By Jo Nova
Finally, a year after the Democrats realized that climate change was a vote loser, the Australian Labor Party are taking their first baby steps to hide their climate zealotry.
Even they realize that bragging about renewable energy targets is like juggling sticks of dynamite when the nation is in danger of running out of diesel. Every time someone mentions the 82% target during an oil crisis, it just reminds us how the government have been barking up the wrong tree.
Make no mistake, they aren’t renouncing Climate Change, they’re just packing the idea away quietly and hoping no one notices. They are testing-the-waters. After the war, if it’s safe to bring aggressive Net Zero policies back, they can pretend it was just a typo. If it isn’t safe, which it probably won’t be, they will be hoping everyone just forgets.
Later they can say there will be no Net Zero targets, while they bring the exact same schemes in under a different name the night before Parliament closes for Christmas. Remember how the hated Emissions Trading Scheme became the SafeGuard Mechanism? Praise be to the Bankers, eh? As long as The Blob gets its funding.
Even the Labor Party is trying to stem the loss of voters to One Nation:
Any party that polls 30% has a lot of soft power:
Renewable target missing from ALP draft national platform
— By Greg Brown, and Susan Ison, The Australian
Labor has dropped references to its 82 per cent renewables target in a preliminary draft of the national policy platform it will take to the next election due in 2028, but is vowing to use wind and solar power to bring down electricity prices and reindustrialise Australia while blaming coal for grid unreliability.
Labor sources are playing down the omission of its goal of 82 per cent by 2030 in the draft, declaring the party remained committed to the target and it was covered in a broader reference to “ambitious and achievable 2030 and 2035 targets”.
And we can see they are afraid of Andrew Hastie — they mocked his idea of reviving an Australian car industry, but lookie here — the government want us to become a leader making EVs?
An initial draft of Labor’s platform would tie a third-term Albanese government to “urgently” grow the manufacturing base by addressing high energy prices and “poor-quality trade agreements”, while backing Australia as a potential producer of electric cars.
Sure, let’s compete with China but with electricity at twice the price?
The Labor Government have been caught with their pants down in an energy war
They’ve spent years trying to stop the tides rising by a millimeter a year, when they should have been keeping our oil refineries running, exploring for gas and oil, and setting up coal to liquids plants for national security.
And so should the Liberals before them.
Let’s just hope the war ends soon…
If Labor continues its belief in “renewables” they will find out that the public doesn’t.
The whole nonsense has left average voters feeling out of pocket, feeling that the government is against them, and feeling that a change of government would be highly desirable.
Unfortunately this farce about CO2 endangering the world/ climate etc. has encompass the Liberals as well. So Labor and the Liberals are wondering why voters have switched to One Nation and Independents. The recent SA election showed the up, although also votes were lost (in well off regions) to the Greens also.
Both major parties have better change or they will be minor parties.
420
It’s inevitable that the Australian political landscape will change. The ALP and Lib Nats are wedded to a leftist ideology that will eventually cause privation for the masses. There’s a lot to play out yet, we can still print some money, burden up our kids as future taxpayers (parental legacy debt funders) and salt the ground so that the “something” that will follow will have a hard time fixing it but invariably that what History tells us will happen.
I’m torn between wanting it done fast, and wanting it slow so I don’t have to watch it happen to my Grandies. I love them so, and I hate what they’re going to be put through. I hate the left and everything it stands for.
630
I hate theocrats and everything they stand for.
102
Please don’t change them ever. Leave them as a reminder of the follies of “Pollies”.
Better times are slowly on the way Down Under and elsewhere on this lovely bountiful World. Wars not withstanding.
110
The ALP believes in $ for ALP run super houses. ALP Super has invested money in government guaranteed infrastructure. 8% return.
They have forgotten how to believe in the Australian people.
90
This is just a ploy.
Remember about electricity prices reducing your bills by $275?
The wolf does not change it’s clothing.
I wouldn’t trust them as far as I could kick electricity Bill.
480
In any case, $275 represents only a small part of the increase in a typical electricity bill due to compulsory purchase of expensive wind and solar.
360
The actual cost of the electricity is becoming increasingly irrelevant on your bill anyway. A lot of what we are charged are system costs etc, and they will keep increasing as they want to build more powerlines to connect to the presently stranded renewable assets.
140
In the manner of Newspeak in Nineteen Eighty Four just about everything the Left say is the opposite of the truth. Therefore deleting the surplus words and adding another we discover the true meaning of that phrase:
361
DM,
If you try to follow domestic end user electricity price moves over the last 15 years by analysis of your quarterly power bill, you will find that much of the change is done by variation in rebates or concessions. This is where you meet problems. For example, a concession to pensioners cannot be modelled without knowing the % of pensioners in society. Then, there are definition problems. If you are invited to apply for a $240 rebate, is this item a real cost of electricity or a blatant effort to buy votes? Is it any more than a rebate of some of your too-high taxes? How do you treat the competitive differences between electricity retailers, some more lean than others?
How about some qualified accountants telling us how to properly follow price moves?
Geoff S
130
Just follow who gets the money if you can. Therein lies the answer. Clue – Not the Consumer.
70
Labor wants to make Australia a leader in manufacturing Electric Vehicles?
Maybe the German car makers who are shutting down their own EV production can relocate to Australia with the appropriate taxpayer funded subsidy of course. 😱🤡💰🔥💰🔥💰🔥
130
Australia – uncompetitive due to high labour costs, low productivity, high energy costs, and bureaucratic government controls.
150
Behind the US independence in oil is fracking. A process now illegal in Victoria, Australia. As is coal seam gas, expanding coal use, repairing gas appliances, picking up sticks in the forest for firewood, nuclear, etc. The figures are incredible
Natural Gas Impact: 78% of total U.S. natural gas production comes from shale formations, which utilize fracking technology.
Oil Production: 64% of total U.S. crude oil production came from tight-oil (shale) resources.
Electricity: Natural gas, driven heavily by fracking, is the largest source of U.S. electricity generation, accounting for over 38% of production.
The switch to natural gas for electrricity has dropped US CO2 output by 40%, far outstripping Australia’s zero acheivements at enormous ongoing cost.
Does the Australian Labor party recognize that it has crippled Australia?
620
The fastest way to reduce CO2 output is to switch to fracking, especially with Queenslands vast shale. Victoria’s vast brown coal.
The total and legal focus on windmills and solar panels and tens of thousands of km of transmission lines is beyond reason. Unless they are just sending our money to China, which is true.
As for the Liberals, the same. Regardless of the fact that CO2 obviously has nothing to do with the weather, if you wanted to reduce CO2, you woudl switch to fracking.
Despite what the United Nations and their self indulged retired politicians say. All our laws reference the UN as the moral and legal and world authority on life on earth.
But where is the United Nations in the Ukraine or Iran or Gaza conflicts? In the anti Israel, anti American camp.
And leftist Europe is too scared of their own Muslim populations to back America. It’s not about renewables but the new class of self indulged whatevfer it takes politicians.
No wonder Pauline Hanson is soaring. The only politician to warn of the dangers of letting the UN and their aspirational hacks control our country.
The Iran war on the world shows the dangers of pretending the greatest threat to society is carbon dioxide. Which is Labor party, Green party, Liberal party policy. They need to have a policy of repealing four decades of the most appallingly wrong science fantasy, Climate Change. We need the money for total energy independence and defence, as does Europe.
470
That is rubbish. The fastest way is to de-industrialise and depopulate.
Australia has largely de-industrialised and would be rapidly depopulating if immigration was halted.
513
The fastest way is to stop breathing. Then there is zero consumption. Simple. And could become government policy to make room for immigration.
160
Ah TdeF,
my old bugbear.
No matter how close to the wall I was walking, how disinterested I looked, and how I was trying to ignore him, I was asked by one of the ‘talking heads’ who set up shopping malls just if I knew anything about Nett Zero, and when I responded …… “oh, a little”, he ‘reeled me in’. He followed up with ….. well what do YOU think it might take to achieve Nett zero?
I said perhaps maybe just a tad facetiously ….. well, we could all stop breathing for starters.
He scoffed, perhaps catching my facetiousness maybe, and then replied no, seriously, so now it was my turn to ask the question.
So, how much CO2 do we breathe out, you know, on the planetary scale.
He said that really doesn’t count towards Nett zero though does it, and I probed a little more, asking him if, you know nett zero was all about reducing the emissions of CO2, then, keeping that in mind, i pressed if he did know the answer, and again his response was well, not all that much at all really, not enough to count.
So I told him.
It’s around 3 Billion Tonnes of CO2 each year, and that’s around ten percent of ALL CO2 emissions from the burning of fossil fuels.
The look on his face was priceless, but he had the perfect comeback.
That’s not right you know, on both counts.
I asked him if he was sure, and perhaps he really might like to check, umm, as I walked away without looking back.
(my figures are probably a little rubbery, but they’re relatively close)
Tony.
PostScript – And here note it’s just ‘NETT’ zero, as we still will be emitting the CO2 anyway, just oh so ever artfully and supposedly offsetting it by some as usually unexplained means.
200
He then said,”umm Tony, how did that CO2 get into the bodies”.
You looked at him blankly.
“It started with photosynthesis to create organic molecules using, wait for it, CO2 to supply the carbon. That whole process is net zero. You know what NET means don’t you?”
Still blank looks.
“But to produce this food and for everything else we do to support humans and society we expend a heap of CO2. We are hoping to rapidly reduce the amount of CO2 produced and increase the amount extracted via public policy. That is what I am asking you about, not human physiology, which, by the way, you don’t seem to understand.”
114
Oh, and to think I actually ‘blogged’ all about this exact topic (CO2 exhalation) back at my home site back in 2008, surely you’d give me some sort of credit ….. even you Gee!
And see how that is also construed as ….. nett. It’s STILL actual.
