Rudd "begs" to get ETS through


How pathetic can you get? The proper response, of course, is “Get of your knees and clear out of here. The ETS is a crock of sh*t, and you know it.” Let’s hope that’s what the Opposition will tell him.

Mr Rudd tried to keep the ETS alive during a news conference in Hobart on Thursday following a meeting of the Council of Australian Governments.

“I’d appeal to all politicians in the Australian Parliament, in the upper house; this is serious stuff for the nation in the 21st century,” he told reporters. [No it isn't, it's bad law based on bad science. It needs to be chucked in the dumpster - Ed]

“Our job is to try and punch this through … we’re going to give it a damn good go.”

Jolly good, old chap, you punch away, for all the good it will do you.

Read it here.

Coalition report on ETS: it's a crock


But we all knew that anyway. It will damage the economy and do nothing for the climate (even if CO2 drives climate, which it almost certainly doesn’t). Maybe Krudd & Co should tax the sun instead to encourage it to reduce its output of harmful radiation (heat and light)!

The analysis, prepared by David Pearce from the Centre for International Economics, warns that the Government has failed to adequately assess the level of environmental benefits the CPRS will achieve for its cost, its ability to deal with uncertainty and whether it explicitly accounts for international developments.

Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change Greg Combet effectively conceded yesterday that the Government will have to deal with the Coalition to pass the CPRS.

He said the Greens had “made themselves irrelevant” with demands that amounted to “lunacy”.

Mr Robb said the CIE report “clearly establishes that the design of the Government’s proposed emissions trading scheme needs to be reconsidered and compared empirically with alternatives.

“For the Government to have ignored the impact of the global financial crisis beggars belief,” he said.

“The costs over the next 20 years of lost competitiveness and lost jobs must be established, along with the likely impact, or not, on CO2 emissions.”

But the Opposition have still got it wrong at the core. They should not be questioning just the effect of the ETS on the economy, they should be questioning the whole purpose of the ETS at all. The science on climate change is not settled, despite what Rudd, Wong, Combet, Gore and Obama say, and there is no evidence, either from recent past or geological times, that CO2 is a driver of temperature. Tinkering with a harmless trace gas will do nothing, and the Opposition should have the guts to say that. Spend money on adaptation, not control.

Read it here.

Emerson peeks out of the closet, then goes back in again


As Andrew Bolt reports:

Days after being challenged here to come out of the closet, Craig Emerson peeks out:

FEDERAL Small Business Minister Craig Emerson has split from Kevin Rudd and ministerial colleagues by declaring science is undecided on key aspects of the global warming debate.

Dr Emerson yesterday became the first minister in the Rudd Government to cast doubt on the assertion that scientific evidence was conclusive for a catastrophic meltdown of the polar icecaps if global warming was not curtailed.

He said he would like to see scientists settle the question of what would happen to sea-level rises and the polar icecaps as a result of climate change.

Sadly, Emerson embarrasses himself – and will once day blush at his timidity – by still hiding behind this deceitful evasion:

“The science is in that we are experiencing climate change and we need to act to deal with it,” Dr Emerson told The Australian.

Give it time. Being sceptical will soon be the new cool.

Read it here.

New Australian temperature record set – for cold


Weatherzone reports that Charlotte Pass in NSW recorded the lowest ever April temperature:

This is the lowest temperature recorded anywhere in Australia in April and is 13 below the average. Nearby at Perisher it dipped to minus 11 degrees and at the top of Thredbo it dipped to minus 10.

Across the border, on the Victorian Alps April records were broken at Mt Hotham where it chilled to minus eight degrees and Mt Buller and Falls Creek where it got as low as minus seven.

Global warming sure is a bitch.

Read it here.

Photo of Wilkins Ice Shelf used 13 months after it was taken


In the same story in The Australian, it transpires that a photo of the Wilkins Ice Shelf, taken 13 months ago and used widely to spread alarm about climate change, has been used again last month to, er…, spread alarm about climate change.

