A petition to stop Australia being involved in the Copenhagen Global Warming aggreement
ONLINE PETITION > Senator Barnaby Joyce > Media Releases<o:p></o:p>
Printable View
A petition to stop Australia being involved in the Copenhagen Global Warming aggreement
ONLINE PETITION > Senator Barnaby Joyce > Media Releases<o:p></o:p>
Have to agree with that. :2tsup:
If you don't believe in global warming, good for you. But it won't alter the fact that exists, and something needs to be done to slow it down or reverse it. What do you suggest?
My beef isn't global warming, it's Dudd and his rush and he won't talk about the costs that we will have to incur, which ulitimately has to push the CPI up and thus interest rates.
To fight an illness- it costs money
To fight a recession - it costs money
To fight poverty - it costs money
To fight climate change - it costs money
To fix these global issues it costs money, we can argue forever about who will should have to shoulder that burden (China, US, Europe etc). In the end though, if we want to fight climate change, at least for the short term, the end result is it's going to cost us all money. If not through direct means like taxes, then indirectly via costs of goods and services (most of which we get supplied from outside Aus).
I don't want to pay more money (already I'll be paying off my home until I retire), but I am also prepared to face the reality of the situation, which ever side of government it comes from.
That's cos we had a late start cos nothing was done before. And the cost? We get to pay either way. At least if we do something we get something out of it in the end. Before the polluters got to make a mess without any recompense. We just had to turn a blind eye. A small price to pay for them getting rich I guess. But now we find its not just a mess that we get to live with, its changing everything and we don't get to turn a blind eye no matter how much we want to. Barnaby Joice is the Dudd.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldo
:2tsup::2tsup::2tsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by tea lady
Nice one Anne-Maria,
Cheers,
Jim
A couple of thousand years ago the polar cap came down to Berlin and except for a few ups and downs it's been getting smaller ever since. Why is CO2 now the problem now? We have had ice ages come and go in the past was it dinosaus farting to much last time?
I don't know if CO2 is causing a problem now; but we have a nuclear lobby saying it is, oil companies saying it isn't, Brokers wanting to make a killing trading carbon credits saying it is,greenies wanting to save trees saying it is. None of these really care about global warming just there pet projects. So what is the general public that knows bugga all supposed to think? What ever the media tell them as usual.
To reduce CO2 maybe we should support Gunns and chop all the trees down chip them make paper etc them bury it in land fill what a great carbon sink.
Most of the world has moved on from these purile anti global warming arguements. We should be discussing what can be done, rather than kicking against it like that serial drongo Joyce and his side kick Nick Minchin.
China amongst others is actually investing huge amounts into alternative power, in the end the world will start to tackle this properly and we will be left at the wharf and those who got in early, developed the technologies and marketed them will do very well. We will again pretend to be the clever country while we buy in what we have to as we get our house in order.
FWIW the avarage Aussie produces five times as much CO2 as the average Chinese.
so is there going to be masses of extra plant growth with all the extra CO2 in the atmosphere?
That depends on the rate we reduce our forests and on the amount of rainfall available to promote growth. The dryness we are experiencing is also effecting Asia, and reducing agricultural output there. Dont tell Queensland or NSW at the moment, their feet are far to wet at the moment to believe you.
Yes, but it won't be as nourishing and you'll have to eat all day to get enough nutriants.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gingermick
The only ones bleating about it being bad for the economy are the ones trying to sell coal fired electricity and oil.:rolleyes: If we use less power they won't make as much money. They can't work out how to make money from a more economical society.
BJ or KR, you're still putting your trust in a politician
On the head, Tea Lady :2tsup:
Sign it or dont sign it. either way neither you or I could do so with any certainty or not.
But if signing some pissy politicians petition makes you feel that you have done your part then sign away.
REMEMBER THE MOST DESTRUCTIVE SPECIES ON THIS PLANET IS HOMOSAPIAN!
MANS WANTS HAVE FAR OUT WAYED HIS NEEDS!
surely with higher temperatures we would get more evaporation, thus more precipitation. Wont do me much good as I require more proteins and fats and get sugar highs from carbs.
What really gets me is that the current boom we are experiencing (albeit with the credit crisis) is being driven by coal and iron ore. and iron ore needs good quality coal to coke. Our present lifestyle, our comfort, is off the back of carbon based resources. The herd, for example, cancelled a concert in Sarina for some ludicrous reason about not wanting to support coal mining, but they wouldn't have had the opportunity to do what they do without it.