(Give up Tony, you’ll never have a chance to make a point)
Tony.
120
Nope. Exhalation is CO2 added into the atmosphere that has already been removed from the atmosphere. It is net zero. It’s the carbon cycle.
Or “nett” if you were educated at Eton in 1930.
111
Fantastic. Burning of coal and gas and oil etc is nett zero. It’s simply “adding into the atmosphere that has already been removed from the atmosphere”.
170
Correct, though the t=0 for accounting does not go back millions of years.
010
Nett is an accounts concept, not science. It perpetrates that myth that CO2 is constant and that any change will disturb the amount of CO2 in the air.
What a crazy idea! Has no one studied any chemistry? Molecules do not obey rules. They go into the water and out of the water as they please. All the gas laws are based on observed equilibrium and the amount of gas in the air under Henry’s Law of dissolved gases is determined not by quantity emitted but by ratios. In fact all chemical equilibrium runs on ratios. As does every chemical equation.
CO2 levels are set by the balance of how much evaporates and how much gets dissolved. Just like water, the third biggest gas. No one is afraid of drowning from the tiny amount of H2O from cars exhausts! We know it doesn’t matter. And no matter how much it rains, the sea level never changes. Despite Climate change.
The same is true of CO2. It is incredibly close to constant within 1% from pole to equator to pole and from year to year. But it is creeping up at 0.4% a year, less than half the 1% CO2 output currently.
So why isn’t the CO2 level increasing 1% a year?
Then you get into fantasy. People just making up science. Talking of equilibrium when they have no idea how real equilibrium works. Henry’s Law doesn’t stop working. The amount in the air is dependent on the % in the surface ocean, the % in the air, temperture and pressure. Nothing else.
So why would CO2 go up at all is not the question. The question is why would it stay constant? The idea that the amount of CO2 in the air is fixed is nuts. Simple ocean warming, currents carrying gases both easily explain a slow change. There is zero science in net zero. Humans do not and cannot control CO2.
And you can prove it easily with NASA data. Between 1988 and 2014 CO2 went up 30%. Tree coverage went up 30%. But if growing trees reduced CO2, CO2 should have gone down. Rather more CO2, more trees in exact ratio.
Where did the extra CO2 come from? Out of the ocean of course where 98% of all free CO2 lives. Real science, real truth is in front of us all the times. There is no need for opinions.
120
Or to put is very simply, 98% of CO2 is in the ocean. Exchange is continuous, like rain and evaporation. So 98% of all CO2 emissions are also in the water. And like rain they represent only a tiny fraction of the total volume. 2% in the air, 98% in the water and we contribute only 1% of 2% a year, so 0.02%.
How then can we humans make atmosopheric CO2 go up 50%? It nonsense, childish, ignorant, nothing like real physical chemistry which is all about ratios, not quantities. It’s not accounting, ledger work.
90
Anthropogenic CO2 emissions is about 40 Gt p.a. Biosphere and ocean absorbs roughly 20 Gt p.a, all thanks to Henry’s Law. Net change is an increase of around 20 Gt p.a. or 2.6 ppm/year.
19
“Anthropogenic CO2 emissions is about 40 Gt p.a. Biosphere and ocean absorbs roughly 20 Gt p.a, all thanks to Henry’s Law.” What contradictory nonsense! Try a real analysis of CO2 equilibrium
His conclusions are
1) The adjustment time is never larger than the residence time and is less than 5 years.
(2) The idea of the atmosphere being stable at 280 ppm in pre-industrial times is untenable.
(3) Nearly 90% of all anthropogenic carbon dioxide has already been removed from the atmosphere.
but I would correct (3) to 98%. Only this explains and perfectly explains the fact that C14 levels today are exactly what they were in 1800
50
We don’t live in a two-box first-order model.
12
CO2 obviously has nothing to do with the weather or climate and this is the point that needs ramming home.
212
Go ahead. Provide the evidence and you’ve won the battle.
013
Perhaps if you could explain how a CO2 molecule in the atmosphere is able to re-emit it’s acquired energy before that energy is very quickly stolen away by the thousands of kinetic collisions with the many other atmospheric gas molecules, then you might stand a chance of convincing a few of us.
And you might like to include your explanation of why the CO2 amount in the atmosphere is not already at or very close to saturation level.
And as an extra, toss in an explanation of why atmospheric water vapour molecules don’t overwhelm the minor amount of CO2 molecules.
Your turn.
60
I’m a biologist. You can source for yourself information about atmospheric dynamics.
The CO2 molecule, as you just admitted, has taken energy (IR in this case) into itself (you know about energy states of electrons in atoms and compounds I hope). That means more energy still in the atmosphere. That state can’t be maintained and the atom returns to a steady state with emission of energy in a random direction. If it is transmitted via kinetic energy that is still more energy in the atmosphere than if the IR EMR had disappeared into space.
B. is well discussed everywhere. You might like to include why you don’t like what the data shows?
C. See B.
113
So you are a chemist, a physicist and a mathematician? You cannot just pull rank as a biologist, it contains very little hard science.
