Combet to "push ahead with carbon price"

Also available for cabaret appearances…

Blimey, gov, that didn’t take long – I can hardly keep up! Only a few hours ago I was wondering when the first bit of Com-bot climate nonsense would come, and here it is already!

Newly-promoted cabinet minister Greg Combet says climate change remains a tremendous environmental challenge that demands careful economic reform.

“My priorities will be to continue the government’s strong support for renewable energy, to promote greater energy efficiency in industry and households, and to work towards the introduction of a carbon price,” Mr Combet said in a statement. [Because all of those things will help to stop global warming, er, climate change. No, wait…]

“In the new parliament, climate change policy will require broad consultation and the building of consensus,” he said.

That means broad consultation with people who have already made up their minds that leads to a consensus which gives us the answer we want. Brilliant. You can’t lose!

Read it here.

Comments

  1. Same hot air with no substance.. Someone try asking them *exactly* how anything close to their targets is going to be achievable.

  2. Laurie Williams's avatar Laurie Williams says:

    Not surprising that the ex head of the fundamentally corrupt monopolistic trade union collective ALP training / financial support / coercion department who was willing to say whatever it takes to support the labour market regulation scam to maintain influence, power and cash flow is now so keen to do the same with the global warming / climate change / carbon pollution scam

  3. The Loaded Dog's avatar The Loaded Dog says:

    “My priorities will be to continue the government’s strong support for renewable energy” dribbles Combet.

    Well, it’s very interesting that Combet should speak of “renewable energy”.

    Seems we may be being deceived here as well.

    I have been following the alarmism surrounding the “Peak Oil” and its reliance on the fossil fuel theory for some years now and in doing so have noticed many eerie similarities to the alarm surrounding the theory of AGW.

    One similarity glaring in my face was as quoted from this recent article below:-

    “Scientists who dissented from the groupspeak were vilified or ignored. In the 1980s distinguished British scientist, Sir Fred Hoyle FRS was one who tried and failed to expose the chicanery of proponents of the fossil fuel theory and diminishing world oil reserves. Hoyle, without the benefit of the worldwide web tried repeatedly to expose this flimflam,”

    He said – “The suggestion that petroleum might have arisen from some transformation of squashed fish or biological detritus is surely the silliest notion to have been entertained by substantial numbers of persons over an extended period of time.”

    “The English professor valiantly argued that oil is abiogenic (i.e. from mineral deposition) and cannot be a biotic (from fossils). Yet despite his eminent stature Hoyle’s sage insight gained him no media platform.”

    And further…

    “Only in Russia, a nation that has eschewed military supremacy to become a global economic power, did Hoyle’s and Lynch’s words find a welcome community of like-minded scientists. Indeed, outside of the English-speaking world there is no controversy and its common parlance that oil is a mineral, not a biological product and as such our planet has endless untapped reserves.”

    Just as we were not previously informed of the fact that the science is NOT settled on the theory of CAGW so we are not informed of the theory of abiogenic oil, and that there is apparently sound scientific debate on this matter.

    Nothing in the western media even though it’s apparently widely accepted by Russian Scientists.

    So familiar, and it has made me personally even more sceptical. Who can we believe?

    link here:-

    http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/27414

    The above article is referenced and has numerous links, all of which are very interesting.

  4. The Loaded Dog's avatar The Loaded Dog says:

    If the above is true, and we have almost limitless supplies of mineral fuels constantly renewed deep within the earth, what are the implications for the carbon sink theory (and AGW theory as a whole) when the oil finally works its way to the earths surface?

    Interesting….