The Most Important Vote Since Federation?

“The vote that Senators deliver on August 13, and again later should the bill be defeated and resubmitted, is the biggest decision that they will make in their political careers. For the passage or not of this bill will determine the fate of the Australian economy, and the standard of living of average Australians, for decades to come.”  Bob Carter

Quadrant Online ETS Forum, edited by Professor Bob Carter, is now online.

Forum participants: James Allan, David Archibald, Bob Carter, Ian Castles, Sinclair Davidson, Terry Dwyer, David Evans, Ray Evans, Viv Forbes, John Izzard, William Kininmonth, Jennifer Marohasy, Des Moore, Alan Moran, Joanne Nova, Ian Plimer, Alex Robson (some essays will be posted over the coming days).

Michael Connor, Quadrant, Sydney

25 Responses to The Most Important Vote Since Federation?

  1. dhmo August 9, 2009 at 7:34 am #

    We are to be cured of a disease that we are not sure will result in a fever. At the moment the snake oil men are saying look you are a bit hotter the end is nigh. Have a bit of this medicine it won’t cost much at first!

  2. spangled drongo August 9, 2009 at 8:31 am #

    “Have a bit of this medicine it won’t cost much at first!”

    It also doesn’t cure the disease and leads to voluntary euthanasia in the medium term

  3. Ron Pike August 9, 2009 at 1:53 pm #

    This is the most bureaucratic building, idioligically driven and destructive legislation ever introduced into the Australian Parliament.
    Rudd and Wong should be condemned in the pages of history and Malcolm Turnbull pilloried for his failure to oppose this nonsence.

  4. SJT August 9, 2009 at 2:37 pm #

    “The matter is, or should be, one of simple cost:benefit analysis, though you would never know that from the hysterical nonsense that is propagated about global warming by green propaganda organisations and their media sycophants – with ABC, SBS and the Fairfax press leading the charge.”

    Carter, what happened to your calm, reasoned rational self? Getting a little hysterical, are we?

  5. janama August 9, 2009 at 3:25 pm #

    Carter, what happened to your calm, reasoned rational self? Getting a little hysterical, are we?

    no, just extremely frustrated with doofheads like you!

  6. SJT August 9, 2009 at 3:27 pm #

    He’s sounding slightly alarmist.

  7. dhmo August 9, 2009 at 5:04 pm #

    I recently revisited the ABC’s handling of the GGWS. They did not address the content TJ went and interviewed Durkin. So in the 16th century TJ as an agent of the ABC would have pursued Galileo Galilei for his lack of consensus. The content of an argument is not important it is only belief.

    So Bob Carter is just assessing the reality of the enemy of reason the media!

  8. Pirate Pete August 9, 2009 at 5:13 pm #

    I did some rough calculations a couple of days ago.

    Australian per capita emissions stand at 26 tonnes per person per year. So for my partner and I, emissions are 52 tonnes per year.

    For a reduction of 15%, means we need to reduce our emissions by 8 tonnes.

    If we abandon both cars, that will reduce emissions by about 3.5 tonnes. Where can we find the remaining 4.5 tonnes? No hot water, off with the TV, off with the fridge and the beer fridge. Off with the freezer.

    But the problem is that we have one of these energy meters, which shows that even if we switch everything off, we cannot reduce our emissions by 8 tonnes.

    So, Kevin, and Penny, how can we achieve the reductions that you are proposing under the ETS? Kevin will have to reduce the cap at a pretty fast rate to achieve his reductions by 2020, only 11 years away.

  9. dhmo August 9, 2009 at 5:47 pm #

    Pirate Pete if we assume the alarmists are correct on their reasoning we need about 40% reduction. Now that is not our personal emissions that is emissions of the nation. So we must include exports as well. Somali is well ahead of us on this so perhaps we should adopt their lifestyle! The leverage we have is 1.4% so 40% of 1.4% that is 0.56% less globally. The rest of the world is increasing rapidly. For instance China duplicates our entire output every 6 months. Given this I doubt our efforts would be noticed a pity about that.

    Resistance is really futile emissions will continue to rise no matter how much we wring our hands or do a chicken little impression.

  10. Jeremy c August 9, 2009 at 7:02 pm #

    Pirate Petey,

    A few questions.

    Have you actually sat down and broken down your energy budget into where your energy goes, how you use it etc?

    For example:

    How do you organise your water heating, i.e. do you have well insulated storage? Have you thought about solar hot water working with instant gas hot water with no pilot light. I only ask because heating a big user of energy.

    Then your fridge. How well insulated is it? Is it placed in an area subject to a lot of heat so it has to work harder? Perhaps the same with your freezer. Why can’t we get in Australia the super insulated, super efficient fridges made in Turkey?

    How well insulated is your house? Does it make good use of natural light and ventilation?

    Moving on, what about A.C? When are we going to get solar apsorption cycle Air Con?

    Basically matey, you can let your own wilful ignorance condemn you to a life style of no beer etc while I’ll have as much beer, aircon, hot water as I want but on a fraction of the carbon budget you are so proud of now.

    Your post is just further evidence of how much deniers dislike new ways of doing things, new technology and the opportunities presented by change.

  11. PatrickB August 9, 2009 at 7:25 pm #

    “with ABC, SBS and the Fairfax press leading the charge”

    Yes dear Bob appears to have blown a gasket. But remember he is probably writing to the Quadrant house style. That would be foaming at the mouth, hysterical right wing rants. It’s also popular at he IPA and at Wilson Tuckey’s place.

  12. dhmo August 9, 2009 at 9:06 pm #

    Jeremy you did not comprehend what pirate pete was commenting on since you got nowhere answering it. Patrick it would seem has never actually read Quadrant. So you guys peddling you crappy belief system get of your prayer mats and tell us how much money you are paid for this rubbish. In the meantime please explain away this lot.

    Climate Revolt: World’s Largest Science Group ‘Startled’ By Outpouring of Scientists Rejecting Man-Made Climate Fears! Clamor for Editor to Be Removed! – July 29, 2009

    American Physical Society to review its current climate statement after a group of 54 prominent physicists petitioned APS revise – May 1, 2009

    American Physical Society editor conceded a “considerable presence” of scientific skeptics exists – 2008

    Polish National Academy of Science ‘published a document skeptical of man-made global warming’ – April 2008

    Climate Fears RIP…for 30 years!? – Global Warming could stop ‘for up to 30 years! Warming ‘On Hold?…’Could go into hiding for decades,’ peer-reviewed study finds – – March 2, 2009

    Peer-Reviewed Study Rocks Climate Debate! ‘Nature not man responsible for recent global warming…little or none of late 20th century warming and cooling can be attributed to humans’ – July 23, 2009

    Peer-Reviewed Study Demonstrates Anthropogenic Contribution to Global Warming Overestimated, Solar Contribution Underestimated – Geophysical Research Letters- March 3, 2009

    March 2009 U. S. Senate Report: ‘More Than 700 International Scientists Dissenting Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims’

    Earth’s ‘Fever’ Breaks! Global temperatures ‘have plunged .74°F since Gore released An Inconvenient Truth’ – July 5, 2009

    India Issued a report challenging global warming fears – 2008

  13. PatrickB August 9, 2009 at 9:37 pm #

    “Patrick it would seem has never actually read Quadrant.”

    No and I’d suggest you stop too, before it’s too late!!. BTW you do know they got rather badly hoaxed last year when they published a fake article on the basis that it strongly (some more savvy editors may have said suspiciously) agreed with their bias. It appears this is a more important criterion for publication as opposed to, oh let’s see … checking that it is in fact accurate?
    I’ll play your other game as well, could you explain away all the articles that support action on AGW? You can? Brilliant, then we’ll meet and compare notes over a Campari and soda, very civilsed.

  14. jennifer August 9, 2009 at 9:37 pm #

    Jeremy C
    According to the best professional advice I would have to get three trees cut down before solar could work at my place – two are huge pines (perhaps 50 metres tall with massive trunks) sequesting a lot of carbon – how might I calculate the net carbon cost to benefit in terms of switching to solar heating versus carbon sequestration in the trunks?

  15. SJT August 9, 2009 at 10:10 pm #

    The carbon is contained in the wood, it is only released when the wood decays or is burned. New trees can be planted, and the solar heating will keep on producing renewable heat for many years.

  16. Jeremy C August 9, 2009 at 10:33 pm #


    Thankyou, I didn’t know sunlight could be blocked.

    I also didn’t know that you and Pirate Petey shared the same trees from a north facing roof.

  17. jennifer August 9, 2009 at 10:45 pm #

    So are you telling me that it is OK to cut down the trees – in terms of carbon accounting? Cinders and others in the forestry industry have been trying to use your arguement for some time but I understand unsuccessfully.