Especially zoology, botany and much of the observational sciences. The physics of back radiation is presented extremely well and simply by Prof William Happer, 60 years an atmospheric physicist from Columbia University. And his conclusion is that rapid substantial global warming from even doubling CO2 is impossible. It’s physics which was mastered a century ago.
150
Chemist and statistician and data analytics.
And I didn’t pull ranks, I explicitly wrote my limitation.
your limitation seems to be the university of youtube.
113
I don’t have to source the info – I have sufficient, over a hundred pages of notes, on the subject, plus other papers. I was interested in your views on these subjects.
40
That’s not how science works. And you know it.
If you want to tax the planet trillions of dollars a year to control carbon dioxide based on a wild theory you should first have to prove everything you say. There is no such proof. Then or now.
All our Australian Federal Acts ultimately rely on nothing more than signatures on UN documents by our Prime Ministers alone, not on any evidence at all. And every climate prediction has been wrong. 38 years is enough or you have to redefine rapid.
For example prove the essential, the foundational story that the 50% increase in CO2 since 1750 is man made, that mankind can and does change CO2 levels. This was proven wrong in 1958 by simple radio(active) carbon dating, thirty years before Al Gore and the WMO and the IPCC invented man made CO2 accumulation. But after two world wars, it was only 2.03%
And that 2.0% has not changed in 70 years because it is the % of fossil fuel CO2 in the ocean in an ultra rapid equilibrium across this 72% water world with the most soluble gas other than water itself. We saw this confirmed beautifully after 1965 when atmospheric bomb testing doubled C14 in the atmosphere from one part per trillion to two parts per trillion. All gone in sixty years in a perfect e-kt decay.
Even more, the evidence is now in that the final equilibrium level in 2023 of -2% + 2% more (1/50th) = 0% from the atom bombs means the C14 level now is exactly what it was in 1750. The bombs contibution exactly wiped out the Suess effect! QED.
But that’s actual science, not quackery. So keep quacking.
140
Actually it is not for me to do anything.
You are not helping to stop what you see as an injustice, by sitting in a remote corner of the internet telling me your problems. You need to make a case in public not just whine here.
216
Stop whining. Your rudeness is exceeded only by your arrogance.
I wrote thousands of articles on Quora. They were deleted a few months ago by management. I was alleged to be part of conspiracy.
That’s what happens when they cannot challenge your facts.
172
But I have to say that Bill Gates wrote to me directly. And accepted my explanations. A few weeks later he recanted, despite writing a book on the subject of CO2 driven man made Global Warming.
Then Quora deleted me. Of course. A dangerous peron. Thousands of hours answering questions with facts. Too much inconvenient truth. Too many inappropriate and unemployable PhDs making money from the scam. Tim Flannery made Australian Climate Commissioner with a degree in English. There are many more Tim Flannerys.
210
sure. I’ll believe you if you show me the youtube.
015
Do you charge by the sneer? Is that how trolling works? You have not made a single actual scientific contribution to any discussion. Why do you bother?
150
Four hundredths of a percent of the atmosphere, yeah right.
90
If you actually understood the carbon cycle, you would be relaxed and comfortable, rather than perpetually having bouts of hysteria.
40
In this brief abstract, from an Australian perspective, at the Holocene Climate Optimum its clear that CO2 in Antarctic ice cores was historically low, while world temperatures were two degrees warmer than present.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/363572677_The_Holocene_hypsithermal_in_the_Australian_region
01
Thanks to the support of the fake conservative Liberals who voted with Labor to bizarrely amend the state constitution to outlaw this energy-liberating technology.
Imagine the scientific and engineering ignorance required to support outlawing a particular technology in the constitution.
Given the profound scientific and technical ignorance of typical politicians, most of those who voted for this madness probably had no clue what they were voting for. It would be even worse if they voted for it and did know the benefits of fracking.
370
Just a shame they didn’t get together to outlaw those other stupid, failing, inconsistent, unfit for purpose ‘technologies.’
180
Where in our Australian Constitution any change must be by plebiscite. Actual people not politicians. Net Zero too should be confirmed by referendum. Otherwise individuals are writing laws without asking anyone.
250
The situation is like declaring war. “the U.S. President cannot formally declare war. According to Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, that power belongs exclusively to Congress. However, as Commander-in-Chief, the President can authorize swift military action to defend the nation, a power often used to engage in conflicts without a formal declaration”
But what Scott Morrison did solo in signing the whole country up to the UN Net Zero, the basis of further Australian laws like the Safeguard Mechanism, has not been ratified by parliament.
This also happened with Malcolm Turnbull’s unexplained gift on the last day of his job, of $444Million in cash to his wife. Or Anthony Albanese’s purchase of $1Billion in shares in a failing Californian Quantum computing company? How’s that going? No one asks or cares.
The flippancy of politicians in Australia with our money and laws is astounding and their complete lack of reference to parliament let alone to the electorate is equally beyond anything like democracy.
