UN forecasts huge rise in costs of emissions reduction


You won’t have seen this anywhere in the Australian media, of course, but the UN Framework Commission on Climate Change has just revised its estimates of the cost of emissions reductions, upwards by 170%. Hands up who thinks this won’t be the last upward revision?

The report, to be presented at the December 1-12 conference in Poznan, Poland updates 2007 estimates that said investment to mitigate carbon emissions had to be ramped up in the coming years, reaching between 200-210 billion dollars annually in 2030.

It cited “higher projected capital costs,” especially in the energy sector, to introduce solar panels and fuel cells that had yet to become competitive with fossil fuels.

There was also the potential bill for implementing carbon storage, a technology that is still at the pilot stage, said the report.

Nothing in this should surprise anyone, of course. What does surprise us is the fact that this comes from the UN itself…

Read it here.

Australian media bias exposed


The Australian comments on the blatant pro-warming bias in our media, in particular the Fairfax publications (The Age and Sydney Morning Herald) and our national broadcaster, the ABC.

In May last year, The Sydney Morning Herald breathlessly reported that climate change had reduced the Southern Ocean’s ability to soak up carbon dioxide, claiming that as a result global warming would accelerate even faster than previously thought.

The story was picked up and repeated in a number of different journals around the region.

But this week the CSIRO suggested the exact opposite. “The new study suggests that Southern Ocean currents, and therefore the Southern Ocean’s ability to soak up carbon dioxide, have not changed in recent decades,” it said. This time the story got no coverage in the SMH, and was run on the ABC’s website as evidence the Southern Ocean was adapting to climate change.

No surprise there. We’ve always known the ABC, like the BBC in the UK, has made up its mind on “climate change” and has an editorial agenda that fits that conclusion.

ABC board member Keith Windschuttle said yesterday the national broadcaster was in breach of its charter to provide a diversity of views. “The ABC and the Fairfax press rarely provide an opportunity for global warming sceptics to put their view,” Mr Windschuttle said. “The science is not settled.

“We are seeing an increasing number of people with impeccable scientific backgrounds questioning part or whole of the story. I don’t believe the ABC has been reflecting the genuine diversity of the debate. Under its own act, the ABC is required to produce a diversity of views.”

Read it here.

Daily Bayonet – GW Hoax Weekly Round-up


The Daily Bayonet’s author is laid up in bed, so Skeptics Global Warming have kindly produced this week’s Hoax Round-up.

Climate madness from Rudd & Wong


That’s right, they just carry on regardless, brushing the observations and the science aside in their pointless quest to “tackle climate change” whilst at the same time committing economic suicide. Krudd and Co are preparing to release the white paper on Australia’s ETS, or, if you wish to use the government’s name for it (complete with two errors in four words), the Carbon* Pollution† Reduction Scheme…

The global financial situation has heightened the importance of providing business certainty on the scheme,” Senator Wong said in a statement.

The economy is already weakened, and the ETS will only make it worse. She just stops short of using the dreaded “D” word about the Opposition, however:

Opposition calls to delay carbon trading were undermining business certainty and were out of step with community attitudes.

“The opposition is looking for any excuse to delay action on climate change, but Australians understand that the longer we wait, the more it will cost us,” Senator Wong said.

Once such “excuse” possibly being the fact that it will make not one iota of difference to global climate even if CO2 is a driver of temperature, which, given present cooling trends, is looking less and less likely.

Pure climate madness.

Read it here.

* Carbon Dioxide ain’t Carbon
For the last time, it’s NOT POLLUTION

Bravo New Zealand


Krudd and his cronies in our blinkered government could learn a great deal from our neighbours across the ditch. The greenie hordes are up in arms because the new centre-right government of John Key in New Zealand has dared to open up a debate on “global warming”:

The government has also suggested a possible review of the science behind climate change, a move that has outraged environmental groups, who say New Zealand’s reputation will be damaged if the concept of global warming is questioned.

Have you ever heard such unadulterated nonsense in a single sentence? Did I read that correctly? A possible review has “outraged environmental groups”? Sorry, is this science we’re talking about, or the dogma of religion? Perish the thought that the divine words of the IPCC, as spoken through the prophet Al Gore, should ever be questioned. Quick, throw another heretic on the fire.

As for their reputation being damaged, in my book, it’s quite the reverse. Bravo New Zealand.

Read it here.

Carbon Sense – Time to review ETS


From Viv Forbes at Carbon Sense:

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on the Queensland Government to follow the lead of New Zealand and initiate a complete review of the science and the cost-benefits of the proposals to levy a new tax on coal and petrol usage.

“All over the world, three factors are triggering a revolt against the lemming-like rush led by the Anglo-Saxons to commit carbon suicide via Emissions Trading Schemes.”

“Firstly, the science behind the scare forecasts from IPCC computer models has been shown to be deficient by a growing band of independent scientists.

“Secondly, the globe itself is sending a warning as daily reports of unseasonal frosts, snow and ice make a mockery of the global warming hysteria. We certainly have climate change, but it is natural global cooling, not man-made global warming.

“Thirdly, the world financial collapse has forced alert politicians to focus on the immediate concerns of voters – real jobs, and the security of supply for food and power.

“The revolt against new carbon rationing and taxes affecting New Zealand now encompasses much of the world including India, China, Indonesia, Brazil, Poland, Italy, Germany and the whole Ex-Soviet bloc. There is naturally no support for carbon rationing from the OPEC world, and falling support from Canada. There is also scant chance that the US Congress and Senate will embrace any expensive new Kyoto pact.

“Soon the only true believers will be the blinkered political and Green zealots in UK and Australia, with cynical support from nuclear-powered France.

“Queensland has more to lose from carbon taxes and rationing than any other place in the world. And there has been no unbiased assessment of the costs and benefits of such moves. Any government honestly representing the real long term interests of the carbon capital will lead the push to review where we are headed, why and at what cost?”

The Australian – climate madness again


The old Maldives story rehashed for the umpteenth time by The Australian (see here and here). It starts off with the usual scaremongering nonsense:

AMONG the many grim predictions of climate change experts, the future fate of The Maldives stands out as a genuine doomsday scenario, with the island chain nation facing nothing short of extinction.

A 1m rise in sea level would almost totally submerge the country’s 1,192 coral islands scattered off the southern tip of India. Experts predict a rise of at least 18cm is likely by the end of the century.

Oh, please. I thought we’d moved on from this. Sea levels have been rising at 1-2 mm per year since the last Ice Age, so 18cm in a century is bang on target (which, by the way, has nothing to do with “global warming” or that evil trace gas CO2). Some experts go even further, such as Nils-Axel Morner, former head of the department of paleogeophysics and geodynamics at Stockholm University, quoted in The Australian just two weeks ago:

Our research data does not lend support to any such flooding scenario, however. On the contrary, we find no signs of any ongoing sea-level rise. Our results comes from visits to numerous islands … and includes coring, levelling, sampling and carbon dating.

Present sea level was reached about 4500BC. In the past 4000 years, sea level oscillated around the present. In the past decade, there are no signs of any rise in sea level. Hence, we are able to free the islands from the condemnation to become flooded in the 21st century.

And none of this mentions the possibility of tectonic movement of the land itself downwards…

Read it here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,860 other followers

%d bloggers like this: