THE path up the carbon tax slippery slope was made clear when Greens deputy Christine Milne said “I certainly recognize that you are going to need a price at A$40 per tonne or more to shift from coal to gas and then a higher price still for gas to renewables.” Some Greens don’t even balk at a $500 per tonne tax. The Green’s junior partner, the ALP, has confirmed that the carbon tax will keep increasing.
Subsidies for solar and wind systems are already raising the cost of electricity to consumers, and Milne affirms that renewable energy will not be at parity with coal or gas any time soon. The disadvantages of renewables are insurmountable: environmental costs due to the low power density and the unreliability of the wind and sun. In short, they do not work.
British columnist and activist, George Monboit, has elucidated the utter futility of the Green agenda and adds, “None of us yet has a convincing account of how humanity can get out of this mess.”
Speak for yourself George.
Granted, a massive nuclear power program, though do-able, has nagging waste and proliferation issues. Exotic energy sources such as the under construction $10 billion International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor, will not be producing electricity until at least 2035.
But the hopelessness of the Greens is in their own minds.
Building on almost 20 years of research, in January this year, fusion-watchers were shocked and skeptical when two Italian scientists Andrea Rossi and Sergio Focardi demonstrated a small nuclear device in front of a number of independent physicists, producing abundant heat, with little or no radiation or waste, and no carbon dioxide.
They promise to be operating a 1MW power-plant by October 2011 at an estimated cost of $10 per MWh; 10 times cheaper than conventional power, nuclear, and 20 times cheaper than renewable energy sources.
Of course, it sounds like one of these energy scams and many have said it’s “too good to be true”. But a number of successful verifications have followed, including with the skeptic society of Sweden. Now, Rossi has signed a contract with a large firm with a history of contracting to the US Department of Energy.
According to Rossi’s patent, his Energy Catalyzer (ECat) consists of a heated tube of powdered nickel (Ni) and proprietary catalysts, through which hydrogen (H) is pumped at high pressure, surrounded by boron and lead shielding, and encased in a water jacket. Rossi claims the power results from conversion of nickel to copper and other lighter elements. Full conversion of 58g of nickel would produce the energy equivalent of burning 30,000 tons of oil. The radiation emitted during operation of ECat was barely detectable above background.
Transmutation of elements would leave little doubt of the nuclear origins. Understanding all the details of the reaction may not be far off, as NASA has initiated a project to study the reaction, and the smart money is on a Low Energy Nuclear Reaction (LENR) called the Widom-Larsen reaction, involving the weak nuclear force, absorption of naked H atoms into the Ni lattice atoms and subsequent low-energy beta-decay processes.
Ironically, Rossi’s developed his devices without the assistance of government programs or grants, and in the face of the opposition from the establishment academics, who have seen Ni-H reactions in the same light as ‘cold fusion’. But this is how great leaps are made, with imagination, persistence, and occasional flashes of success. The same problems faced in the development of semiconductors, now a trillion dollar industry that has changed our lives.
Fortunately, if Rossi’s device is genuine and scales up, as appears to be the case, it no longer matters what the Greens say or do, and whether government or academia supports this or not. Due to the low cost, transition to a zero-emission super-abundant energy future will be inevitable.
The entire raison d’être for renewable energy will be history.
Australia may be lucky in not adopting nuclear or renewable energies on a large scale, and be uniquely open to a new source of power at a fraction of the price, with a tiny fraction of the pollution. The science community in Australia, purveyor of all things green, could initiate a Manhattan-style LENR project overnight. If it wanted too.
Alternatively we can continue down the slippery slope with the alarmist anti-industrial pipers, mindlessly pursuing a futile agrarian vision. This is the challenge for the Greens: will they embrace a new, clean energy source which can preserve the current standard of living? Or will they ignore it, continue to promote the chimera of renewable energy and be revealed as just being intent on reducing living standards?
We Australians are by nature a practical, direct and industrious people, but we are falling behind. According to a 2009 US defense department review, Japan and Italy are leaders in this field, and Russia, China, Israel, and India are also devoting significant resources to this work.
A carbon tax now will simply gut our existing industries, putting us further behind.
Human innovation and energy infuses the future with hope. Let’s use our grey-matter to develop the expertise and facilities to make a realistic energy alternative a reality.
By David Stockwell and Tony Cox
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Gobstopped – the dynamic duo have jumped on a nutty invention while verballing a Green. Look Mum no hands.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/forget-the-tofu-bob-brown-wants-red-meat-and-the-greens-are-dancing-in-the-streets/story-fn72xczz-1226061432457 was what was said – he was verballed you creeps.
Rossi’s device – our sceptic chums are suddenly all embracing ! Amazing. After an exhausting search up the quantum gullies in search of greenhouse excitation levels leaving no energy microstates unturned, our lads have suddenly have seen the light (or aura). Well Hallelujah ! No more more uncertainty principles for the boys.
OK let’s give them one – let’s make the carbon tax $1,000,000 a ton. In fact let’s ban CO2. Let’s even ban carbon as an element.
Happiness is a warm gun.
The Greens who by and large lead comfortable lives in the inner city have forgotten or more likely never realised where their comfort and sustenance comes from. It’s from the factories and farms they so want to close down. They will never recant until it is too late so we must negate their ludicrous plans in every way available to us. It is obvious from the too few interviews with questioning journalists that Bob and Christine may have a vision but absolutely no idea how it might work.
Luke,
Here’s the sort of science you subscribe to. As John Ray suggests, “Nature” calls on the UVA to stop obstructing Cuccinelli’s investigation into Michael Mann.
Well, er, something like that anyway:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v473/n7348/full/473419b.html
Shub describes it well:
http://nigguraths.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/creeh-nature/
David and Anthony,
Be marvellous if it happens but Bob Brown and the Lukes would be absolutely horrified. Can’t have unlimited, low-cost energy even if it is emission-free [and Luke has been busy telling us about the wasted R&D on fusion].
This would really be the end of the world for them.
Already happened here in France SD. Sarko brought out last year his carbon tax plan. Greens jumped on it, saying that no tax on nuclear would not discourage people from using energy.
Boo! Hiss! Energy bad! Environmentalists are luddites and a public enemy. Where can we put them?
I won’t comment, and I expect Luke to quote me making a comment on this, on principle.
SD; just passing by when I noticed this last ditch attempt to distract us from a carbon tax. I reckon you should be alarmed that such fringe physics can be alternative to the mess we’ve gotten ourselves into with fossil fuels. This invention is only a mirage. IMO it floats in blogsphere but nowhere else as yet.
Wait till the US patents are settled before getting too excited. Here is a parallel.
Before my apprenticeship was completed a neighboring company invited me to join their “wet combustion” pilot project. Some years later their contractors had me join in on the final stages of their full scale reactor installation, a massive project that needed some fancy small bore SS tubing to complete links from the process to instruments around the control loops. My old tech school mate had arranged for fresh lengths of thick walled SS tubing to be carried down the isle on my flight back to his site while he quietly got rid of their first attempt. Lets say I had quite an audience while we tidied up for commissioning. Btw the air compressor then was the largest ever delivered to the Southern Hemisphere.
Now I can invite interested readers to Google “wet oxidation” then Zimmermann F or “Zimpro” process to follow its evolution in real science terms and compare that with the above mirage. btw my experience was associated with “black liquor” recovery at APPM Burnie. For a good general technology outline see
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1385894799000224
The reason I made a call on this one is the number of independent empirical validations. We will only really know at the end of the year when he delivers a 1M unit though. Real tests, empirical evidence is the test. Not whether its been picked up by the MSM.
Predictable response from Luke
Predictable response by Luke and also stupid response by Luke as usual.
Obviously I don’t know whether this is the nirvana dream of energy production or not. Let’s wait until October and see the results, but I’ll remain an interested sceptic until then.
But if it is nonsense then we should be building smaller gas fired p/stations in the future because we have a plentiful supply of this cheap fuel and as a sideline it reduces co2 emissions by 75%.
But of course the main reason to choose gas is it’s RELIABILITY and it’s BASELOAD and cheap compared to coal and nuclear, let alone super expensive idiocy like wind and solar.
David
For current nuclear power technology:
The current state of play (March 2011) with operating nuclear power plants:
Canada 18
US 104
Mexico 2
Brazil 2
Argentina 2
UK 19
France 58
Spain 8
Germany 17
Switzerland 5
Czech Republic 6
Hungary 4
Slovakia 4
Belgium 7
Sweden 10
Finland 4
Ukraine 15
Romania 2
Bulgaria 2
Russia 32
Pakistan 2
India 20
China mainland 4
S Korea 21
Japan 54
Taiwan 6
South Africa 2
It is also perhaps not well known that France through its’ nuclear plant network sells power to a host of surrounding countries, including the UK. These countries purchase nuclear plant generated power without the environmental and political problems of doing this on their own soil
The “state of play” March 2011 post Japanese earthquake/tsunami is much more difficult to define, but I have found no reports, with the obvious exception of the east coast Japanese stations, of any of the above listed being closed down. The Aus MSM valiantly resist publishing these details because the plebs may gain a different picture to the “correct” one
We can hope that the scale-up of this process you describe here works. After all, the Greenies are always on about increasing R&D expenditure, and here is a perfect example of the risks in R&D
“the Greenies are always on about increasing R&D expenditure”
This sort of black swan, game changer, (providing it works out of course) illustrates how little value environmental research expenditure provides to society. It also brings into question the model that results come about from government money funding theoretical research, that in turn leads to practical innovation. It would be interesting to see any studies of what causes research that actually does create value.
Is this the equivalent data tranfer breakthrough of the energy dream above?
Very hard to believe, but let’s wait and see.
Just hope Juliar and team go slow on the NBN for a while.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-13469924
For me one of the exigencies which necessitates looking at the Rossi device is shown by these:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/the-power-shocks-to-come/story-e6frg6z6-1225996396590
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/threat-of-carbon-tax-blackouts-secret-report/story-fn59niix-1226063747389
The ‘problem’ has already been canvassed in England:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/03/04/the-empire-strikes-out/
It is inevitable that power shortages will be the real consequence of anti-AGW measures not electricity prices.
The greens have been rabbiting on about the need to ‘adjust’ lifestyles for some time and this is the real meaning of ‘sustainability’: reduction, contraction and doing without. It is based on a Malthusian approach to humanity and what I believe is a misanthropic attitude towards humanity.
David had been exploring this energy device for some time and I suggested that an article describing it and proposing the availability of a non-emitting energy source would force the greens into confronting the real underpinning of their support of AGW.
I’d add that boron-proton fusion is at a similar point in the development curve and has had similar problems with attracting development funding.
David; the problem is you guys have absolutely no idea of the practices involved in just getting that thing out of the lab. Therefore you both go misleading your readers here and on your own blog too it seems. I should add imo it’s most likely a fraud from the way it was announced under the cover of “cold fusion” and without any apparent technical support team.
You can’t pick up such a fragile concept or a few new terms then run with it as a job being done when you probably have never done such work. Yourself and the little guy have no actual platform to stand on. Evidenced based science is not something you are capable of from your mere interest and private writings. We end up with a blog full of crap rhetoric and political statements.
By contrast I suggested in my last post that we once had teams of highly skilled facilitators working in industrial scale R&D. The mate mentioned had another cobber who also came to the mainland straight after qualifying as a boiler maker and joined the Snowy Mountains scheme in his welding capacity without the usual quality test . Another classmate was an electrical switch gear designer before becoming an expert in furnace re lining and builder of designer kitchens for Sydney’s elite households. We all had the ability to communicate and facilitate with other team members based on our engineering drawings. The same group dynamics created a revolution in underground mining equipment manufacture.
