- Joined
- 31 January 2007
- Posts
- 411
- Reactions
- 0
You've lost me coko, I don't see the link between WMD and Copenhagen. IMO you are drawing a long bow.
The Copenhagen Agreement - Australia to lose sovereignty?
- Thread starter Fishbulb
- Start date
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,123
- Reactions
- 16,970
The consequences of either climate change itself or the measures required to effectively combat it far exceed those which actually happened as a consequence of the WMD hoax however.
Well the changes may be more positive than negative.In that respect we will have to suck and see.
My comment about WMD'S in Iraq was a little disengenuous.It was designed to point to the level of integrity of John Howard,
This is because some on these forums do not seem have gotten over Howard's demise and conseqently call Rudd a liar and imbecile etc.
It flushed out one Rudd-hater at least.
If Bush and Howard were still in power Copenhagen would be well and truly trashed.
Like it or not Rudd has a mandate to take action on climate change.
For thousands of Iraqis the brave new world of Climate Change is moot point.
My comment about WMD'S in Iraq was a little disengenuous.It was designed to point to the level of integrity of John Howard,
This is because some on these forums do not seem have gotten over Howard's demise and conseqently call Rudd a liar and imbecile etc.
It flushed out one Rudd-hater at least.
If Bush and Howard were still in power Copenhagen would be well and truly trashed.
Like it or not Rudd has a mandate to take action on climate change.
For thousands of Iraqis the brave new world of Climate Change is moot point.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
You're quite right. Ditto Afghanistan.
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
You're right and so does Turnbull, and like most mug punters I assumed an ETS was about cutting back on pollution. But nobody told us that it was the road to "Global Management" where other countries could tell us what to do and also seek compensation because we have burned more fossil fuels than they have.
And Rudd has gladly accepted the offer of "Friend to the Chair" at Copenhagen to play an active role in bringing this about. And now Turnbull has an unholy alliance with Rudd.
Just because Copenhagen will probably be a flop, doesn't mean that Rudd and Turnbull will stop trying to sell us out. The ETS is the thin edge of the wedge.
- Joined
- 14 February 2005
- Posts
- 15,123
- Reactions
- 16,970
If you are referring to my post then I'm certainly not anti-Rudd anymore than I'm anti-Liberal. Bottom line is that at the federal level both parties make empty promises and burden the future with massive debts - all that differs is what he promises are and who is left holding the debt bag.
At the state level I generally prefer Labor, largely because the Liberals just run up debts and sell everything off. They're always running around preaching doom and gloom with no optimism for a future that doesn't involve the state going completely broke. Been there, seen that and I'd vote Green before I considered the Liberals in a state election (not that I think Labor is any good either, but at least they're not as keen on the debts and selling everything).
I maintain my original point though that the consequences for Australia of either actual climate change or attempts to combat it will almost certainly exceed anything that actually happened in Iraq in terms of its impact on Australia.
I'm thinking in economic terms, but when you really think about it, it's not impossible that carbon caps globally may ultimately lead to military war at some point down the track.
Coal is abundant and well distributed whereas cleaner natural gas, the primary coal alternative in the short term, is 70% concentrated in Russia and the Middle East. Think about that...
And now think about the consequences when every third world backwater has a working nuclear reactor...
And now think about the reality that we don't have enough uranium (much of what we're using now comes from old weapons) to use the throwaway nuclear fuel cycle to power the world. We'd have to use breeder reactors instead and recycle the fuel - sounds great until you realise we're now messing about with plutonium rather than just uranium.
Now maybe I'm being a tad over-cautious here, but I really don't think that having 3 countries, two of which have historically been problematic to the West, control a huge chunk of the world's fuel supply (gas - Russia, Iran, Qatar) is a wise move. And nor do I think it's overly wise to have plutonium widely available to anyone who owns a power station. That sounds like a recipe for trouble to me...
There's a lot more to this than a bit of CO2. Brown coal might not be too good for the atmosphere, but nobody's likely to start fighting over it and it's useless in terms of weapons (well, unless your plan is to simply throw lumps of the stuff at someone...). Plutonium has a few more hazards, as does having Iran and Russia dictating the terms globally.
Julia
In Memoriam
- Joined
- 10 May 2005
- Posts
- 16,986
- Reactions
- 1,973
Smurf, thank you for your always reasonable, informative posts.
Presently, I'm trying to resist the temptation to just bury my head in the sand to prevent abject depression setting in.
Presently, I'm trying to resist the temptation to just bury my head in the sand to prevent abject depression setting in.
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 919
- Reactions
- 174
Unbelievable. Both Parties should be thrown out...
Andrew Bolt from the Herald Sun talks to Alan Jones about the ETS vote and emails exposing the dubious science behind climate change.
http://www.2gb.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=5268
Andrew Bolt from the Herald Sun talks to Alan Jones about the ETS vote and emails exposing the dubious science behind climate change.
http://www.2gb.com.au/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=5268
What a great interview between Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt. Only if Alan Jones could get our fearless leader on air. What an interview that would be!
