here.

Steggall, and others who propose these policies to achieve zero net carbon dioxide emissions by 2050, need to explain how they can be achieved. And at what cost. And what difference it would make to the global climate.



That's waffle. Do you think China, India, Russia and USA look to Australia for leadership on this issue?

There's a fashion parade of politicians vying for votes based on climate change. Our policies make absolutely no difference but by voting for the right idiot it absolves their sins for having two cars, taking international trips, demanding reliable electricity.
Your argument is “let’s do nothing until others do something”.

It’s beyond idiotic.
 
Because i'm not chanting the matra about the national KPI's its funny?

What was wrong with my suggestion regarding low emmission steel production in Australia?
Because you said CO2 isn't a poison. If that's so then feel free to breathe only it for 20 minutes and tell me how you feel.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Your argument is “let’s do nothing until others do something”.

It’s beyond idiotic.
He decries aboriginals for not doing anything until the british came but wants us to do the same with climate change. The irony is palpable, which shouldn't be surprising given the source's money first mantra.
 
Your argument is let's do something even though we know it's idiotic.
But at least it's something.

And if doing something doesn't result in the perfect weather we remember, we can just do more.

And if doing more doesn't fix it either, we can double down on it.

Eventually doubling down will turn into not doing enough.

Then we get back to doing more.

How hard is it to do more?

That's why it's such a great political club at the moment.
 
No, my argument is “lead by example”.

Like I said, idiotic.

It's ridiculous to think that the leading CO2 emitters - China, USA, India and Russia - would follow our example. They account for 65% of emissions, growing to about 75% by 2030.
 
Like I said, idiotic.

It's ridiculous to think that the leading CO2 emitters - China, USA, India and Russia - would follow our example. They account for 65% of emissions, growing to about 75% by 2030.
How about we transition to renewables and EVs and improve industrial efficiencies and plant trees and reduce deforestation for our own health? If we happen to impress the Chinese along the way all well and good.


"On the basis of these and related studies, it is clear that urban air pollution is a significant cause of death and illness in the community. By one estimate, there were close to 3000 deaths due to urban air pollution in 2003. This was 2.3 % of all deaths and nearly twice the national road toll."

"Most pollutants (carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide and PM2.5 particles) result from combustion (primary pollutants) (Table 3.7). Major sources include motor vehicles, industrial processes and domestic heating"

 
By removing the mining and coal industries in this country, which thus removes most of our biggest exports, will have a very obvious economic impact. This means people within these industries will lose their jobs, also having a flow-on effect to people in other non-related sectors.
Noones killing mining and coal mining loss can be more than offset by renewable energy export.
 
Like I said, idiotic.

It's ridiculous to think that the leading CO2 emitters - China, USA, India and Russia - would follow our example. They account for 65% of emissions, growing to about 75% by 2030.
Like i said idiotic

its ridiculous to think the non allied countries will see our paltry 1 million troops and follow us into ww2. They account for tens of millions of troops growing to twice those numbers by 1945!!!
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Like i said idiotic

its ridiculous to think the non allied countries will see our paltry 1 million troops and follow us into ww2. They account for tens of millions of troops growing to twice those numbers by 1945!!!

You don't need to make up a hypothetical, how is international pressure going against Russia annexing Crimea or the Indians and Chinese not putting their Muslims into camps?
 
Because you said CO2 isn't a poison. If that's so then feel free to breathe only it for 20 minutes and tell me how you feel.

It is plant food. So he’ll grow.
 
If your avenue to your goal isn't going to get you there then yes, you should absolutely give up on that course and come up with a new one to get to that goal

You do the things you can do while working on other solutions.
 
By removing the mining and coal industries in this country, which thus removes most of our biggest exports, will have a very obvious economic impact. This means people within these industries will lose their jobs, also having a flow-on effect to people in other non-related sectors.
Yep, just like car makers are gone, retail is dying, taxi drivers are getting ****ed over by ride share, restaurants screwed by uber eats, hotels hit by air bnb, etc, etc, etc.
Its what happens when another way of doing things comes along.
All of the above, we allowed to happen simply because he price was cheaper. At least we stand to gain major benefits from decarbonising our society. From the health of our air to improved prospects for our farmers.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top