I used to believe the talk, but questioning the dogma now is akin to questioning McCarthy in America in 1955.:)
Global warming is a myth , even the pollies and the ultra greenies dont use the term anymore, they now say " climate change" , so before you blindly follow rudd's grand plan for this new tax at least look at the facts
This preposed ETS will cost you more to go to work
Will cost you more every time you turn on any electrical device
Will cost more for every slice of bread you eat
Will not reduce co2 emmisions by 0.01%
and will proberly reduce the standard of living for your children
No one in their right mind is against reducing pollution in any form and this ETS will not reduce any form of pollution, Rudd is trying to push a new tax on australia weeks before the copenhagen convention why , is it so this small man can appear big on the world stage ,
One last thing before the pro lobby gets into me does anyone here fully understand this new tax , how it will be collected , implemented or even how it will be spent :?
I don't think even the pollies have thoroughly thought it through that far. Yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ashore
My main concern is that if implemented they'll issue "free permits" to what they class as essential industries, as was done in the EU ETS.
There, the power industries got these "free permits," made record-breaking profits and still raised the prices of power to keep them "in line with what people are paying elsewhere." :~
Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that our crop of pollies will learn from someone else's mistakes, no matter how obvious in hindsight.
You can call it what ever you like - or even argue that it does/doesn't exist but
As a farmer, if the lack of rain, seemingly higher temps are climate change and this is going to continue at this rate then in 30 years Australia will be too hot & dry to live in.
Were the changes on farms to continue at this rate for the next 10 years Ballarat (once regarded as one of the wettest places in Vic will have no town water. You can blame the pollies for not building dams but when you have a dam in every major waterway and they are about 9% full what will more dams do. If you cant get enough rain to fill the ones you have why build more. So to go from a annual 36+ inch rainfall to about 12 to 15 in ten years, in another 10 years we will be desert.
So lets hope that it is weather patterns or climate cycles because if it is climate change, global warming or anything else happening at this rate then we are stuffed and whatever you do/change it will make not one bit of difference.
BTW i bet all these costs/charges etc all have a tax component so how serious are they really - just more revenue for a greedy pack of pollies.
Cheers
i hadn't heard of these "free permits" If so why does Europe import wood pellets from the US to feed in 10% with coal to make what they clasify as low carbon electricity. They just ignore the energy to make the pellets and to cart them across the atlantic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skew ChiDAMN!!
I maybe a sceptic but I believe most politicians only concern is to get re-elected.
Well said and the heart of the matter. I remember some interviews with Barnaby Joyce in the early days where he calmly stated that he would at the maximum see two terms in office as the effect of Canberra was corrupting and he didnt want to end up just another piece of apparatchik. Well guess whats happened. This is just a ploy to keep the votes coming. At least he doesnt have the nauseating self righteous pseudo christian posturing of St Steve Fielding.Quote:
I maybe a sceptic but I believe most politicians only concern is to get re-elected
Most concerning is that these poor gullible people are being fed by the American Republican right. We cant even have our own debate here in Australia, we import their vitriole, tactically and intellectually. There is only one place where the debate rages in such a black and white manner and that is America. But then what can you say of a country where 20% believe evolution is a hoax. For an insight into the tactics watch Sarahs Palin's speeches on healthcare reform. Misleading and innaccurate statements are deliberate. But the climate of insularity it creates ensures a loyal voter base. Very clever really.
Its actually too late to do anything about climate change. Adaption is what is called for now. We may bitch about it here because we have to move but the real affect will be to the people of the Hindus and particularly countries like Bangladesh. As the Himalayas dry up there will be boat people on a scale that not even 1000 John Howards will be able to deal with.
If I know bugger all about something that's important then I generally tear myself away from my mobile phone or my X-box and get clued up by doing a bit of reading and making use of the internet (its not all and spam).Quote:
Originally Posted by glenn k
Clued up people are empowered people.
The debate will rage for years to come. Whether people are responsible for what is happening is one debate, and we may never know the answer to that. My thought is that we may be responsible and therefore we should do whatever is possible to at least slow down our rates of pollution.
The second debate concerns the need to sign and adhere to such things as the Tokyo Protocol and the Copenhagen Agreement. This debate should be very concerning for all of us. One side of that debate is very disconcerting and deals with the possibility of ceding sovereign rights to some amorphous unelected body.
What ever your views on these issues I think that Brnaby Joyce's partition is foolish simply because of its narrow focus and the rather clever play with human nature. I fear many will sign this without any real knowledge or informed opinion.
In terms of squandering our resources it is interesting to note the lack of effective action by politicians of all persuasions on both sides of the pacific.
Take Australia. I read where researchers had developed a superior road sealant to asphalt- tar if you like. This was made from sugar cane. Whatever happened to this? Another example is the process developed at UQ ( I think I remember this correctly ) whereby twice as much energy could be extracted from coal than is presently the case. This would halve the amount of coal used to generate electricity. Has the Government backed this with extra funds and made its application an urgent priority? You know the answer.
Remember when John Howard talked about Australia developing our own alcohol technology? Didn't happen, probably won't happen. There was no need to reinvent the wheel in any case. Brasil has developed this technology and Australia could have simply purchased it from them to fast track its implementation.
Sao Palo in Brasil has decreased air pollution by some 20%-25% over the last 25 years due to the use of fuel alcohol. All new cars sold here must be what they call "Flex" i.e they must be able to run on petrol, alcohol, or gas. They do, and they do it well. The air in Brazilian cities is certainly nicer to breathe
in the 22 years I have been coming back and forth.
Why isn't more emphasis given to solar energy for heating water and producing electricity? All over Turkey, Greece and Spain tis is the case and there are no government subsidies. In Spain certain aspects of solar energy are simply compulsory.
Whatever is done there will be a cost. So why not just get in and do it?
A can if worms this one :UQuote:
Whatever is done there will be a cost. So why not just get in and do it?
But well said, much of what you say in reference to govts is true. Big business etc is governed by self interest. Some thing the Labour Party has alway insisted on as being a bankable commodity :U
Reminds me of the storey about Tesla who came up with polyphase power ie AC. JP Morgan who was financing his endeavours at the time argued it was a goldmine, when Tesla suggested it could be made free to everyone on the planet.
The bottom line is that vested interest wants control and no competition.
Global warming/climate change is a scam.
I love how the socialists have rebranded themselves "progressive" in a pathetic attempt to kid themselves they are less pig ignorant than the conservatives.
Go ahead and vote up your ets. It'll help not at all and I won't be paying the bills that arise from it.
If you happen to be on reticulated gas have a look at this :
Ceramic Fuel Cells Limited :: BlueGen
Fight pollution, don't be sucked in by the mentalists...
I am unconvinced either way because neither side can be trusted. One thing I am sure of is that global warming/climate change is a great excuse to get money and control/power.
As a last post to this I want to add:
It's undeniable that with the CTS it will cost us at the hip pocket and all businesses will get stung unless they are running off cow dung to generate their power consumption.
Every operational aspect of my day to day running will increase.
And I'll be passing those costs onto my clients, as will every other business - so everything you currently buy or services you pay for will cost more, so living will cost you more - and I doubt that your income will rise accordingly.
Looks like dear old Barnaby has been out in the sun to long again.
The thing is what if? Can we afford to put our heads in the sand and risk sunburnt bums, we should take climate change seriously, stop talking and arguing and take actions.
At the very least if the sceptics are right we should be using our resources sparingly, to go on using resources at the rate we are doing now we won't have to worry, things will take care of them selves as we will have used up all the resources we have.
Then again if climate change is real, with more CO2 in the air the trees may grow quicker and that means mote wood.:)
The "what if" argument has been put many times. It doesn't hold water. What your actually suggesting is imposing a signifignat tax on everyone in the developed world just in case carbon emissions are driving us toward catastrophic climate change. You could apply the same logic to meteor strikes and say everyone should live underground.
If you make a study of the data, as opposed to the models, human driven climate change is not certain.
None of what's been in the media is proper science. There are tremendous vested interests on both sides, and as I've said before a PhD is no garantee of intelligence let alone moral fibre. I know 100's of PhD's, had to work with them for many years. There are some who are smart and who I spend time with voluntarily, but these are the minority.
I find it astounding that people are so willing to impose additional hardship on others barely getting by. Double my electricity bill, no problem I'm financially comfortable. I am well aware however that there are single income families, people on minimum wage etc barely getting by now. Double their energy costs ? I want to be convinced before I support that. What if doesn't cut it, not even close.
It is doubtful that the ETS will make enough of a difference to carbon levels let alone climate change. It will put $ in the pockets of a lot of the same people who brought on the credit collapse and subsequent worldwide recession. Have a good long look at the backgrounds of the people prominent in the pro-ets camp.
While your at it take a good long look at the enviroment movement. They are a mix of thieves and self gratifying morons. Mentalists, not enviromentalists. The first type are out to line thier pockets at anyone's expense that they can manage to con, the latter sit around sipping their late's in their inner city slums complaining about what everyone else is doing, and offering no sensible solutions.
It bewilders me that these people who claim to love nature for the most part not only live as far from it as they can but assume people like me who voluntarily live in the bush want to clear fell everything in sight. I recall well surprising a "greenie" friend years ago. He'd been to a talk by some self righteous moron about how "green" his new house was. I looked over the flyer and pointed out I do 80% of what was on it and among my neighbours we'd account for all of it. 2 key differences, we do it as much because it's cheap as enviromental, and we don't feel compelled to launch a lecture tour to tell everyone how great we are.
If the government are so hell bent on reducing pollution there are plenty of carrot approaches, rather than this universal stick. Ask you federal member why the photovoltaic rebate was killed off then reinstated in it's current form, ask them why they aren't pushing heat pump water heaters ? ask them why bluegen isn't on the rebate list ? (no personal interest just think it's a good idea). There are plenty of ways the government could encourage rollout of lower pollution solution at very low cost to the taxpayer like teh bulk buying schemes that died immediately after the pollies had had their photo ops. Instead we get a tax that's filtered through yet another bureaucracy and the finance industry.
Understand I'm all for reducing pollution.
One more thing before I stop my rant. Data drives models, not the other way round. You don't alter data to fit your model.
:aro-u: 100% :whs: :2tsup:
Ihave no idea if CO2 is causing these problems but I totally agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waldo
I'm sorry for the venemous rant yesterday. I get a bit out of control on this and similar issues. I'm politically middle of the road and rail against extremists on either side.
The reason I get so cranky is this is a social justice issue for me. As I mentioned I am constantly bewildered at how readily people will put being heard and getting their way ahead of the real needs of the vulnerable people in society. Some of you will remember the Hawke Keeting government in the early 80's destroying the textile industry in Australia. For the sake of economic rationalisn I saw hundreds or people, mostly women from the poorest backgrounds thrown out of thier minimum wage jobs with little hope for alternative employment. This sort of thing happens again and again, for the sake of idealogies and egos.
Self confessed cranky old man :)
Using economic levers like the ETS do have some merit providing they are linked to programs that actually bring about change. You actually need to provide the direction, some solutions and a time frame and then use a lever like an ETS as a prod to get things moving. On its own an ETS may do little, and dry conditions and CO2 warnings seem to be giving sellers of water and power the opportunity to push up costs without doing much to reduce the problem.
We are possibly the worlds worst polluter per capita, producing twice as much CO2 as the Europeans, five times the Chinese and marginally more than the North Americans.
Some of that can be put down to our coal fired generators and some to poor (inefficient) house design. Our heavy industry is in decline and we are cutting back on land clearing so in some ways reductions are occuring.
We do need to protect those on low incomes, solar hot water and double glazing should probably be standard and rather than hoping it will happen the government needs to do more in building standards and retrofitting old homes. That especially means helping those on lower incomes to make changes that reduce their costs and power needs.
If we can bring down the cost of LED globes and ban appliances that consume power on standby we could probably knock a minimum of 25% off home power bills. Solar hotwater, reduction of drafts in homes, and better understanding of where heat is lost would bring further savings.
There is a lot that could be done without huge cost, but in the end someone is going to have to make the decission to bring an end to our dirtiest coal fired generators, and do more about alternatives.
Instead we bring on line a desal plant that uses massive amounts of power from generators that use massive amounts of water to produce that power. Wouldn't capturing urban runoff to feed our parks, and gardens along with rainwater tanks have been worth considering. We would use more of what we currently waste and reduce CO2 emmissions at the same time.
We remain locked into the silliness of pretending we need not do anything, but why should the rest of the world bother when the dirtiest users of CO2 choose to do so little. If a supposedly well off country with one of the worlds most solid economies can sit on its hands where is the obligation on anyone else to get moving.
