Resisting Climate Hysteria

Julia said:

But my point was that many people who do not need this assistance have taken up these offers, thus pushing up electricity prices for those who do need the help that they are not getting.

People on low incomes often are renters so obviously they're not in a position to take advantage of this great offer.

I just think it's a very unfair distribution of taxpayer dollars, and from what I understand, to an end which has a dubious cost/benefit result.

It's also irritating for those who paid for their own solar systems long before the subsidies were offered.

Click to expand...

Totally agreed with all of that. It wasn't a good use of taxpayer funds that is for sure. Neither, in my opinion, was the $900 handout and most of the "stimulus" measures which, at best, returned poor value for money (and sent much of the money straight overseas anyway).

As I said though, if someone's willing to give me an inverter, 6 panels, mounting system and electrical components AND they're willing to do all the work to install it, all at no cost to me, then you can hardly blame me (or anyone else) for taking up the offer.

drsmith said:

I can't take advantage of it cost effectively because I'm on 3-phase power.

Western Power's approved list of 3-phase inverters are all around 10kw.

Click to expand...

1. Do you actually need to have 3 phase?

2. From a technical perspective, there's no real problem connecting a single phase inverter to a three phase supply (just about every house is connected to a 3 phase supply out in the street, it's just that one phase is wired to your switchboard since that's sufficient for most homes) as long as the metering is able to cope. And of course most of your appliances are also single phase.

Western Power may not have suitable meters available for connecting an inverter in this manner however. They could do it if they really wanted to...

I was advised by Western Power that a single phase inverter could not be used with 3-phase power.

Smurf1976 said:

1. Do you actually need to have 3 phase?

2. From a technical perspective, there's no real problem connecting a single phase inverter to a three phase supply (just about every house is connected to a 3 phase supply out in the street, it's just that one phase is wired to your switchboard since that's sufficient for most homes) as long as the metering is able to cope. And of course most of your appliances are also single phase.

Click to expand...

A couple of the solar panel companies I contacted don't think it's a problem, so perhaps this is what they had in mind.

Smurf1976 said:

Western Power may not have suitable meters available for connecting an inverter in this manner however. They could do it if they really wanted to...

Click to expand...

That could be the case too.

It would appear from the article in the Australian Newspaper, Cancun Mexico
may finish up worse than Copenhagen. Let's hope Combet brings back the message to Julia Gillard to scrape the carbon tax once and for all.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...e-of-a-bad-movie/story-e6frg6zo-1225964133849

I am beginning to believe this whole episode of Global Warming Alarmists throughout the World is fading with every conference they have, becoming less significant in light of recent happennings.
With lots of rain right down the Eastern Coast of Australia and into South Australia. Rains, Tim Flannery said would never happen when he predicted Melbourne, Sydney and Brisbane would be without water by 2010, so he persuaded all the state Labor Governments to spend $Billions on useless desal plants.
The authorities should lock this bloke up and throw away thr key.
To add insult to injury, Great Brittain and Europe are experiencing record snowfalls. All caused by 'Global Warming' of course. LOL

http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermai...scare_turns_into_a_greater_joke/#commentsmore

OK Bandicoot, here's your chance. I think the 2nd article Noco linked to shows that Andrew Bolt either doesn't understand or chooses to ignore that the scientific understanding of global warming predicts colder winters on the northern continents. How do you research the science? What opinion, if any, do you reach about the freezing conditions in Scotland? What conclusions, if any, do you form about Andrew Bolt's reliability as a source on the science of climate change?

Cheers,

Ghoti

ghotib said:

...that the scientific understanding of global warming predicts colder winters on the northern continents.

Click to expand...

Well the alarmists can't really lose there now can they? If it's warm it's because of AGW. If it's cold it's because of AGW.

The fact is that though not usual, this sort of weather has always happened from time to time.

What game do you think "alarmists" are playing Wayne? Let's just pretend that the "alarmist" explanation for the growing number of weird weather events is correct, i.e. that they are early examples of how climate change is fast destroying human land, food, and water resources. Do you seriously think "they" see that as a win????

There's an old story about an experienced traveller who realised that the bloke in the seat beside him was terrified. The experienced traveller kindly tried to help the other guy relax and by explaining how he travelled for his work and he knew how safe flying is. "So, what do you do for a living?" The other guy managed to still his chattering teeth for long enough to reply: "I'm a pilot".

Nobody is flying the planet, but the people who have seriously studied its behaviour for decades are sounding emergency alarms that the partying passengers have pushed it outside safe flying parameters. There are no winners if the plane crashes.

Some regions of the world are experiencing record cold. At the same time others are experiencing record heat. The planet as a whole is warmer than at any time in human history.

Ghoti

ghotib said:

OK Bandicoot, here's your chance. I think the 2nd article Noco linked to shows that Andrew Bolt either doesn't understand or chooses to ignore that the scientific understanding of global warming predicts colder winters on the northern continents. How do you research the science? What opinion, if any, do you reach about the freezing conditions in Scotland? What conclusions, if any, do you form about Andrew Bolt's reliability as a source on the science of climate change?

Cheers,

Ghoti

Click to expand...

you know my opinion, that is climate is always changing and mans impact is minimal at best....i'm not on here trying to convert anyone one way or the other...if you want more new info on the subject... google it... thats what i do!

bandicoot76 said:

you know my opinion, that is climate is always changing and mans impact is minimal at best....i'm not on here trying to convert anyone one way or the other...if you want more new info on the subject... google it... thats what i do!

Click to expand...

My mistake. I thought you meant you continue googling and try to keep up with new information. I didn't realise you think there's no new information because you stopped looking 5 years ago.

Yesterday I googled "warm Arctic cool continents". I chose that search term because I've been reading about northern hemisphere winters for some time and the phrase has become a common label for the kind of conditions we're seeing up there now. It refers to the effect of the warmer Arctic Ocean and reduced Arctic sea ice on the behaviour of the atmosphere. The top Google results are mostly from sites about climate, though Wunderground, a weather site, turns up on the first page. The pages talk about large scale effects and large scale weather patterns and how the conditions in different regions are related.

Then I googled "record cold winters". Most of these results refer to the last northern winter, which is fair enough considering how early we are in the current one. They include general news items about the cold in a particular town or region, a WattsUpWithThat post collecting cold records from a number of places in the US, and a Skeptical Science article that describes the "Warm Arctic Cold Continents" pattern without using that expression. Apart from the Sceptical Science article, I didn't see any attempt to explain the temperatures or to relate conditions in different parts of the world.

You asserted that climate scientists are a bunch of self-serving twats who fudged the data and made stuff up. Even if that's true, they might still have hit on a valid explanation for the changing climate by accident so it's still necessary to show where the scientific explanation is wrong and to provide a different but still coherent set of mechanisms for the climate.

AFAIK anthropogenic global warming is the only explanation that includes all the phenomena being observed AND and the science on which most of modern western life is based. That doesn't mean it's complete or that there are no uncertainties, but then real scientists don't claim that. I've shown you an example of how I did the research that persuades me that climate science is solidly based and incidentally that climate scientists as a group are neither self-serving nor dishonest. Now I'm asking you to demonstrate how you did the research behind your opinion.

Thanks,

Ghoti

ghotib said:

OK Bandicoot, here's your chance. I think the 2nd article Noco linked to shows that Andrew Bolt either doesn't understand or chooses to ignore that the scientific understanding of global warming predicts colder winters on the northern continents. How do you research the science? What opinion, if any, do you reach about the freezing conditions in Scotland? What conclusions, if any, do you form about Andrew Bolt's reliability as a source on the science of climate change?

Cheers,

Ghoti

Click to expand...

ghotib, whether its extreme temperatures, extreme cold, drought, excess rainfail, flood or fire the 'ALARMIST' will blame Global Warming (aka climate change). I believe in Climate Change but I do not believe it is man made.

I am unaware of which era you have lived, but it would appear you may still have been in liquid form when I was in uinform. My memories of these extreme conditions go back to the 1930's and nothing has changed in 2000 and beyond. These so called experts who say they can predict what our conditions will be in 2100 can't even predict what our weather will be in 6 months. As I mentioned before, Tim Flannery, who a lot of politicians placed confidence in to proceed with desal 'WHITE ELEPHANTS', could not predict 3 years ahead.

I worked on sheep stations in South Western Queensland in the late 40's and earlt 50's for 3 years. I have been cut off by floods for two weeks at a time. I have witnessd the soil without a blade of grass for sheep to graze and plagues of locusts so thick that blotted out the sun. I've been through horrific storms in Brisbane with hail stones as big as cricket balls and iron ripped from roofs like a giant can opener.

I recall a report in the 40's where the Thames River in London was frozen. Extreme winter conditions was one of Hitler's down fall in the second world war.

Mark my words the Cancun Mexican conference will be glazed over as a success without any agreed resolution. Kyoto will die of natural death in 2012.

So ghotib, I don't need so called scientist to ram down my throat what extreme weather conditions can be like as I've been through it all before and no doubt even before these so called experts were born. Nothing has changed and nothing will. All it needs is plenty of commonsense and memories of the past to understand the future.

Noco,
I've been there and done that too, since the 30s. I've seen natures ravages of drought and floods. I've seen the sandstorms and the smoke from days of bustfires.
I've also seen the pollution caused by human occupation that ADDS to natures cycles. Could be the straw that breaks the camels back. I've watched as the air quality deteriotes. I've seen clean rivers get to a stage where the fish prefer to be out of the water than in it. I've watched as lung disease and asthma from man made pollution increase faster than the decrease from tobacco smoking reduction.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that man has made a difference and has within their power to reverse some of their effect on the enviroment. To not accept that is the same as saying you wont stop speeding on the roads because "it is not MY speeding that kills"

ghotib said:

What game do you think "alarmists" are playing Wayne? Let's just pretend that the "alarmist" explanation for the growing number of weird weather events is correct, i.e. that they are early examples of how climate change is fast destroying human land, food, and water resources. Do you seriously think "they" see that as a win????

Click to expand...

Apparently so. Such is the tone of the Climategate emails. The game they are playing is both financial and political.

The planet as a whole is warmer than at any time in human history.

Ghoti

Click to expand...

Ahem.... even some of the most strident alarmists are recognising the existence of the medieval warm period. It is probable that that period was warmer than now.

But the GISS data you are referring to has been challenged - DYOR

It's official. Climate change is man made.

The Bureau of Meteorology says so.

Across South Australia a background temperature rise since 1950 of about 1 °C to 1.5 °C has been observed. Background warming is expected to be even higher in coming years as an ongoing consequence of man made climate change.

Click to expand...

http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/sa/media_releases_sa_extreme_heat_20091208.shtml

nioka said:

Noco,
I've been there and done that too, since the 30s. I've seen natures ravages of drought and floods. I've seen the sandstorms and the smoke from days of bustfires.
I've also seen the pollution caused by human occupation that ADDS to natures cycles. Could be the straw that breaks the camels back. I've watched as the air quality deteriotes. I've seen clean rivers get to a stage where the fish prefer to be out of the water than in it. I've watched as lung disease and asthma from man made pollution increase faster than the decrease from tobacco smoking reduction.
There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that man has made a difference and has within their power to reverse some of their effect on the enviroment. To not accept that is the same as saying you wont stop speeding on the roads because "it is not MY speeding that kills"

Click to expand...

nioka, I could not agree with you more when it comes to large cities around the world like Bangkok, Manila, Beijing, Davao and many more where pollution from vehicles and some industry is horrific and affects the people who live in those cities. They can be controlled as many cities like Singapore and Hongkong have done.

My objection is relevant to the claims that Climate change is man made, which more and more people are becoming scepital about the theory presented by these so called scientist such as Tim Flannery. We now have just about every dam on the East coast of Australia overflowing. I read in one of the papers this week where in most cases there is enough water stored for 5 years and another 5 years storage has gone to waste. What if these so called politicians had built more bloody dams in the past 10 years instead of wasting $billions on desal plants.

drsmith said:

It's official. Climate change is man made.

The Bureau of Meteorology says so.


http://www.bom.gov.au/announcements/media_releases/sa/media_releases_sa_extreme_heat_20091208.shtml

Click to expand...

I assume that's tongue in cheek, Dr Smith?...

BOM doesn't always get it right as we have been reminded this week. We were all booked in to have some work done at our place which requires two consecutive days of fine weather. Forecasts were for rain all this week. The job was postponed and then the sun came out to stay...

noco said:

What if these so called politicians had built more bloody dams in the past 10 years instead of wasting $billions on desal plants.

Click to expand...

I'm with you on this I'm a dam person in more ways than one. A damn dam CHANGES the enviroment for the better in most cases.

nioka said:

I'm with you on this I'm a dam person in more ways than one. A damn dam CHANGES the enviroment for the better in most cases.

Click to expand...

The availability of water in a reliable manner from a dam can be worked out using mathematical analysis and meteorological data.

Essentially, it comes down to (1) flow into the dam (2) storage capacity of the dam. Once those two are known, the former from long term records, it's not overly difficult to work out the "firm" (reliable) annual yield and also the gross yield (not reliable but a higher figure).

We've been doing this stuff in Tassie for literally a century now and the export of such knowledge (along with hard engineering aspects of dam construction and design etc) is actually quite a significant business employing hundreds at Entura. It's certainly not impossible to work this sort of thing out for any potential dam site anywhere, provided that the meteorological records are available.

There's certainly plenty of others around the world looking at building large dams. For example:
http://www.entura.com.au/system/fil...lectric_feasibility_studies_Consult-23166.pdf

And looking at renewable energy closer to home, here's an example of how wind, solar and battery storage can substantially replace an existing diesel-only system (note however that it is not a complete replacement, the diesels still have to run, just at far lower output than would otherwise be the case).http://www.hydro.com.au/system/files/documents/King_Island_Renewable_Energy_PK_2008.pdf

sails said:

I assume that's tongue in cheek, Dr Smith?...

Click to expand...

U assume correct.

I just find it amusing that a government organisation supposedly independent of politics has got itself, well, caught up in the politics.

The Fallacy of Decomposition is something that is not addressed in this whole climate debate.

Lets tax everybody, that should solve it!!!!!!

Rubbish, lies and bull**** tape.