Work on our wet combustion pilot plant was about as secret as it gets in any industrial research. The company also got me into another patent process re design with work on the new continuous pulp digester No2 originally built in Sweden then shipped out as a going process. Sharing patented technology and changing patented technology is the norm provided each contributor can advance in unison. I should note we were also converting furnaces from black coal to oil while changing the wood pulping and chemical process. This created an opportunity to get right into the newest German built steam turbine combination with their guy out on loan after that big thing played up.
How we get into hazards like handling super-heated water and steam around reactors is a long story. Mine starts with a minder who served on steam driven capital ships with the British navy during ww2. The electrical side begins with big DC generation. The control side requires a nose and many other things that include routines that can be handed over to another guy or a box of switches with a micro processor. Recall too there is a gap between a dynamic process and the electronics and that was mainly my field
The idea that one hides behind patients is absolute BS in this modern society. Racing ahead in a very competitive field requires a lot of individual freedom. We don’t get that by worrying about who is watching. Design time to production for consumer electronics was about 3 months in the 1970’s and we got that from the expert, a whiz engineer who radically changed Phillips here and elsewhere through cartel streamlining and disposing of dinosaurs in the materials flow.
Finding dinosaurs round the traps was my speciality too.
Do you know Rossi’s technical expertise and history? He has a (checkered) lifetime in energy-related engineering. Do you know that he doesn’t have a team? One statement came out quoting european financing for a hundred-million dollar factory. Now I don’t know if any of this is true, but if not a blog, then where is the place to discuss it? Currenlty he is only going to be heating water with it. Now I wouldn’t be surprised if the first time its installed the whole thing overheats and bursts into flames, but hell, thats progress.
The challenge is still out there to the Greens, do they back a realistic zero-emission agenda, or a fantasy?
I don’t object to spending millions on researching energy technology that is probably a fraud and a dud.
I object to spending hundreds of billions on mainstreaming energy technology that is definitely a fraud and a dud.
Here’s a Greek company that claims to have the rights to manufacture Rossi’s device. It appears it was patented in April.
http://www.defkalion-energy.com/
So cohers, the unintended consequences of the carbon tax will be to make base load power unreliable and thus make everyone own a private FF power generator thereby enormously increasing local ACO2?
Who’d’a thought?
Meantime more unintended consequences but no one will blame the CT. I mean, Heinz are only rationalising after all.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/27/3228509.htm
We ain’t seen nuthin yet.
And more unintended consequences as a result of the beaut REDD greenscheme:
http://www.private-eye.co.uk/sections.php?section_link=in_the_back&
Ross Cameron explains it well:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/bid-to-stifle-climate-debate-clouds-history-of-scientific-errors-20110526-1f69s.html
B of N: There are probably a lot of viable nuclear reactions without the boom and the spooky radiation, just waiting for the right conditions to make them work. People aren’t saying much but I bet the race is on. Australia, hello? Anybody home?
From the Gav:
“David; the problem is you guys have absolutely no idea of the practices involved in just getting that thing out of the lab”
Gav’s posts are at best semi-literate and consequently quite incoherent, but I understand (misunderstand ?) that he is constantly accusing other posters here of lacking practical experience in R&D
If so, wrong, Gav, wrong. I’ve spent the last 35 years in practical applications of R&D efforts (from the CSIRO, Unis, most places that produce any concept that may be remotely useful). Most do not work in scaled-up practice, some do (occasionally to my great surprise). The ONLY guarantee from R&D is that you will find answers that you do NOT want. That is why R&D is so expensive and risky
Spangles, there are 3 deplorable things about AGW; firstly, that real environmental issues are neglected while this end of the world nonsense holds sway.
Secondly, opportunity cost as Jo Nova recently noted in respect of every $ which is wasted on solving AGW means that it can’t be spent somewhere useful like medical research or infrastructure. In this regard the feed in tariff schemes really annoy me; the rest of society are paying for the moral enrichment of those guys who have put the panels on; if they felt so strongly about saving the world you’d think they’d be happy to pay extra.
Thirdly, in Australia swimming in minerals and real energy options we have these cretins advocating wind and solar; by comparison Rossi is a gold star certainty. But by going down the W&S wretched path we are going to have power shortages while surrounded by energy. It is grotesque!
Cohenite,
Your third point is my biggest gripe about this whole fiasco.
It is likely to be power shortages and food shortages, when Australia has no need to have them.
Especially when anything we’re likely to do with emission reduction will have sweet F A effect on global climate anyway.
That would also be if anyone anywhere will be able to mitigate climate anyway through an E T S governed by a global authority.
Cohenite, locally there is a storage shed block – I’m sure you know the type. There are around 40 solar panels mounted on the roof. I’m sure they are not offsetting their energy consumption. It’s a money making concern based on a flawed scheme.
Cohenite,
Another reason is the sheer impracticality of ditching petroleum powered transport etc – hospital back up power are diesel powered generators, same with modern telecommunications. They want us to switch to gas? And then renewables? Excuse me but how is the mining industry going to cope with transportation costs – wind powered iron ore freighters?
And the hidden fact is that government still owns all the power generating infrastructure – so you can start to now see why privatisation was on government agenda for power – this agenda has been in play for a long time.
“Thirdly, in Australia swimming in minerals and real energy options we have these cretins advocating wind and solar; by comparison Rossi is a gold star certainty.”
pure raving madness
What’s wrong with mixed models of energy generation and diversity. Love the framing “EITHER OR” – “make your bed and lie in it”
Come on stop framing guys.
Wind powered (supplementary of course) modern sailing ships – hmmm – why not? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7205217.stm
Oh sure, kites on ships is a great idea; nothing wrong with a little supplementary frugality; and where would we have been without kites, Benjamin Franklin and all that; the sheer cretinistic idiocy begins when they say the reason for this is AGW, which makes it mandatory that NOTHING but kites should power the ships or anything else.
Anyway the point about David’s article is that if there is a non-emitting, non-nuclear base load alternative will the greens still be bleating about gaia and the primacy of nature?
Wrong Ian; I said two posters haven’t got a shred of practice in their platform. SD is another matter. I don’t know exactly where he comes from but its not heavy or crafty engineering going by the way he gets conned by these half smarts.
Now I don’t have much power house experience either but I have worked around various furnaces, boilers and the odd reactor besides the older petro chem industries and a bit of gas and fuel for Melbourne. True too I was mostly paid for what I knew and could do rather than write. I never got scolded, burnt or particularly harmed by the range of very nasty chemicals we made. Other hazards like electrical energy and radiation were other fields of mine and on occasions exclusively but in general it was more about direct technical support to other teams engaged in anything from law enforcement to electricity grid control.
My last post was interrupted and I reckon it’s time some one questioned why the Rossi tube has lead shielding. We have no idea that it’s even needed.