Im with Tea lady all the way, if she is ever my way she is welcome to drop in for a cuppa and,if given warning, Ill make a batch of scones. This issue dragged on in the other forum, it is a two sided fight and has turned into something other than climate. My advice to all is drop it, its never solved as it has politics jammed in the mix. Anyway Australia has no choice, we can be in, and fight on the inside, or out and be dictated to. In the scheme of things, Australia lives by selling to other countries, if we start giving them the rude finger they aint gonna buy from us.
And to see rrobor reasons look here
Emission Trading - Renovate Forums
and read the 475 posts that got nowere , people have mindset on this new tax and no one will change their views
or if you disagree with the ETS you can sign the petition from hugie's first post but lets not go another 475 posts of bias
.
Yes because their political/business masters told them to.. If everyone jumps over a cliff do we do it as well???Quote:
Originally Posted by johnc
Many years ago everyone thought the world was flat... Even today billions of people believe in an entity where there is absolutely no proof of it's existence other then handed down legend..
People for the most part are not rational nor logical and generally believe whatever they are told to believe..
He hasn't done two terms yet has he???Quote:
Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56
Senate terms are eight years, not four..That is why only half the senate gets voted out/in every federal election...
Statistics prove nothing, and you have manipulated them to make a point...Quote:
Originally Posted by johnc
Why didn't you say we produce something like 3% of the worlds CO2??
Why didn't you say we are the fifth or sixth largest country with an extremely small population??
How much of the worlds food do we produce??
How much of the worlds coal do we produce??
How much of the worlds iron ore do we produce??
:no:
Because the first two are nonsense (its about 1.4 to 1.5% if you believe the Libs and Nats, and we make up something like .3% of the worlds population), and the last three may well make interesting statistics if you provided some figures but do not bear directly on the question. All of mans endevours have some bearing on resource use, and various emissions, but whats your point. We don't as far as I know include exported coal or iron in our CO2 calculations just the stuff we use. What bearing does food have in the calculations?. Quite frankly if thats about all you can manage why bother posting inuendo without rational support.Quote:
Originally Posted by .RC.
I have noted some earlier posts on the fact that this has been done to death in the renovation forum, and see little point in adding fuel beyond this post. It is a shame this topic can't be a discussion on what is and is not drawn in and what various proposals will do rather than people getting all fired up and posting meritless accusations.
Oh dear, this is why this debate never goes anywhere (Dont take it personally Damian, I read your apology but want to make another point). There is a undercurrent of violent agreement about the need to reduce resource wastage and therefore cost. What is skewing perceptions is the very successful wedge politics being waged to neutralise the need for calm rational action. It is divide and conquer. The longer we argue about caracatures of various positions in this debate (left / right, green / industrialist etc) the less real action needs to be taken and the better chance of us re-electing the same stooges (no matter what party they claim to represent) who got us into this mess in the first place. Their lackies are the media who spew that same wedge vitriol to ensure their personal ratings dont slip. The best way to eff their whole game is to actually talk to each other and see that we have the same agendas. I think the way the debate is conducted is more damaging than the climate change itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by damian
As a business owner and employer I know that there will be more to pay for years of mismanagement by governments of all flavours, and it will pass through the whole economy. And my staff want more money, and my kid needs tutoring if he is going to get through school, the car is 5 years old and is starting to need work. Ive got the effin chinese breathing down my back undercutting me on jobs that arent even worth a grand. If we are going to get rid of anything lets get rid of the WTO and all of the free trade areas and agreements, oops my rant...
The best environmental work in Aus at the moment (IMO) is coming from the Uni of NSW. Leaders in Cogeneration, Solar panel technologies, etc. Their website is worth looking at to see what solutions are being proposed. See also the World business council for sustainable development World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD) check out who is in it and what they are trying to do.
Finally, Australia's ETS has nothing to do with the Copenhagen Conference. The conference is an attempt to get a world wide agreement to limit the amount of carbon going into the air. Any decision taken must be implemented by the governments of the countries of the world. An ETS is only one way of doing this and fits with the current free market philosophy that the "L" parties subscribe to. There are lots of other ways of incentivising economies to reduce carbon consumption. The "L"'s are too lazy/scared to publicly canvas the rest. I thought Turnball's suggestion of a straight carbon tax was one of the better ones but it only got a very limited airing. The government has been trying to push the legislation through before Copenhagen to give it some negotiating leverage as Australia is such a small player. But it has never had the numbers in the Senate, it aint gonna happen.
I would make a terrible pollie, Id tell the lot to eff of and then go down to the shed and ruin some nice timber.