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
Even if Kevin Rudd goes to Copenhagen with the ETS and CPRS under his belt it boggles the mind to think that he would agree to anything that would endanger our coal industry. Australia's economic survival is dependant on our coal exports which earn $50 billion annually.
In a country which manufactures practically nothing and where all our electronic goods, white goods, motor vehicles,clothing, etc are imported; without the export earnings of coal we would be reduced to third world status.
And yet coal (along with other fossil fuels), as far as Copenhagen is concerned is the main enemy. It is not our enemy - it is our saviour.
And we will retrain the 130,000 people in the coal and power industries to erect wind turbines and solar panels and install pink bats. Of course we will have to import these things first. And pigs might fly.
In a country which manufactures practically nothing and where all our electronic goods, white goods, motor vehicles,clothing, etc are imported; without the export earnings of coal we would be reduced to third world status.
And yet coal (along with other fossil fuels), as far as Copenhagen is concerned is the main enemy. It is not our enemy - it is our saviour.
And we will retrain the 130,000 people in the coal and power industries to erect wind turbines and solar panels and install pink bats. Of course we will have to import these things first. And pigs might fly.
Calliope, as Rupert Murdock said, "Rudd is more interested in ruling the world than taking care of the Australian interests". He rarely missus an opportunity to attend world conferences in an endeavour to become a populace amongst world leaders. He is hoping they will fall for his spin and BS to finish up as UN Secretary General.
- Joined
- 10 July 2004
- Posts
- 2,913
- Reactions
- 3
- Joined
- 23 September 2008
- Posts
- 919
- Reactions
- 174
Calliope, there's a bigger agenda unfolding and the Copenhagen Treaty is the bridge to achieve it. Hence the reason why Rudd and Obama are now aggressively mandating a ETS/Cap and Trade schemes be signed in as law as quickly as possible.
Lord Monckton interviewed by Alex Jones on the latest developments... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z1Qhm6YRdJE&feature=player_embedded
This is going to get a whole lot more interesting over the coming weeks.
So_Cynical
The Contrarian Averager
- Joined
- 31 August 2007
- Posts
- 7,464
- Reactions
- 1,464
The coal industry has had 15 years to do something about its negative exposure to GHG's, instead they chose to go down the denial road which has now lead them to this dead end....maybe they should sue Howard and Co for leading them on this journey of denial and stupidity.
Now before every jumps up and down with the usually bollocks...im talking about OFFSETS, the coal industry could have been collectively putting say a lousy 50 mill a year into forestry offsets (tax deductible) for the last 15 years and now be in a substantially better GHG position.
And they didn't do it partially because that would have sent a message of inevitability, acceptance and responsibility, a bit like JH setting up an asbestos victims fund before it was forced to.
Ato
Ato is credit to team
- Joined
- 4 July 2009
- Posts
- 157
- Reactions
- 0
Sorry, I dont have time to go through all the info out there. What's the bigger agenda?
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
Our coal exports are stepping up every year and under Labor Governments. Queensland would be a basket case without coal exports We can't deliver it to our coal loading ports fast enough for the bulk carriers lining up to take it away. Have you been to Newcastle lately? What have OFFSETS got to do with this? This coal is being exported to burn overseas.
Greg Combet is Ms Wong's offsider. This is what he said recently;
Any puny efforts taken by Rudd, Wong and Combet to reduce carbon emissions by the CPRS or OFFSETS would be a drop in the ocean compared to what we export to be burnt overseas. Of course if we want to give up most of our imports including a lot of foodstuffs, we could stop, as Bob Brown and Greenpeace advocate.
So_Cynical
The Contrarian Averager
- Joined
- 31 August 2007
- Posts
- 7,464
- Reactions
- 1,464
Calliope have u heard of coal seem gas?...its basically methane and that's the nastiest GHG by volume...digging and transport coal = release of Methane = a great need of offsets to cover the emissions....assuming u want to carry on business as usual.
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
Well Cynical it's no use complaining to me about it on this thread. You should take the matter up with the man most involved in digging up and exporting coal. It's Greg Combet, the Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Minister Assisting Penny Wong. He is also the member for Charlton in the Hunter coal regions.
If anyone can capture the nasty methane gas he can. But I doubt he can do this before Copenhagen.
- Joined
- 2 July 2008
- Posts
- 7,102
- Reactions
- 6
Mr Rudd heads for Washington with the endorsement of the Commonwealth Heads of State, for his ETS, CPRS and Copenhagen plans, ringing in his ears and accompanied with accolades which he modestly accepts. They even agreed to his request that the venue for the next meeting be moved from Sri Lanka to Australia.
It seems ironic that most of these countries, being minor polluters, could get behind the leader of a country, which is the world's greatest exporter of carbon pollution, on the Copenhagen issue.
However if you look at it in a different light, these are the countries which stand to gain the most of the billions in compensation, which will have to be paid by the rich polluting countries, if Copenhagen is a goer.
It seems ironic that most of these countries, being minor polluters, could get behind the leader of a country, which is the world's greatest exporter of carbon pollution, on the Copenhagen issue.
However if you look at it in a different light, these are the countries which stand to gain the most of the billions in compensation, which will have to be paid by the rich polluting countries, if Copenhagen is a goer.
Similar threads