All of this non taxation though Carbon Credits and Green Certificates is beyond oversight by parliament. And the tens of billions are not taxtion because they do not go into General Revenue. Parliament does not have the right to order this robbing of Australians to give money to unknown people and without revue.
The Climate Scam is not just about CO2. It’s about the tens of billions gone missing, the biggest theft in Australian history, far exceedin Turnbull’s $444Million. Snowy II alone is over $20Billion and has taken nearly twice as long as the Channel Tunnel and cost more than the Panama Canal but even when it is finished, it will likeliy be unused. Like 3 of the 5 desalination plants for the drought which would never end.
We are being robbed. By Labor, Liberals, Greens and the Teals. Most if not all of the Climate laws would not survive appeal to the High Court. It’s government legislated and administered robbery, like the original Howard Renewable Energy(Electricity) Act 2001.
230
PSI Quantum is an extraordinarily high risk venture, trying to build a 1 million qubit machine whereas others like IBM and Google are building much smaller machines with much lower risk. If PSI fails, there is no plan B and the Australian taxpayer loses $1 billion.
Taxpayer money should never be used to invest in private business ventures, especially high risk ones and even more so foreign owned businesses PLUS, even worse, when it already has rich investors like Microsoft and BlackRock.
This is out and out gambling with taxpayer money. It’s difficult to understand what caused Albanese or those who tell him what to think and do to have a brain f@rt about this.
The politicians have no idea of the value of money, especially communists like Albanese who think you can just print, borrow or tax more and who themselves have never worked in a proper job in their lives.
190
Does someone in Magoo’s family own shares in PSI Quantum.
20
TdeF,
Do you think that Australian Labor or Greens would plan for a public vote on net zero Carbon or repeal of anti-nuclear laws when they have seen the public vote that emphatically rejected the October 2023 proposals to amend the Constitution their way to give our land to a small special interest group of “first nations”? Geoff S
200
Agreed. That’s why they don’t ask. With The Voice, they had to change the Federal Constitution and lack the power to do that. What they are doing with carbon is not mentioned in the Constitution so they presume they can do what they like and hide it all from the public. That’s taxation without representation. And illegal under the constitution, which is why they are at great pains not to handle the cash but pass it from victim to middle men without anyone knowing, especially the public.
Take the City of Canberra who put up windmills for their own use and were repaid from illegal taxes buried in our electricity bills. The City of Canberra five years ago found they had $37Million in unearned payments from simply owning windmills to supply their own power. This is theft, not taxation.
And I would guess they used the cash to order the surrender of the Catholic Calvary hospital and paid for the unwelcome deal in stolen money.
There is no end to the theft in government these days. The Constitution does not give the Federal government control of hospitals, social services, education. All these have been seized by controlling the cash and handing our favours. We are a nation of public service crooks who cannot get enough cash and power.
170
Especially when there were no ‘nations’, and we’re not even sure whether they were ‘first’.
110
One thing is for sure they were last, not first, just ahead of us whities by 5000 odd years, but who’s counting.
40
Labor wants to make Australia a leader in manufacturing Electric Vehicles?
Maybe the German car makers who are shutting down their own EV production can relocate to Australia with the appropriate taxpayer funded subsidy of course. 😱🤡💰🔥💰🔥💰🔥
50
Much the same ignorance shown with banning Nuclear for power generation.. Meanwhile 430 + plants safely operate around the world providing their populations with clean, reliable, dispatchable 24/7 electricity.
180
Any process that has associated logic is illegal in today’s Victoria!
00
Where does the 40% figure come from?
Our World in Data shows the USA annual CO2 emissions peaked at 6.13 billion tonnes in 2005, coming down to 4.9 in 2024. That’s a 20% reduction.
https://ourworldindata.org/profile/co2/united-states
Did you only mean a 40% reduction in the electricity generation sector?
Our world in data indicates the USA has reduced emissions per kilowatt-hour from 610g in 2000 to 384g in 2024. Which is a 37% reduction. That’s per kilowatt-hour not total emissions. I imagine total electricity demand has increased in that time so the actual reduction in CO2 emissions would be less.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electricity?mapSelect=~USA
(no idea how accurate OWID data is)
50
My point was about the scale of the reduction while actually increasing energy supply. At no real cost to taxpayers or energy users. By comparison we have achieved very little while reducing energy supplies to critical while making manufacturing uneconomic. Bowen’s achievements are smoke and mirrors and we are now critically exposed as energy poor and reduced to begging Indonesia for fertiliser.
150
Australia is energy rich as an exporter but energy poor domestically.
Never forget it was Howard, one of our first anti-energy activists who set Australia up on its present road to ruin by signing (but not ratifying) the Kyoto Protocol.
He oversaw, and was elated when under him a bizarre 30 year contract (still running) with the Chicomms was signed basically giving our gas away at world’s cheapest prices and for which some clown forgot to put a provision in the contract to allow for price changes due to inflation and market prices.
https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/how-australia-blew-its-future-gas-supplies-20170928-gyqg0f.html
140
Australia is lucky to be rich in natural resources, and just unlucky to be badly managed by morons.
