What? After what trip12 and Wolfy tell me I don’t know what to believe anymore.
Who are these AGL leftist hippies?
3 Likes
Cheers boot, … but that’s not news at all, .everyone knows it… except for complete nutters.
And it still won’t stop the Super Goose living in his determined ignorance, and alternative fact world.
Get outta town. It’s the market and not wind farms? But, renewables are UNRELIABLE! Now what could be making the gas market unstable… could it be that we’re giving it all away to markets overseas despite nearly being the world’s biggest producer? Better start fracking everything. And then give all of that away too!
Farking dumbest economic managers and energy policy makers in the world.
3 Likes
Agreed. Dumb as dogshit, … and for a long long time too.
1 Like
What so another insipid article posted by a left wing zealot is meant to mean something?
A host of organizations supporting ets or similar? The previous embarrassing article mentioned an “impasse” with regards to an ets or similar. There is no impasse. The Australian people had an ets thrust apon them despite assurances to opposite. They then voted against it when given the opportunity and it was justifiably removed.
The previous article also mentioned all of the supporting organizations and came up with 6. One being the climate council hehe.
A few points:
- Surely this is trolling because it’s talking about an ets rather than climate change - we must try and change the topic heading. (don’t believe this for a nanosecond but trying to make you highlight the juvenile attitude).
- The previous article talked about all of the organisation’s supporting the Ets or equivalent and then named the climate council. Lol.
- I’ve produced a multitude of evidence to show that as things currently stand renewables are expensive, unreliable and complex.
However ignoring everything you or I have said - if Labour is prepared to go to an election with an ets (Rather than lying and doing a a later dirty deal) bring it on. We’ll then see what the Australian public want.
so suggesting an ETS to reduce carbon emmisons is trolling on the same level as posting an article talking about more coal mines?
In other news.
Climate change impact on Australia may be irreversible, five-yearly report says
Exclusive: State of the Environment report says heritage and economic activity are being affected and the disadvantaged will be worst hit
Josh Frydenberg: bright spots, but much more to do
The Tarkine wilderness area in Tasmania
The Tarkine wilderness area in Tasmania. Josh Frydenberg says the State of the Environment report indicates the impact of changing weather patterns is being felt on both land and sea. Photograph: Jason Edwards/Getty Images/National Geographic RF
View more sharing options
Shares
1,417
Comments
351
Katharine Murphy Political editor
Tuesday 7 March 2017 07.22 AEDT Last modified on Tuesday 7 March 2017 09.19 AEDT
An independent review of the state of Australia’s environment has found the impacts of climate change are increasing and some of the changes could be irreversible.
The latest State of the Environment report, a scientific snapshot across nine areas released by the federal government every five years, says climate change is altering the structure and function of natural ecosystems in Australia, and is affecting heritage, economic activity and human wellbeing.
It warns climate change will result in “location specific vulnerabilities” and says the most severe impacts will be felt by people who are socially and economically disadvantaged.
Record high water temperatures caused “widespread coral bleaching, habitat destruction and species mortality” in the marine environment between 2011 and 2016, it says.
The minister for energy and the environment, Josh Frydenberg, was due to release the report card on Tuesday morning.
Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions are rising and forecast to miss 2030 target
Read more
In a column for Guardian Australia, Frydenberg says the report indicates the impact of changing weather patterns is being felt in the ocean, on the Great Barrier Reef and on land, affecting biodiversity and species habitat.
“While carbon emissions per capita have declined from 24.1 tonnes in 2011 to 22.2 tonnes in 2015 and energy efficiency improvements are reducing electricity demand, the report makes clear that, for the world to meet its Paris goals, there is much more to do,” Frydenberg says.
The minister says the report makes clear Australia needs to prepare for changes in the environment and “put in place a coordinated, comprehensive, well-resourced, long-term response”.
Advertisement
He warns that failure to do so “will have a direct and detrimental impact on our quality of life and leave a legacy to future generations that is inferior to the one we have inherited”.
The minister says the report presents the government with a mixed picture. “Good progress has been made in the management of the marine and Antarctic environments, natural and cultural heritage and the built environment – while pressures are building in relation to invasive species, climate change, land use and coastal protection,” he says.
Frydenberg says the doubling of Australia’s population in the past 50 years and growing urbanisation “have all combined to contribute to additional pressures on the environment”.
Australia’s heavily populated coastal areas are under pressure, as are “growth areas within urban environments, where human pressure is greatest”, the report finds.
Grazing and invasive species continue to pose a significant threat to biodiversity.
“The main pressures facing the Australian environment today are the same as in 2011: climate change, land use change, habitat fragmentation and degradation, and invasive species,” the report’s summary says. “In addition, the interactions between these and other pressures are resulting in cumulative impacts, amplifying the threats faced by the Australian environment.
“Evidence shows that some individual pressures on the environment have decreased since 2011, such as those associated with air quality, poor agricultural practices, commercial fishing, and oil and gas exploration and production in Australia’s marine environment.
“During the same time, however, other pressures have increased — for example, those associated with coal mining and the coal-seam gas industry, habitat fragmentation and degradation, invasive species, litter in our coastal and marine environments, and greater traffic volumes in our capital cities.”
Arctic sea ice could disappear even if world achieves climate target
Read more
The report criticises the lack of “an overarching national policy that establishes a clear vision for the protection and sustainable management of Australia’s environment to the year 2050”.
It points to poor collaboration, gaps in knowledge, data and monitoring and a lack of follow-though from policy to action.
“Providing for a sustainable environment both now and in the future is a national issue requiring leadership and action across all levels of government, business and the community,” it says. “The first step is recognising the importance and value of ecosystem services to our economy and society.
Advertisement
“Addressing Australia’s long-term, systemic environmental challenges requires, among other things, the development of a suite of stronger, more comprehensive and cohesive policies focused on protecting and maintaining natural capital, and ongoing improvements to current management arrangements.”
Late last year, the government established a review of its Direct Action climate policy. The current policy has been widely criticised by experts as inadequate if Australia is to meet its international emissions reduction targets under the Paris climate change agreement.
Shortly after establishing the review, Frydenberg ruled out converting the Direct Action scheme to a form of carbon trading after a brief internal revolt. Many experts argue carbon trading would allow Australia to reduce emissions consistent with Paris commitments at least cost to households and businesses.
The Direct Action review still allows for the consideration of the potential role of international carbon credits in meeting Australia’s emissions reduction targets – a practice Tony Abbott comprehensively ruled out as prime minister – and consideration of a post-2030 emissions reduction goal for Australia.
Josh Frydenberg insists Paris climate deal lives on, despite MPs’ claims
Read more
The review also requires an examination of international developments in climate change policy, which is code for an assessment of what is happening on global climate action in the event the US pulls out of the Paris climate agreement.
The New York Times reported last week that the White House was fiercely divided over Trump’s campaign promise to cancel the Paris agreement.
Its report said Trump’s senior strategist Steve Bannon wanted the US to pull out of the Paris agreement but Bannon’s stance was being resisted by the new secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, and the president’s daughter, Ivanka Trump, who are concerned about the diplomatic fallout.
The Turnbull government has already indicated that it intends to stay the course with the Paris agreement, and has argued it would take the US four years to withdraw from the deal under the terms of ratification.
But if the US withdraws from Paris, internal pressure inside the Coalition will intensify, and the prime minister will face calls from some conservatives to follow suit.
State of the Environment report: bright spots, but much more to do
Josh Frydenberg
Read more
In his column for Guardian Australia, Frydenberg says the Coalition is doing good work on the environment and the conservative parties in Australia have been responsible for establishing legislation such as the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, and programs such as the Natural Heritage Trust and the first mandatory Renewable Energy Target.
“The task now is to build on this proud Coalition tradition and to use this report to continue the good work the Turnbull government is already doing across so many areas of environmental policy,” he says.
Ben, you were bemoaning the fact that politics should not play a part in climate change discussions yet you reproduce an article from the Graudian written by that organisations POLITICAL editor…
Climate change has been occurring since the beginning of time. Is it irreversible? It has always changed and will continue to do so with or without people releasing evil carbon.
Is it reversible? Probably not. It’s different and always changing.
You litterally don’t read anything do you?
It was about climate change.
Ffs
1 Like
So when are you posting the research that supports your belief (I use this word deliberately) that fossil fuel emissions are not a major causal factor of global warming?
Considering the weight of evidence and expert opinion that opposes your belief, it had better be damn compelling.
Nice idea, but you’d never get enough hamsters.
4 Likes
This is the bit they need to point out. All the ■■■■■■■■ and moaning from the federal Liberal party when the power went down in SA. Nope, all Labor and Greens fault.
1 Like
The true cause of our problems is Layce off the Vodafone ad.
She talks about growing up with 11 brothers and sisters on the farm. I think the ad executive wants me to regard that as some romantic ideal of good wholesome living. Instead, I just think about what a ridiculous multiplication of demand for natural resources that is. And now they have all moved to the city and gotten mobile phones.
Once the kids start breeding, all efforts to survive will be futile!
1 Like
AFL chief executive Gillon McLachlan today begins a legal fight to protect his childhood home before a full-bench court in Adelaide.
Mr McLachlan’s is one of four appeals to be heard together against Tilt Renewables Australia’s 114-turbine Palmer Wind Farm.
Tilt Renewables is the best name ever for a wind turbine business. Best. Ever.
Before today’s appeal hearing, Mr McLachlan said he was “frankly heartbroken that this land will be forever marred by enormous man-made structures” that will stand 165m high along a stretch of ranges close to his pastoral property Rosebank, founded by an ancestor, George Melrose, in 1843.
“Even if it were to be conclusively established (that) wind farms do not produce health problems, it’s annoying and affects quality of life”, he has said, and would cause significant damage to the land, hinder potential tourism opportunities and “cause extreme division in the community”.
But he loves renewable energy for other people:
1 Like
Probably when someone produces irrefutable evidence of it’s existence which has not and will not occur. What we do have is modelling, guesswork and completely ignoring the temperature fluctuations that naturally occur. All done by people who’s job is to actually try and show climate change. Of course they agree - it’s their job. Don’t pretend that your belief is anything other than that.
There is plenty of evidence out there if you care to look though. There is one link below but I’m not going to bother trying to convince people that seem to genuinely want to live in fear and try and get others to do the same.
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/02/the-big-picture-65-million-years-of-temperature-swings/
Is that it? So climate change is an on-going process (no one would argue against this), therefore the current warming trend is not caused by human activity. That argument facile at best. I have much more respect for the scientific process which has arrived at a different conclusion. It would be arrogant and ignorant for me not to respect this.
And it’s not the job of climate scientists to ‘try and show climate change’. That’s nut-job conspiracy theory territory.
Well I would have thought that in order to cure something you would at least need to understand the problem in its entirety first.
Here’s The Audio Of Peta Credlin Admitting The Last Seven Years Of Politics Is Based On Total Crap
I am shook.
posted on Feb. 15, 2017, at 1:17 p.m.
Mark Di Stefano
BuzzFeed News Political Editor, Australia
Tweet
Tumblr
Please make sure you’re sitting down. You are? Okay, well, Tony Abbott’s former chief of staff Peta Credlin has let slip that one of the most damaging political campaigns in recent Australian political history was based on bullshit.
Credlin, who became a Sky News commentator after leaving politics, made her comments during the final minutes of Sky’s Sunday Agenda.
If you missed it, this is what she said:
_ Along comes a carbon tax. It wasn’t a carbon tax, as you know. It was many other things in nomenclature terms but we made it a carbon tax. We made it a fight about the hip pocket and not about the environment. That was brutal retail politics and it took Abbott about six months to cut through and when he cut through, Gillard was gone._
“It wasn’t a carbon tax, as you know.”
Okay, okay, okay. Let’s just provide some context. Australia has a complicated history in trying to do what many countries have already done – put a price on carbon emissions.
Emissions trading scheme proposals contributed to the demise of Malcolm Turnbull as opposition leader in 2009 and Kevin Rudd as prime minister in 2010. Julia Gillard finally introduced a carbon pricing scheme in 2011.
It was Tony Abbott who re-framed Gillard’s scheme as a “carbon tax”, even though after the first year the price on carbon emissions was no longer fixed, and was instead set by the market.
Abbott rode the anti-carbon tax movement all the way into The Lodge and eventually had everyone, including Labor and the media, calling it a carbon tax.
_ More than that, it was routinely described by reporters, incl on ABC, as the ‘carbon tax’. https://t.co/H4pUBO4Zu7_
_ — Peter Brent (@mumbletwits) _
The scare resonates today, with opponents of emissions trading schemes and other market-based mechanisms still playing the “carbon tax” card.
Credlin also suggested it was time for prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to apply what Abbott did on the “carbon tax” to renewables.
That is, make the current argy bargy around renewables a “consumer” issue rather than an “environmental” one.
_ Is Malcolm going to be able to take something as complex as the RET (Renewable Energy Target) and break it down and argue it and hit the hustings and smash through all of that detail to have people come with him? That will be the political test._
Oh well. So that’s that. Even though the government has been told by its own people it should consider some sort of carbon pricing scheme, it’ll never, ever consider it because the Australian people are prone to scare campaigns about carbon taxes that aren’t really carbon taxes.
Here’s The Audio Of Peta Credlin Admitting The Last Seven Years Of Politics Is Based On Total Crap
UPDATE: A week later, writing in her News Corp column, Credlin went straight back to referring to Labor’s plans to price emissions as a “carbon tax”.
UPDATE: A week later, writing in her News Corp column, Credlin went straight back to referring to Labor’s plans to price emissions as a “carbon tax”.
People noticed.
_ A week ago, Peta Credlin said Labor’s carbon tax wasn’t a carbon tax. Now she writes Shorten will bring back a carb… https://t.co/e7XiFqnAVF_
_ — James Massola (@jamesmassola) _
Labor leader Bill Shorten’s office was not amused.
_ Peta Credlin pens column about the “carbon tax coming back” a week after admitting the campaign under Abbott was a… https://t.co/2uiZFHptbN_
_ — Shorten_Suite (@Shorten_Suite)_
1 Like