British newspaper The Observer this month published prominently a story with a photograph of breaks in the Wilkins shelf.

“A huge ice shelf in the Antarctic is in the last stages of collapse and could break up within days in the latest sign of how global warming is thought to be changing the face of the planet,” the story began.

In March last year, US news agency msn published the same photograph with a similar story that began: “A vast ice shelf hanging on by a thin strip looks to be the next chunk to break off from the Antarctic Peninsula, the latest sign of global warming’s impact on Earth’s southernmost continent.” The photograph was published by numerous other outlets, including The Australian.

A spokeswoman for the British Antarctic Survey said the photograph in both stories was taken in March last year.

Nationals Senate leader and climate hero Barnaby Joyce is rightly hopping mad:

Nationals Senate leader Barnaby Joyce said the misuse of the photograph and the similar story lines 13 months apart reflected how the Wilkins ice shelf break-up was being recycled annually to fuel global warming concerns.

Senator Joyce said Mr Garrett’s entry into the debate demonstrated how it was being hijacked by misinformation.

“We are on the edge of a possible pandemic that could cause untold misery and people are running around tilting at windmills,” he said.

Read it here.

Government at war with Greens (and themselves)


The government, increasingly desperate to keep the ETS going, has launched an attack on the Greens for adopting an “unrealistic” emissions stance, and at the same time, Penny Wong and Peter Garrett are squaring up for handbags at ten paces about sea level rises.

To the Greens first, who have been spanked down by Greg Combet for their emissions reduction proposals:

“The Greens currently are arguing for a 40 per cent cut in emissions by 2020,” he said.

“That’s like taking the back of the axe to the economy potential in the absence of a wider international agreement. [Economy potential?? - Ed]

“They need to get towards a far more realistic position.”

But on the other hand, the government’s proposal, assuming CO2 were involved in climate change (which it isn’t), would make not a kangaroo’s fart of difference, Australia contributing only 1.5% to global emissions. The line they are treading here is about a micron thick…

On to Wong and Garrett, who are slugging it out about sea level rises due to melting of the Antarctic (last time I checked, Antarctic ice was way above average, but I’m splitting hairs…):

Federal government sources said Climate Change Minister Penny Wong was disappointed with the way her ministerial colleague, Peter Garrett, weighed into the debate about global warming [surely "climate change" - Ed], claiming sea levels could rise by 6m as a result of melting in Antarctica. Senator Wong yesterday pointedly refused to indicate whether she supported Mr Garrett’s view.

“The impacts of climate change are being seen in many ways, from sea level rise through to extreme weather events,” Senator Wong said yesterday. [Wrong on both counts, Penny - Ed]

“Climate change is a clear and present danger to our world that demands immediate attention.” [Adaptation, maybe. Attention? No - Ed]

Senator Wong declined to nominate potential levels to which seas could rise.

Why so coy, Penny? Debate’s over – science is settled. Let’s have the figure please.

Read it here and here.

Clinton: the new King Canute


Just as King Canute tried to stop the tide coming in (and failed miserably), so the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton will try to “tackle climate change”, and likewise, they will fail miserably. The only difference being that this time, it will cost billions of people trillions of dollars, and probably cost millions of lives in developing countries.

”Climate change is a clear and present danger to our world that demands immediate attention,” she said.

”It is a threat that is global in scope but local and national in impact.

”We know climate change threatens lives and livelihoods. Desertification and rising sea levels generate increased competition for food, water and resources. [Show me the rising sea levels and desertification, please - Ed]

”But we also have seen the dangers that these trends pose to the stability of societies and governments. We see how this can breed conflict, unrest and forced migration.

So no issue we face today has broader, long-term consequences, or greater potential, to alter the world for future generations.

Climate changes, that’s what it does. Trying to stop it is nonsensical. Adaptation is the key. But you can’t expect governments to pass up the opportunity to tax people out of existence, can you?

Read it here.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 8,731 other followers

%d bloggers like this: