Australian
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 5455 comments are related to the topic:
THE CLIMATE CHANGE MYTH that Julia wants us all to pay for
THE CLIMATE CHANGE MYTH that Julia wants us all to pay for
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 5,455
|
By:
Our co2 emissions fell during the period of the Carbon Price and have risen in record amounts since the Carbon Price was dropped by the climate vandals.
The warming trend has not stopped ...it is rising year upon year. All these FACTS are there for any one interested enough to really want the truth. Abbott and the Liebrals don't give a stuff about the climate or renewables. They have driven investment in wind and solar to the lowest levels in years by fostering doubt in the Renewable Energy Target. Their paymasters are the Fossil fuel industry |
|
By:
Carbon tax demise leading to large rise in emissions, says academic
Removal of carbon price has led to a surge in the use of brown coal generators in Australian electricity sector, analysis shows Which? says significant reforms are needed to restore confidence in the gas and electricity sector. Consumer behavioural changes caused by a carbon price may be unwinding, the report stated. Oliver Milman Tuesday 4 November 2014 Emissions from Australia’s electricity sector have risen significantly since the repeal of the carbon price, with a record rise in emissions predicted this financial year. An analysis of the National Electricity Market (NEM) by Mike Sandiford, a University of Melbourne energy academic, has shown their emissions will rise about 9% in 2014-15 compared with 2013-14 – the equivalent of 14m extra tonnes of carbon dioxide. The figure could be as high as 10%, according Sandiford. The NEM covers about 80% of Australia’s electricity consumption. “To put it in historical context, this recent increase in emissions is currently tracking at about 250% higher than the previous largest recorded increase,” Sandiford wrote in the the Conversation. “That was back in 2003-04 when emissions increased by a touch over 5m tonnes for the year.” Sandiford said the increase was clearly linked to the Coalition’s repeal of the carbon pricing mechanism, which was scrapped in July. “The reason is straightforward,” he said. “During the years of carbon pricing, hydro was being dispatched at unsustainable levels. Since repeal the reduction in hydro output has been substantially picked up by brown coal generators in Victoria.” Separate figures released by consultancy firm Pitt&Sherry show that annual NEM emissions were 1.3% higher in the month to September 2014 compared with the year to June 2014, the month before carbon pricing was removed. In a briefing note, Pitt&Sherry said black coal generation has increased 0.5% in this period, with brown coal, the most carbon-intensive type of coal, rising 2.2%. The increase in emissions wasn’t entirely down to the removal of the carbon price, the note stated, with falling gas generation and “considerably less” wind generation causing coal to take up the slack. |
|
By:
Climate Myth...
Global warming stopped in 1998, 1995, 2002, 2007, 2010, ???? "January 2008 capped a 12 month period of global temperature drops on all of the major well respected indicators. HadCRUT, RSS, UAH, and GISS global temperature sets all show sharp drops in the last year" (source: Watts Up With That). ...................................................................... A common claim amongst climate "skeptics" is that the Earth has been cooling recently. 1998 was the first year claimed by "skeptics" for "Global Cooling". Then 1995 followed by 2002. 'Skeptics' have also emphasized the year 2007-2008 and most recently the last half of 2010. NASA and climate scientists throughout the world have said, however, that the years starting since 1998 have been the hottest in all recorded temperature history. Do these claims sound confusing and contradictory? Has the Earth been cooling, lately? To find out whether there is actually a "cooling trend," it is important to consider all of these claims as a whole, since they follow the same pattern. In making these claims, 'skeptics' cherrypick short periods of time, usually about 10 years or less. 'Skeptics' also take selected areas of the world where cold records for the recent past are being set while ignoring other areas where all time heat records are being set. The temperature chart below is based on information acquired from NASA heat sensing satellites. It covers a 30 year period from January 1979 to November 2010. The red curve indicates the average temperature throughout the entire Earth. The red line represents the average temperature. The top of the curves are warmer years caused by El Niño; a weather phenomenon where the Pacific Ocean gives out heat thus warming the Earth. The bottoms of the curves are usually La Niña years which cool the Earth. Volcanic eruptions, like Mount Pinatubo in 1991 will also cool the Earth over short timeframes of 1-2 years. UAH Figure 1: University of Alabama, Huntsville (UAH) temperature chart from January 1979 to November 2010. This chart is shown with no trend lines so the viewer may make his own judgment. Below is the same temperature chart, showing how 'skeptics' manipulate the data to give the impression of 'Global Cooling'. First they choose the warmest most recent year they can find. Then, in this case, they exclude 20 years of previous temperature records. Next they draw a line from the warmest year (the high peak) to the lowest La Niña they can find. In doing this they falsely give the impression that an ordinary La Niña is actually a cooling trend. UAH Figure 2: Representation of how 'skeptics' distort the temperature chart. Even though the chart clearly indicates increased warming, 'skeptics' take small portions of out of context to claim the opposite. What do the past 30 years of temperature data really show? Below is the answer. UAH Figure 3: Trend lines showing the sudden jump in temperatures in the 1995 La Niña (Green lines) and the 1998 (Pink lines) El Niño events. Brown line indicates overall increase in temperatures. The chart above clearly shows that temperatures have gone up. When temperatures for the warm El Niño years (pink lines) during 1980-1995 are compared to 1998-2010, there is a sudden increase of at least 0.2o Centigrade (0.36o Fahrenheit). Temperatures also jumped up by about 0.15oC (0.27oF) between the cool La Niña years (Green lines) of 1979-1989 and those of 1996-2008 (the eruption of Mount Pinatubo in 1991 lowered the Earth's temperatures in the midst of an El Niño cycle). The overall trend from 1979 through November 2010 (Brown line) shows an unmistakable rise. This is particularly clear when we statistically remove the short-term influences from the temperature record, as Kevin C did here: In spite of these facts, 'skeptics' simply keep changing their dates for 'Global Cooling', constantly confusing short-term noise and long-term trends |
