Aside from heavy job losses and economic meltdown, there would be much to lose environmentally by Australia scaling back mining, minerals processing or heavy industry through overly punitive measures.
Shortfalls in production would be made up quickly by rapidly industrialising nations and rival raw material exporters.
Global production and consumption of Australia's largest export, coal, for example, is increasing. Any fall off in production would be replaced by coal extracted in such nations as Indonesia, Colombia, South Africa and Russia -- often less cleanly than in Queensland.
Giving the planet the benefit of the doubt will require a far more sophisticated, global approach than the asinine "cut Australian emissions by 40 per cent" mantra chanted by Greens leader Bob Brown, who has dealt himself out of the rational debate.
I have no intention of joining an in depth debate on climate change.....I'll leave that to all you folks who relish a good argument!
One thing I note though, is that Rudd has been pointing to certain extreme weather events recently and claiming they're proof of man made global warming...e.g. the dust storm across Eastern Australia back in September, the recent heatwave, the heatwave and associated bushfires in Victoria earlier this year.
I wonder if Kev will have anything to say about the cold snap currently gripping Europe and the USA (with some US centres setting new records.)
Will the silly bastard come out and tell us this is proof of man made global cooling?
Of course not....it doesn't suit him to think that way so he'll keep his mouth closed and say nothing. This Rudd character is shaping up to be the biggest joke Australia has ever had for a Prime Minister.
http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2004/05mar_arctic.htmthe cold snap currently gripping Europe and the USA (with some US centres setting new records.)
March 5, 2004: Global warming could plunge North America and Western Europe into a deep freeze, possibly within only a few decades.
The view from orbit clearly shows a long-term decline in the "perennial" Arctic sea ice (the part that remains frozen during the warm summer months). According to a 2002 paper by Josefino Comiso, a climate scientist at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center, this year-round ice has been retreating since the beginning of the satellite record in 1978 at an average rate of 9% per decade. Studies looking at more recent data peg the rate at 14% per decade, suggesting that the decline of Arctic sea ice is accelerating.
I'm sure we can all remember anecdotal instances like this. What I remember is the opposite, i.e. as a kid in NZ I was always into summer clothes in October. Now it's pretty much winter clothing all year round in Christchurch barring the occasional warmish day.Personally I think the ski fields are getting warmer because I can't ski for as long as I used to when I was a kid.
Cosmic rays and chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), both already implicated in depleting the Earth’s ozone layer, are also responsible for changes in the global climate, a University of Waterloo scientist reports in a new peer-reviewed paper.
In his paper, Qing-Bin Lu, a professor of physics and astronomy, shows how CFCs – compounds once widely used as refrigerants – and cosmic rays – energy particles originating in outer space – are mostly to blame for climate change, rather than carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
The present hypothesis, according to the IPCC, was for specific warming in the first 2-3 decades of this century.If cooling does occur then this will break the present hypothesis.
The present hypothesis, according to the IPCC, was for specific warming in the first 2-3 decades of this century.
It has been falsified.
ALP + Greens + Xenophon are still short of a senate majority. Fielding (the gift to the nation from the Victorian ALP) obviously would never contemplate anything remotely (shudder) 'Green'. Ditto the Nationals, although funnier things have happened. What if a National senator come to the conclusion that global warming is a threat to his/her constituency?...
Does anyone think there's any chance of the government negotiating with the Greens re the ETS being re-presented in February? How do the numbers stack up if the Greens and Labor came to an agreement and the Coalition continued to vote against it?
It seems like an impossible alliance philosophically.
Don't forget the NOx. They don't mention the NOx.I won't pull apart the article all together but his main point of modern efficient coal power stations maybe true in Queensland but doesn't hold up in Victoria's case.
Our powerstations are very old, very inefficient and also burn brown coal which is also very inefficient. They are probably the most inefficient large generators in the world.
It's a bit of a complex issue, a few comments as follows:I won't pull apart the article all together but his main point of modern efficient coal power stations maybe true in Queensland but doesn't hold up in Victoria's case.
Our powerstations are very old, very inefficient and also burn brown coal which is also very inefficient. They are probably the most inefficient large generators in the world.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?