40
I wonder if John Howard still has that view. After all, Margaret Thatcher change her perspective.
00
No worries. Just wanting to see what the 40% was based on given it’s a hefty number.
And it’s a good point to make.
In 2005 Aus emissions were 385 million t. In 2024 Aus emissions 387 million t. An increase of 0.5% in the period the US dropped 20%.
https://ourworldindata.org/profile/co2/australia
Aus peaked at 415 million t in 2018. In 2024 the reduction is 6.8% from that peak. But still above the 2005 level. We have a long way to go to get to 43% below 2005 by 2030. A legislated reduction figure. So I wonder. If that is legislated and the Labor party doesn’t achieve it, do any of them go to gaol?
But our emissions per capita are down 24% on 2005. Going so well thanks to our Govt’s ridiculous immigration levels. And you thought they didn’t know what they were doing. /s
70
Answer is a Big Fat No.
30
“… fracking. A process now illegal in Victoria, Australia“.
Not just illegal, but unconstitutional. They’re idiots and there is no hope for them. We have to cut them off the national grid, before they bring the rest of us down with them.
00
I’m not so sure this is the beginning of an about face. It’s obvious they can’t meet the 82% target in just 4 years and the main problem for these climate zealots is that we’re running out of other people’s money. Once the subsidy taps get turned off, then the entire push to net zero stops dead in its tracks. And, it’s not just the climate goals, it’s every social program that they implemented such as NDIS, subsidised child care, subsidised maternity leave, increased medicare funding, hex debt reductions and a long list of vote buying policies used to buy their ticket to power. Labor is now starting to panic, wondering where to find the money to maintain forever power in an economy that is going into free fall, and all because of their climate policies that destroyed our own local production of petroleum and fertiliser and pretty much everything else, leaving us totally dependent and exposed.
IMO – The biggest takeout of the energy crisis saga is the glaring absence of any measure to generate more local oil, build more refineries or fertilser plants or even store more oil. When asked about this at press conferences, the answer is always redirected back to this being the previous governments fault and their focus is on doing new deals to get oil from elsewhere. This response is obviously because they don’t want people to link our current dire predicament to their climate change policies, because that would land a killer blow to their entire agenda and future re-election. In other words the truth must be hidden at any cost, even as we face the grim reality of now being up S#!T creek without a paddle, in a capsized canoe.
350
They have the 2022 Safeguard Mechanism. A hidden massive Green credits slush fund with 35% CO2 tax on everything except breathing. Not a legal tax either. And never in the press.
300
Also as we have just discovered the government is only considering domestic electricity. As we have just found out that’s only 1/3rd of the CO2/energy story. The real needs of trucks, factories, farmers, manufacturers,aircraft,.. are outside their arithmetic. That’s why the Safeguard Mechanism is designed to completely shut down travel, shipping,manufacture and farming.
210
Safeguard mechanism is such Orwellian speak. A product of the COVID era that had guardrail guidelines, rings of steel, caution abundance, curve flattening and my favourite “we’re all in this together”. This is what happens when you have an opposition largely asleep at the wheel. The SM got no publicity whatsoever and yet it’s a carbon tax by stealth.
150
‘ … such as NDIS, subsidised child care, subsidised maternity leave, increased medicare funding, hex debt reductions and a long list of vote buying policies used to buy their ticket to power.’
Its a democracy and essentially a popularity contest, so neither side of politics has any desire to eliminate NDIS, Medicare or subsidised maternity leave.
But on the issue of renewable farms its clear to see the Iran war has been a wakeup call for our political elites. Stopping all subsidies should be on the Coalition platform.
82
Labor is betraying its working class base by pursuing the Renewables agenda.
But the Greens have increased their primary vote from 11 to 13% over the past year. That is 13% who believe fervently in Climate Change and all their preferences go to Labor. So clearly they do not want to lose those voters.
Meantime One Nation has gone from about 8 to 25% of the primary vote, which is 25% who don’t think Climate Change is important.
We are set up for a real clash of ideas and neither Labor nor the Liberals know which way to turn. What a dilemma!
320
The Labor politicians aren’t going to change their approach, partly because they are so distant from the working class that they only see them from the limousine window, and party because the number of working class are diminishing with their jobs disappearing.
The Liberals believe that they can get back those TEAL electorates by being more Green. This helps The Greens slightly as they are held up as slightly less insane. (have you ever heard or experienced any Green proposal that works?).
290
I have lost faith in the Australian voters’ BS detectors.
Think about it:
1. Some voters still get their information from their ABC!
2. Some voters still view BoM and CSIRO as credible agencies working for the good of Australians!
3. There are enough voters in McMahon willing to get Blackout over the line FIVE TIMES!
The source of the problem is that those with good BS detectors are not particularly vocal. They want to get on with life. They do not want to offend. So BS is not being called out.
If you meet a Greenie, ask them if they support bird mincers.
If you meet a “renewables” fan ask them if they are operating off-grid
If you meet a climate zealot ask them why ocean surface never sustains more than 30C.
330
“If you meet a “renewables” fan ask them if they are operating off-grid”
I have done this multiple times. Most ignore the question (Beneath their dignity to respond to the peasants?), a couple have said they would like to, but batteries are not economic.
But none have come out to admit they tried and failed.
But while we are on the subject, some questions for Gee Aye.
Do you have solar panels on your roof?
Do you have a household battery?
Do you drive only an EV?
And, most important, are you fully disconnected from the grid?
60
Sorry but I’ll choose when to tell people about my life.
02
Most renewable power sources are connected to the national grid. If we were off-grid, we wouldn’t be able to utilise them……
09
According to green theory, if you are off grid, you don’t need to utilise them.
60
Thanks for confirming that ruinables can’t survive separate from the national grid, and so can never stand alone.
Do you revert solely to your household battery on a windless night, or are you a hypocrite who uses carbon emitting electricity generation?
00
Australia – uncompetitive due to high labour costs, low productivity, high energy costs, and bureaucratic government controls.
270
Oh no, the Labor party is flailing around industry policy again. Quantum computing, solar panels , EVs why not? The are the Underpants Gnomes of elite business development.
1.Have thought bubble. 2. ? No idea. 3. Success!!>
90
I have a completely different view. The radical left, represented by Labor and LNP, have been the cheer leaders in adopting the UN agenda of de-industrialisation of the west. They are supported by their flunkies in Canberra and throughout academia.
Australia needs leaders prepared to make a strong stand against the UN globalist agenda. Paulina Hanson and Malcolm Roberts have been relentless in their fight against the UN globalists and radical left in Australia.
Australia needs a government that works for Australians not UN bureaucrats.
330
Rick,
I agree with you about the United Nations (and also the European Union and the current NATO) as being the laughable but manic dangerous modern “She who must be obeyed.”
Suggestion to all readers: Make separation from UN influence on Australia policies a central part of your public comments. Write to politicians about it over and over until they realise how widespread the public concern is.
If readers hesitate because this step seems too radical, contemplate a more radical step, namely, that we need to reduce the area of Australian national parks and reserves to a couple of % of the present area. There is no demonstrated value in the lock-up of vast areas that grow weeds and increase bushfires because no private individual is present to love the land. Geoff S
150
Here’s the soaring increase in FF consumption around the world and China has shown a record increase since 1988.
The fantasy that we can replace FFs with toxic, unreliable W & S is delusional and Australia should quickly use all of our efforts to change back to FFs ASAP.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/fossil-fuel-primary-energy?tab=line&country=IND~ZAF~JPN~AUS~USA~GBR~CHN~OWID_WRL~OWID_EU27
120
Here’s another way to look at FF consumption since 1950 or since 1988 etc.
The lunacy that we could replace FFs with unreliable, toxic W & S is a very sick joke and China, Russia, Nth Korea etc must be laughing at our unbelievable stupidity.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/global-fossil-fuel-consumption
180
How does that fit in with FTA Albo and crew just signed with the EU and the punitive action they will take under the Paris Accord?
70
Labor, just like their phantasmogorical green energy schemes, are only able to function on life support provided, faits accomplis, by the Aussie taxpayer. Time to pull the plug!
100
Word of the day “phantasmogorical”. A sequence of real or imaginary images like that seen in a dream.
60
Reality beats Ideology every time.
Emissions Impossible clearly on show at any place near you.
Next?
90
I think at least the MSM are starting to wake up to the whole climate change scam. With all its absurdities. Chris Uhlmann in changing from the ABC to CH9 and now The Australian has been doing a sterling job. Most other energy policy journalists tend to just repeat the government announcements. If they do question, it’s with the power of a wet lettuce. The people who have been doing it for such a long time ( eg Andrew Bolt and Chris Kenny) just need more friends. Oh, I so wish our Jo could write for some of the majors or at least get a gig as commentator!!! Years ago she appeared on Ch10 Bolt Report and it was brilliant.
100
Have you seen the biffing that Liam Bartlett gave Bozo Bowen, Bozo wasn’t happy.
30
🤡 The Labor Party’s Far Left/green policies are not being dropped.
Their green at any cost policies are just going into hiding for election purposes. 😱
The usual suspects, aka old school (non-woke) Labor voters will now believe the Labor has changed back to the Labor Party they loved and has finally rejected its new destructive anti-reality “green at any cost” policies that hurt ordinary workers. 👹🔥💰
Just look at their new faux immigration policies allegedly rejecting existing uncontrolled mass migration of future “Labor dependant” voters. 🧕
50
Labor wants to make Australia a leader in manufacturing Electric Vehicles?
Maybe the German car makers who are shutting down their own EV production can relocate to Australia with the appropriate taxpayer funded subsidy of course. 😱🤡💰🔥💰🔥💰🔥
70
We were going to be a Green energy super power. Then a solar panel super power. Our only windmill manufacturer in Portland closed because they could not compete with China. No tariffs to protect them. No subsidies.
If we cannot make solar panels, how on earth are we supposed to make electric cars? Toyota paid out three years wages in advance just to get out the country, the unions were so bad in what was a 90% automated plant in Altona. One in ten employees had to be a Union leader. And they wanted long holidays over Christmas when car manufacture had to ramp up. Now we have no car manufacturers. Chased out of the country by Unions, the labor party and the Federal government.
80
Australia invented the solar panel, but now we pay China to make them, yes, the clever country, Pffft.
60
They just copy everything. No fear of patents. The communist system kills innovation as eveyrthing is stolen. Which is why they are so dependent on the US for innovationa and Japan and Germany, as is everyone else. The UK seems to generate nothing new. And the US is getting sick of it, especially in pharmaceuticals. The Chinese have stolen and undercut everything. It’s not a risk. It’s a certainty.
70
Unless a reversal of the climate hoax based economic vandalism taking place is implemented soon the dominos will keep falling and Australians are destined to become what a former Prime Minister described, saying he worries about our friends Australians, the trash of Asia Pacific.
Yet, and he know it, this country should be much wealthier than it has been to date, self reliant and a major hub for our neighbouring countries as well as respected on the wider world stages.
20
It’s part China syndrome, doing everything to please China who killed tens of thousands of Australians and locked the rest up with their military virus. And shut down our coal and wine and lobseter business in retaliation when we asked questions. We exist only as an open quarry and are not allowed make anything ourselves, defend ourselves, process our own material and have buy near useless (very short lifetime) solar panels and windmills when we should be building power stations. Their wine output now exceeds our own and Treasury wines is on the skids as is Yellowtail. Duplicate and undercut, government subsidized.
And part Australian public service explosion. Each new act creates a department and they need more and more people. The public service is the only growing business in Australia and of course it runs on inventing more taxes for you to pay. Australian public sector employment has experienced significant growth, rising 3.3% to almost 2.6 million employees by June 2025, driven by state, territory, and federal hiring. That’s 18% of all people working for the public service and voting Labor for more public servants. Goodbye workers. In a nutshell, Argentina.
80
Percentage of workers in the public service. Spot the Labor party countries.
Taiwan 2%
America 11%
Singapore 10%
Canadians 13%
Italians 13%
Germans 11-13%
British 17%
Australia 18% The share of the workforce in the public sector increased from 12.5% to 17.9% between 2014 and 2024, a 40% increase!
NZ 19%
Argentina 19-25%
In true Labor fashion, you can buy votes with uncontrolled immigration and endless legislation requiring more tax collection. Especially in Health and Education.
So while Labor drops extreme Climate targets, nothing changes. They will keep priming the pump to make their friends richer. It beats working.
110
And then start outright theft. Death taxes. “Intergenerational wealth” code word for private savings and “unrealized capital gains” code word for private investment. Henry Ergas writes about this in the Australian today. Communist theft posing as reasonable social policy. Our money and their vast generosity to people who have contributed nothing and are not undertaking to contribute anything, as in Manchester and Minnesota.
The Government seizes your life’s work and hands it out to Brides of Isis and their friends, in the name of equity. Equality of outcome, not equality of opportunity. The Ant and the Grasshopper parable with the public service mandarins as the grasshoppers, generating no wealth and stealing the hard work of others. And by paying bills by just printing money which devalues your life’s work with rampant inflation as in Argentina.
All inflation is created solely by Government budget deficits, printing fake money to pay bills. But Dr. Chalmers rushes to the press to blame people and events overseas when every real economist knows the one and only cause is runaway government spending. Chalmers has seen Federal debt soar over a million million dollars, a trillion dollars. And three states over $200Billion. And while the Labor party claims they have to solve intergenerational wealth what they mean is to seize everyone’s cash to pay for their profligate spending and shutting down manufacturing and manufacturing jobs and substituting with imports from China. While banning or limiting or taxing exports such as coal, gas.
No wonder everyone is going to vote Reform in the UK and One Nation in Australia. Climate Change needs to be dismantled now. Not just the visible nonsense, Snowy II, transmission lines, subsidies and Green certificates, Agricultural Carbon Credits (2011) but all the hidden theft from the RET and Safeguard Mechanism and the entire 1/3 of the public service who make their living from environmental scams and prosecuting people for their expressed opinions, as in the UK. You cannot have everyone working for the government while the government earns nothing and you are jailed if you dare object, especially on uncontrolled and risky immigration.
Or as Margaret Thatcher said, socialism is fine until you run out of other people’s money. And renewables is a total lie. The war in Iran just proved it.
50
The Luton car-park fire.
Two years on and And “we” are being shoved further down the toilet, faster than ever.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk0MWDsueMY
00
Have to disagree – Let’s just hope the war keeps going… This is the only time the Albo left has had to face up and do something right!. If the war stops its back to “normal”.
10