|
By:
Source skepticalscience.com
The most feared website by the deniers of Global Warming like the Abbott gov't. They have no answer to the facts presented on that website. |
|
By:
If you are going to put a question mark on the reality of global warming please post just one Climate Science
agency in the world that disputes the obvious facts of the reality of Global Warming to support your belief that this question should even be asked. There is NO GOV'T funded CLIMATE SCIENCE agency in the world that disputes the reality of human induced Global Warming and Climate Change. |
|
By:
spot on Boots ...
Irrespective of whatever Australia decides to do with CO2 emissions we are heading for a Global CO2 level of around 430ppm by 2030. ... and solar ... would have to be the first most logical step it's a shame that our previous govt in australia saw fit to pull back the meagre $60 mill they promised Whyalla ... so much for the old renewable Energy Board .. shame on them really http://www.whyallanewsonline.com.au/story/1553997/solar-oasis-at-the-risk-of-scrapping/ Whyalla City Councillor and endorsed Labor candidate for the state seat of Giles Eddie Hughes has slammed the decision by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency to terminate the funding deed for the $230 million (complete) Whyalla Solar Oasis project. “The decision means that 15 years of hard work to establish in Whyalla a major world first concentrating solar thermal power station using Australian technology has been flushed down the drain,” Cr Hughes said. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-07/solar-thermal-plant-blow-for-whyalla/4738758 A proposed $230 million solar thermal plant at Whyalla is unlikely to go ahead after the Federal Government withdrew a $60 million grant. The withdrawal of funding comes as residents from Port Augusta prepare to lobby the State and Federal Governments for a solar thermal power plant to replace the city's coal-fired power stations. .... its hard to believe isn't it the previous govt pulled the plug ... on a COAL town which wanted to replace their coal based power grid ... with SOLAR but now the obama-led USA want us to give our money ... via an ETS ... to the UN ... to give to someone else (whilst applauding & patting on the back the chines who want to double their co2 emmissions for the next 15 years) BIGGEST RORT EVER  |
|
By:
If you agree how dirty coal is and how it should be replaced at the earliest opportunity then you must really
detest Abbott and the Liberal Party who argue that coal is good for humanity and is our future and the more coal the merrier we will be. Where is your rant against the biggest coal lovers Abbott and the Libs? Already Abbott has cost billions in future investment in wind and solar but no rant against the Abbott gov't ? We are the global pariah on climate change all because of the warped ideology of Abbott and the Libs. What a disgrace they are. |
|
By:
Africa is exactly why we need a price on pollution - the world will be much better off if we effectively pay them to keep their coal in the ground while helping them develop solar / renewable alternatives. Imagine the pollution we can stop from occurring while still helping them develop like they must
Doing things like that don't come cheap though and we should all do our part to pay for it - it's for the common good Agree 100% we should be funding solar and it's a disgrace Labor pulled out of the Whyalla scheme, provided it was designed correctly. It costs money to do that kind of thing though and the carbon tax was a great way of paying, it shared the pain. A MUCH better alternative than taking it out of consolidated revenue and using cuts to the poorest to cover the hole in the budget instead And for those that think there's no problem http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/2014-officially-hottest-year-on-record/ |
|
By:
wombleoz
the world will be much better off if we effectively pay them to keep their coal in the ground ... yet you applaud china who will continue to burn for 15 more years ... very strange concept AFL If you agree how dirty coal is and how it should be replaced at the earliest opportunity ... coal is that dirty that the planet is warming by 0.05c ... each DECADE ... according to the IPCC the greenhouse is the issue and methane is by far more potent a problem but how do we ask china and india to stop increasing their rice plantations ... and ... AFL .. you must really detest gillard & labor for stopping the first real solar power testing that may have proved to everybody that it is a viable project on a large scale (whyalla were planning to convert the whole city & industry and 19,000 homes under their local plan) and you must also agree that the pathetic Renewable Energy Board decision to withold the mere $60 mill for the solar project was shameful .. and they raeally had to GO  and the deceeiver gillard wouldn't approve $60 mill to prove to australians (and the world) that solar is LARGE scale viable yet the deceiver gillard was signed off at cancun to HAND OVER $10 billion of australia's sovereign wealth to the UN you must hate labor for their trickery and deception of the true believers AFL  |
|
By:
The LIE-BRALS are in power now FYI...
so you must really detest Abbott and the Lieberal Party who argue that coal is good for humanity and is our future and the more coal the merrier we will be. Unless you agree with them of course or have an iron in the fire yourself. Where is your rant against the biggest coal lovers Abbott and the Libs? Nothing to say about Abbott and the Liberals destroying renewable energy industry by breaking another pre election promise to commit to the Renewable Energy Target. Another promise broken by the biggest frauds ever elected. |
|
By:
just political ramblings mate ... but i know you enjoy them ... so i accept them
have a top day |
|
By:
They found the only LIEbral Party member left that believes in climate change....
Climate change isn't just a Leftist cause By Dale Hughes abc the drum Tony Abbott Photo: The Liberal Party should look to its core values, or risk sitting on the wrong side of history. The climate debate has descended into an ideological battle of Left versus Right, with parties of the Left taking ownership of the moral necessity for climate action. It need not be so, writes Dale Hughes. I'm a Liberal voter and I'm passionate about action on climate change. Did that sentence seem strange? Under Tony Abbott's stewardship of the federal Liberal Party, the term "Liberal" has almost become synonymous with climate change denial. It need not be so. The climate debate has unfortunately descended into an ideological battle of Left versus Right, with parties of the Left taking ownership of the moral necessity for climate action. Yet this is an issue that should never have been framed in ideological terms, since history will be harsh judges on those who refused to accept the scientific consensus that something must be done to preserve the planet. Just yesterday the Bureau of Meteorology confirmed that Australia experienced its third warmest year on record in 2014. It's a confusing time to be a social liberal, free market champion, and an environmentalist. In fact, many people would scoff that such a three-peat of convictions is the product of confused ideological preferences rather than a carefully considered set of priorities. Yet the essence of "conservation" should fit neatly with conservatism. The want and need to maintain and sustain the planet as we have known it. But what of that other faith? What of the free market? Can long-term sustainability fit with a continued commitment to free market capitalism? As part of my summer reading, I settled by the pool to explore Naomi Klein's latest polemic, This Changes Everything. With sound research and fine prose, Klein contends that capitalism, or more precisely, neoliberalism, is ultimately responsible for the current crisis and for the failure of nations to act. The message being that market forces are incompatible with sustainability. Herein lies the conundrum for many young Liberals. How does one reconcile faith in the free market and a commitment to climate action? While Klein rejects the notion that the free market can usher in a new paradigm of renewable energy, I believe that the role of any thinking Liberal should be to explore how best to use government policy to create business incentives to make the transition. A party that champions innovation and enterprise as the driving force of mankind should embrace the renewable sector with alacrity. As with anything in history, it will be technology that drives behavioural change, not any punitive scheme from a government. The role of those on the Right should be to remind people that the market is the best mechanism for technological advancement. If capitalism is purely to blame for the damage wreaked on the environment since the industrial revolution, then how does one explain the ecological vandalism of Soviet Bloc countries during the 20th Century? This is a point Klein conveniently overlooks in her book. The Australian Liberal Party has traditionally embraced economic rationalism and policies grounded in pragmatic logic. It should therefore accept the inevitable economic necessity to shift Australia's heavy reliance on fossil fuel energy. Yet worryingly, the Abbott Government has demonstrated no such desire to embrace this shift. In fact, rather than support the renewable energy sector, the Government has pursued policies contrary to the industries' needs. Its current moves towards cutting the renewable energy target being a case in point. Rather, the Prime Minister has openly and enthusiastically embraced the coal industry. In fairness, coal has been and will continue to be a valuable source of energy for a number of years, but the party risks becoming stagnant if it does not appropriately embrace alternate forms of energy, as it will inevitably have to. The Government's