Garrett demoted, but not sacked


Kevin Rudd has barely acknowledged his environment minister’s total and utter incompetence by stripping him of responsibility for energy efficiency. But he still has a job, despite 4 deaths, numerous house fires and potentially thousands more homes with live roofs that will all need to be inspected.

The dubious pleasure of administering “energy efficiency” goes to Wongbot Version 3.5 – oh joy. Insert a fresh memory card. And the hospital pass, namely clearing up Garrett’s insulation cock-up, goes to Gullible Mug-in-Chief, Greg Combet (couldn’t have happened to a nicer bloke). Good luck with that, pal.

Read it here.

Dennis Shanahan thinks it makes Rudd’s position worse. Oh dear. How sad. Never mind.

Abbott: ‘Rudd can’t even sack a minister properly!’

Nuclear power essential for energy security


The way ahead for Australia

Nuclear power is on the agenda from both sides of politics today, as Opposition leader Tony Abbott and Victorian Labor’s former state energy minister, Theo Theophanous, highlight its importance in Australia’s future energy policy.

This comes after I nearly crashed my car listening to the deluded ramblings of NSW Greens MP John Kaye on ABC Sydney yesterday morning, who, like all enviro-moonbats, thinks we should tackle climate change by shutting down our coal fired power stations, which provide our essential baseload electricity, and instead rely on fart power and sunbeams [that’s wind and solar – Ed]. I actually sent in a scathing text along those lines to Deborah Cameron, although I didn’t get to hear whether it was read out – anybody hear it?

And of course, they cannot possibly advocate nuclear, because they are still stuck in the 1970’s “Nuclear Power – No Thanks” bumper-sticker mentality, despite the fact that if climate change is really the catastrophic problem that the Greens say it is, nuclear is the only viable option for electricity generation. If the Greens were ever in power, the lights would really go out in Australia.

So it is encouraging to hear these sentiments echoed on both sides of politics:

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says nuclear power is the “only realistic way” for Australia to cut its carbon emissions but he will not take the policy to the next election.

Speaking at the Menzies Research Centre in Canberra, the opposition leader said nuclear power was the only proven way of generating the base load power Australia needed without producing carbon pollution.

The opposition leader was responding to comments by former defence force chief Peter Cosgrove, who said nuclear power was the only practical alternative to carbon-based energy resources such as coal.

Mr Abbott said that if “the most urgent task confronting humanity is to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions” the “only realistic way to do that in ways which maintain living standards” was to move to nuclear energy.

However, he will not be taking it to the next election [why not? – Ed].

“That’s not the policy of the Liberal Party [It should be – Ed]. It will not be the policy of the Liberal Party between now and the next election.

“Nevertheless, it is a debate that this country should have.” (source)

And Labor is so dependent on the Greens that they cannot press the nuclear button (so to speak) for fear of losing preferences. However, at least one outgoing Labor energy minister has the guts to speak the truth, and the words are so similar to Abbott’s that you’d think they had worked it out together!

AUSTRALIA should debate going nuclear and Victoria should be prepared to host nuclear power stations, former state energy minister Theo Theophanous said yesterday.

In a dramatic final speech to Parliament, the retiring Labor heavyweight called on Kevin Rudd to lead a national debate on nuclear power.

Mr Theophanous said Australia could not afford to put all its eggs in the ”clean coal” basket because the ”Holy Grail” of storing carbon underground might never be viable.

”If the Prime Minister is true to his word that climate change is the moral challenge of our generation, then nuclear energy as a form of base-load power will probably have a role to play in addressing it,” he said.

”My prediction is that a mix of clean coal, renewable energy, energy conservation and nuclear power will all have a role to play in the future.” (source)

A very sensible conclusion, although he omits to acknowledge that coal (clean or otherwise) is the backbone of Australia’s energy supply. We will have to rely on it for many years to come, if we don’t want to return to the Dark Ages.

Daily Bayonet GW Hoax Weekly Roundup


Skewering the clueless

As always, a great read!

China says no to emissions cap


The best bit about the Herald’s headline is the last two words: “for now.” The most blindly optimistic words in journalism this year:

China’s top climate change negotiator says the world’s biggest carbon polluter has no intention of capping greenhouse gas emissions for the time being.

Su Wei, who led China’s negotiating team at the UN climate change talks in Copenhagen in December, said the country’s carbon emissions had to increase because the economy is still developing, the China Daily reported on Thursday.

China “could not and should not” set an upper limit on greenhouse gas emissions at the current stage, Su told a meeting on climate change policy in Beijing on Wednesday.

However, he said China was committed to making its economy more energy-efficient.

Beijing has pledged to reduce its carbon intensity – the measure of greenhouse-gas emissions per unit of gross domestic product – by 40 to 45 per cent by 2020 based on 2005 levels.

Su said that pledge would be a binding part of China’s next two five-year economic development plans.

His remarks came a day after President Hu Jintao told a high-level Communist Party meeting that China must “recognise the importance, urgency and difficulty of dealing with climate change”.

Looks like they are saying nice reassuring things to pull the wool over the UN’s eyes, but in fact carrying on exactly as before, business as usual.

Read it here.

Touché: Clive Hamilton gets taste of his own medicine


Nauseating

Uber-Green Clive Hamilton bleats on the ABC that he’s received “threatening emails“. Diddums. My heart bleeds. Maybe it makes up for calling sceptics worse than Holocaust deniers.

Go to hell, Hamilton.

UK: belief in climate change plummets


© Guardian

All change

A poll in the UK Guardian shows that belief in man-made global warming is disappearing faster than a Himalayan glacier, thanks to Climategate and daily revelations of IPCC blunders:

Public conviction about the threat of climate change has declined sharply after months of questions over the science and growing disillusionment with government action, a leading British poll has found.

The proportion of adults who believe climate change is “definitely” a reality dropped by 30% over the last year, from 44% to 31%, in the latest survey by Ipsos Mori.

Overall around nine out of 10 people questioned still appear to accept some degree of global warming. But the steep drop in those without doubts will raise fears that it will be harder to persuade the public to support actions to curb the problem, particularly higher prices for energy and other goods.

The true level of doubt is also probably underestimated because the poll only questioned 16 to 64-year-olds. People over 65 are more likely to be sceptical, the researchers [Because they have been around long enough to recognise a tax-grabbing scam when they see one – Ed].

“It’s going to be a hard sell to make people make changes to their [people’s] behaviours unless there’s something else in it for them – [such as] energy efficiency measures saving money on fuel bills,” said Edward Langley, Ipsos Mori’s head of environment research. “It’s a hard sell to tell people not to fly off for weekends away if you’re not wholly convinced by the links. Even people who are [convinced] still do it.”

Read it here.

Labor in denial as ETS fairyland fractures


Climate sense

Apologies for the lack of posts today – other commitments. But this one is a must read, from Paul Kelly in The Australian:

The Rudd government is stranded without any apparent game plan on its most important first-term policy (outside its response to the global financial crisis). It is rare for a national government to face this predicament in its first term. Labor seems unable to abandon its ETS yet unable to champion its ETS; it cannot tolerate the ignominy of policy retreat yet cannot declare it will take its beliefs to a double-dissolution election; it remains pledged to its ETS yet cannot fathom how to make its ETS the law of the land. Such uncertainties are understandable, yet they are dangerously debilitating for any government. In such a rapidly shifting policy and political climate, even fallback positions risk being rendered obsolete. As Ridout says, the way forward is not clear.

In the interim, Labor’s response is to launch a furious series of spins, diversions and alternatives. The list is long: it will make health the main election issue; it will be brave enough to seek a double dissolution on the private health insurance rebate; criticism of its $250 million tax break for the television networks was just a Murdoch media conspiracy; and Tony Abbott is off the planet whenever he attacks the government.

Beneath such drum beating is a government whose world view on climate change is in eclipse and whose domestic political assumptions about climate change have been broken.

Read it here.

Rudd government censured on climate change


A gesture only, but a symbolic one none the less:

The federal government has been censured by the Senate for failing to adequately deliver climate change programs.

The coalition and all seven cross-bench senators teamed up on Tuesday to reprimand Labor over its mismanagement of the home insulation, green loans and solar rebate schemes.

In moving the censure motion, Australian Greens leader Bob Brown said there had also been “gross and systemic failure” in the government’s renewable remote power generation program and renewable energy target.

“The use of the censure, I can assure senators, is not taken by me – after 24 years parliamentary experience – lightly at all,” he told parliament.

“However we are, as a nation, witnessing one of the most gross episodes of mishandling of the public money and the public trust in recent governments history.”

One of the very rare occasions where I agree with Bob Brown. But why is Peter “Big baldy ball-bag” Garrett still in his job, after one of the worst displays of ministerial incompetence in living memory?

Read it here.

Great Barrier Reef: alive and well


Doing OK

The UK Telegraph reports that a study has shown the health of the GBR has been markedly improved by the emissions reductions policies implemented throughout the globe which have halted climate change… er, no, wait, a strict fishing ban:

The study has raised hopes that years of decline on the world’s biggest living organism can be reversed.

Australian researchers said their findings had proved “no-take” zones set up in 2004 to prohibit fishing have had a significant benefit.

“The results are actually quite impressive. Having a higher proportion of protected areas is good for marine life, it’s good for fish and it’s good for people who rely on the reef for a living,” said Laurence McCook, the lead author of the report by the Australian Research Centre’s Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies and Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.

The study, published in the Proceedings of the US National Academy of Sciences, shows the zones have more and bigger fish, including sharks, and less damage to coral.

“That’s a very important result not only for the reef, because corals build the reef, but it’s also important for the tourism and fishing industries because fish rely on coral for their habitat,” said Mr McCook.

All good news then? Of course not. We couldn’t end without playing the “Climate Joker”:

However, he warned the reef was also facing a significant danger from climate change, which bleaches the coral and impedes its growth by raising the water’s temperature and acidity.

Phew, I was starting to worry there for a minute…

Read it here.

ETS bill "delayed until May"


So “the greatest moral challenge since the start of the universe” (© KRudd) suddenly isn’t so urgent after all. But hang on… just a couple of months ago, it was essential we passed the ETS before Copenhagen, wasn’t it? Or is it because Rudd has no principles whatsoever and his only political compass is popularity, which he slavishly follows, so that now the ETS is proving an electoral liability, he’s looking for ways to quietly abandon both it and his robotic minister, Penny Wong? Hmm.

THE future of the government’s emissions trading scheme was in disarray last night with claims that the Senate vote on the bill could be delayed until May.

The possible delay, the result of the opposition blocking a procedural vote in the Senate, has cast fresh doubt on the government’s ability to create an election trigger on its amended climate legislation.

Last night the government was seeking legal advice about whether it could force an earlier vote than the May sitting. Each side blamed the other for the delay, which resulted from the Senate’s blocking a motion yesterday to speed up the debate.

The government has already dropped the emissions trading scheme from the parliamentary schedule this week to give priority to establishing a double dissolution election trigger on its changes to the private health insurance means test.

Read it here.