    Jeremy C,
    My trees are due west of my home – but massive. I have observed, and it has been explained to me, that they shade the roof for most of the day and thus solar won’t work.
    The trees do keep the house cool in summer. I wonder what percentage of homes are in my situation – unable to switch to solar because of large trees?

  18. had enough August 9, 2009 at 11:34 pm #

    If the water is going to be up to the steps of the OPERA HOUSE by 20015 caused by globel warming, according to brainwashed ,self appointed, ill tell you how to live your life police, idiots,. then that gives us six years to measure the water rising. I SUGGEST that we [the senseble people )forget about any CARBON TAXES what this government, is trying to con,us into to. a tax what will complety wipe out the honest workers othis country. The same workers, who cannot avoid paying, tax , Not like THE DUDD(kevin rudd) and his top shelf mates, who hardly know what the word, tax ment.What we should do is wait ONE YEAR before any thouhgt of carbon trading ripp off takes place,AND MEASURE THE HIEGHT OF THE WATER AT THE OPERA HOUSE NOW…AND IN ONE YEAR FROM NOW MEASURE IT AGAIN. THEY the brain washed, cannot say they cannot take, this measurement, for any reason what so ever.IF we only have SIX YEARS to wait for the world to end as we know it has to be easely, measured if the water level is rising that fast . SO PLEASE YOU!!! BRAINWASHED!!!! !!!BRAIN DEAD!!! SELF APPOINTED, ILL TELL YOU HOW TO LIVE YOUR LIFE POLICE !!! WHAT EXCUSE WILL YOU USE NOW .I eagerly await your PATHECTIC ANSWER…. when the water level is still the same .

  19. Jeremy C August 9, 2009 at 11:35 pm #


    So, with you talking about trees (not to trees as the Spike Milligan song puts it) does it mean that you agree with the technology based, evidence-led, practical solutions I put to Pirate Petey?

    And don’t worry about those pesky trees of yours. They are likely to be got rid of if the ideologues exploiting the over 170 deaths in the Victorian bushfires get their way.

  20. had enough August 10, 2009 at 12:19 am #

    after reading some off the blogs on this site ,you cant help but wonder where this country is heading.when the people ,running this country are complety blind to the facts ..thuths.
    i sincerly hope that when these people finally destroy peoples lives in the name of GREED power and complete STUPIDITY,hopefully, that they one day that they are dragged, screaming,and kicking…so they can deservedly pay the piper.we must never allow these clowns to get away with there lies.

  21. dhmo August 10, 2009 at 6:43 am #

    Jennifer I have a very large protected tree to the North of my house. JC did not answer PP question. PP said if he switchs everything of then the aim is not reached. The continual argument about our houses is a nonsense. That is not where the power is used. Look here

    “Victoria’s Portland Aluminium smelter, for example, consumes around 25 per cent of the State’s electricity, at a taxpayer subsidised price, in order to preserve approximately 2000 jobs in the Southwest. A time involving Hell and pigs performing unnatural activities might have to occur before the State or Federal Government will admit that this smelter might have to be sacrificed for the greater good.”

    Transport, heavy industry, large buildings that is where it is used. Only someone who has no idea of reality puts cells on their roof and buys ES lights.

  22. Phillip Bratby August 10, 2009 at 7:03 am #

    If anyone wants to know how to cut their energy use, or where to get it from in the future, I suggest looking at ‘Sustainable Energy – without the hot air’ by David MacKay, downloadable at or purchasable on paper, if you don’t mind chopping down a tree. It’s really applicable to the UK, but the numbers (very round) do apply elsewhere.

  23. Jeremy C August 10, 2009 at 8:58 am #


    You make a good point about the aluminium smelter. However, you seem a bit confused about the difference between solar thermal and solar PV.

  24. Jimmock August 10, 2009 at 1:05 pm #

    Jeremy C: “Basically matey, you can let your own wilful ignorance condemn you to a life style of no beer etc while I’ll have as much beer, aircon, hot water as I want but on a fraction of the carbon budget you are so proud of now.”

    Isn’t it an irony though that your average greenie prefers smoking organic material to drinking beer, and has little use for hot water? If the feral beanie fits, Jeremy….

  25. dhmo August 10, 2009 at 2:01 pm #

    “However, you seem a bit confused about the difference between solar thermal and solar PV” how can you perceive that if it was not mentioned. Where the hell did that come from? I know being called JC got to you. You think you are omniscient! Listen you ignore others comments on top that you make stuff up. Get real say something that actually addresses what others have said.

Website by 46digital