direct action plan needs to be called on for what it is: a facade to give the impression that it cares about climate change, all the while protecting the views of sceptics in the ranks. For a young political enthusiast, Australian politics presents a frustrating conundrum. The Australian Greens embrace environmental zeal at the expense of everything else, while the Australian Labor Party presents a confused mix of economic rationalism, protective unionism, and environmental tokenism. The party for individual enterprise, autonomy, and the free market, presents a rejection of forward thinking energy change and thumbs its nose at liberal social freedoms. It's a most unfortunate quagmire. Perhaps the last word should be left to the party's founder, Robert Menzies. "Modern history is, as you all know, full of examples of great movements that disappeared because they ceased to have any genuine reason for existence." The Liberal Party should look to its core values, or risk sitting on the wrong side of history. Dale Hughes is a freelance writer and a member of the Victorian Liberal Party. View his full profile here. ..................................................................................... That's what you get when you lie your way into office un-checked..... even your own deluded supporters are mystified at how low you would stoop by throwing away your core values to gain power. |
|
By:
and more ramblings ... of a political nature
you had 5 years to say the same about the deceiver gillard but nothing of course .. not one thing NOT EVEN ABOUT WHYALLA ... back to the nonsense thread for you  |
|
By:
I'm already on the nonsense thread .....when the opening post accuses every Climate Scientist in the world of
being corrupt it can only go downhill from there .............. and so it has proven. |
|
By:
the retired ones as i remember it
 but how correct was this prediction by secong .. impeccable imo bob and his loonies have convinced foolya joolya,wombleoz and her (soon to be backstabbing) mates that we need this tax............ |
|
By:
nostrasecong
|
|
By:
a measly $60 mill - would have been nothing as Wayne was going bananas at the time....methinks they were nobbled...surely the left doesn't do favours for the coal industry?
 |
|
By:
Of course its hot. If your starting point is at the end of a warming phase and then the temperature stabilizes for 20 years, those years will be hot as well, some higher, some lower. I believe the UK Met Office refers to it as a pause.
My problem with 'climate science' is that it is not science but politics. Science is supposed to work like this. You make observations then propose theories that match the observations. If the theory no longer matches ongoing observations, you ditch the theory and try new ones until you find one that works. Climate Science works the other way round. You propose a theory, carve it in stone, (the science is settled)then proceed to manipulate data (hide the decline) regularly scare the world about the consequences of dramatic temperature increase (although its not happening) and denigrate anybody who disagrees. (Climate Change denial is medical disorder) All this ignores the real question. Why is it not hotter now? |
|
By:
Of course its hot. If your starting point is at the end of a warming phase and then the temperature stabilizes for 20 years, those years will be hot as well, some higher, some lower. I believe the UK Met Office refers to it as a pause.
My problem with 'climate science' is that it is not science but politics. Science is supposed to work like this. You make observations then propose theories that match the observations. If the theory no longer matches ongoing observations, you ditch the theory and try new ones until you find one that works. Climate Science works the other way round. You propose a theory, carve it in stone, (the science is settled)then proceed to manipulate data (hide the decline) regularly scare the world about the consequences of dramatic temperature increase (although its not happening) and denigrate anybody who disagrees. (Climate Change denial is medical disorder) All this ignores the real question. Why is it not hotter now? |
|
By:
Just total garbage of the type sprouted by that other famous Climate Scientist Andrew Bolt and the Murdoch
deniers. You are quoting the same B/S of the Climate denialists. You have just posted b/s and i posted links that rebutt your B/S and you still deny Climate Change and the warming. Only in Australia and the USA is it political ...the loony Tea Party and the loony Liberal Party singing from the same hymn book that worships the dirty Fuel industries. |
|
By:
And that loony right wing nutter and great friend of that liar Abbott in....... Canadia...
|
|
By:
I don't know what happened there, I didn't mean to post. I'll continue
The computer models from 20 years ago all predicted that the global temperature would be a lot hotter now than it is but it has barely budged. So what went wrong? Is the greenhouse effect crap? No, I think that it is quite certain that greenhouse gases do cause some rise in temperature. So what else? If greenhouse gases do cause a rise in temperature but the global temperature is stable something else must be offsetting the greenhouse effect. What is missing from the computer models is the effect the Sun has on the Earth's temperature and that the Sun's energy output varies. The Sun is entering a cooling phase and this is offsetting the increase caused by the Greenhouse effect. We are actually quite lucky that this is happening at a time that we are committed to increasing levels of Greenhouse gases as declining output from the Sun will offset this. This gives us time to work out what quantity and mix of Greenhouse gases (both up and down) are required to offset changes in the Sun's energy output and hopefully give us the ability in the future to control the Earth' temperature to some extent. |
|
By:
Abbott and the Liberal Party made it political in this country. When Abbott a Climate Change denier won the
Liberal Party chief liar award with the backing of the 2 biggest Deniers in the Liberal party Nick Minchin and Bernardi over a belliever in Climate Change Turnbull. Funny how most of the liberalo party suddenly went from Climate Change believers under Turnbull to a pack of deniers as they are today. They made it political.................... FACT |
|
By:
More lies please stop posting lies on here. You are using all the same arguments the other 2 deluded fools who
post on this thread have tried again and again on here. All this b/s has been shot down as lies with actual links to the rebuttals something you fail to do to back up your lies |
|
By:
Please post just one peer reviewed paper by an actual Climate Scientist that supports the lies you have just
posted. You can't because there isn't any. Well maybe one or two somewhere in the ether that have been discredited lol I have asked thebas and SC to do this for 3 years on this thread and they can't produce one ...ha ha ha what a sham they and you are. |
|
By:
I post links from Climate Scientists to refute what you post....... and you ignore them and go onto the next
load of c raap that is used by every denier out there . PLEEEEASSSSEE |
|
By:
over a belliever in Climate Change Turnbull.
i think everything including the cat having kittens is nothing but politics for AFL all politics and yet no reply over gillard and the renewable energy commissions their flicking of solar in whyalla yet happy to give our money to the UN yeah ... true believers in science ... that party are for sure  |
|
By:
The liberals made it political the day Abbott was made KING LIE MAKER so criticize them for doing that.
Interesting that you were fine with it being political whilst Labor were in power and you participated in the political debate then and even when Abbott was PM you continued to participate in the political debate for about 12months and then the penny must have dropped that he Abbott and the Liberals were impossible to defend without being a complete hypocrite so you abandoned them and him and suddenly became Switzerland. |
|
By:
The liberals made it political
... what .. not you ffs mate i know its a full moon but pls there is a nonsense thread to deal with politics ... you're out your cell block again |
|
By:
it is hotter now just not as hot as was predicted - does that mean we should ignore it?
China and Africa are two very different places Thebas - like I've said, ideally China would stop polluting tomorrow but that would crash the world economy and we'd all be stuffed in the short term. Africa hasn't started yet but will - we should do all we can to help them develop through cleaner alternatives |
|
By:
wombleoz
it is hotter now just not as hot as was predicted yes ... and according to the ipcc 0.05c hotter .. no need for alarmarism at this point ... but yes its prudent to plan for our future .. tangible plans to do with the greenhouse ... not just moving money from one place to another ffs China and Africa are two very different places Thebas - like I've said, ideally China would stop polluting tomorrow but that would crash the world economy and we'd all be stuffed in the short term. Africa hasn't started yet but will - we should do all we can to help them develop through cleaner alternatives yes agree mate ... but why should china & india be allowed to do what they want .. because they have developed so far they have overtaken the rest but to relegate poor africa to just welfare recipients & not at least bit players appears a poor plan for their long term future ? |
|
By:
good to hear you accept we need to do something Thebas - now we just need to work out that the best way to pay for it is an ETS
India and China are still developing - do you think we should try and get them to slam on the brakes? It's all about timing in that regards. In saying that it sounds like India is going big on solar and most likely nuclear so they might do ok Paris will be fascinating later in the year - can a deal get done??? |
|
By:
Julia has a solution:
[ This image is no longer available. ] |
|
By:
wombleoz
now we just need to work out that the best way to pay for it is an ETS ... more socialist claptrap cause .. as anyone can tell you who has finally solved a problem that a solution is an ... actual solution to a problem ... not moving money around to satisfy an agenda and henry .... aaaagggghhhhhhh |
|
By:
a price trigger is the best way to change behaviour Thebas, no question
|
|
By:
that has never been proven womble that i can remember
in fact in relation to europe ... the ETS was a rank & disgraceful failure BIGGEST RORT EVER |
|
By:
any smokers here? or have you all given up because of the price rises??
|
|
By:
ffs ... is that it
|
|
By:
and maybe ... if they wrap the coal in plain packaging ... china might just stop burning it
have a good one pal |
|
By:
lovely balmy day up here
|