Another point I was going to make about reactor practice is the need to get heat away in some form of locked response to the reaction. Turning that energy into say useful electrical power is another great big ball game. Having all those skills in one place beginning with the lab is highly unlikely given the performance so far
Ian; “The ONLY guarantee from R&D is that you will find answers that you do NOT want. That is why R&D is so expensive and risky” I don’t agree, sorry. A testament to our success in large scale industry R&D is contained in TIA – see this item is on page 252 however in the same era we made other big process changes at APM, Bowater-Scott and Smorgens all in Melbourne and on the run outside our labs
“APPM developed a successful two-stage soda batch pulping process in the late 1940s to reduce alkali requirements[91] and when, a few years later, a new type of continuous digester was introduced in Sweden for single stage alkaline pulping APPM, realizing its intrinsic advantages over batch pulping and its potential for two-stage operation, ordered one of the very first units, modified for its own requirements. APPM then developed the system further, by converting it to countercurrent pulping (with the pulping liquor moving upward through the downward moving wood chips) and adding a final stage of in-digester pulp washing. Overall this innovation was most successful and resulted in alkali savings, improved heat economy, reduced bleaching chemical requirement and alleviation of the earlier black liquor evaporation and burning problems.[92] APPM licensed its new technology overseas where its in-digester pulp washing principle has now become standard for most continuous digesters”
http://www.austehc.unimelb.edu.au/tia/247.html
As I was saying before, once again, Davy Crockett interrupted, if you take away AGW then what is happening to energy price and availability is criminal; look at this article which for the ABC is hard-hitting about the effect of a CT on electricity prices:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2732408.html
But it doesn’t make sense; she goes from a $25-35 per MWh for the 2 coal options to $60MWh for her bottom 3 scenarios; that’s doubling right there, unexplained; even accepting her figure of $90 MWh for gas and carbon capture [which is junk anyway] there is an initial 300% difference between coal and gas and somehow we only get a range of price increases from 6.7-16.8%.
And this is not W&S, which contrary to the usual deadheads on the comments saying it can do basepower, is at least another 400% more expensive even if it did work.
Between the likes of Jimminy Cricket and the idiots advocating W&S and renewables, this country will be stuffed.
“Conversion of 58gm of Ni would produce the energy equivalent of burning 30,000 tons of oil!”
Even deducting the energy required to produce the hydrogen which would be what ? Maybe this is the snag ?
Still we can always have sailing ships from Luke.
Living in caves your next suggestion Luke?
cohenite,
to steal a phrase from Python.
‘You’re a very naughty boy’
Nyuk nyuk nyuk!
Carbon Capture and Storage. Fancy calling it junk.
It can’t be junk.
Governments everywhere are throwing money at it, so it must work.
Even Federal Labor haven’t taken Rudd’s grand gesture of $2.4 Billion into CCS projects and $100 million a year to the Global CCS Institute it started up.
Insight into CCS, go here.
http://papundits.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/kerry-liebermans-clean-coal-hole-in-the-ground-just-throw-in-money/
Tony.
cohenite
“Davy Crockett interrupted”
Pure gold cohers, but at least Davy was known and loved for other qualities than just homespun “wisdom”.
Cheers
Luke; just some back of the envelope calculations, at 1hp per 10sqm of sail, even a 5000sqm sail would provide at best 500hp, which for a 10,000hp tanker would provide 5% of the power. Given that its only deployable downwind at best 10% of the time, and probably less so that’s 0.5% of the power required, not to mention the wear and tear and other costs associated with it. Looks like a pipe dream to me.
My theory is that the trajectory of energy generation is to increasing energy density, and that is the best outcome for the environment – less space needed for living so more can be locked up for nature. Renewables go in the wrong direction, decreasing energy density, so decreasing the quality of the environment.
Thanks TonyOz; $20 billion according to your link on clean coal; that is obscene; that is the price of the moral sensibilities and vanity of the likes of gav and luke who think the world is in danger from humans.
Mack; your focus on the fuel won’t make it a power plant and cohenite should realize that energy capture is in its entirety is just as expensive as carbon capture with all things taken into account.
Hoarding sunlight is about as difficult as it gets but we can use a medium as cheap as water. The nuclear process is much less safe given the same water.
Now here is the difference; you guys are not team players as illustrated by your persistent unwillingness to participate in any change to our energy source as it is happening today. Who says this Rossi product will ever be available to the masses anyway?
I say if it was any good somebody else would have it or something similar up and running by now despite that fudgey patent. Btw at Bowater- Scott and elsewhere the lab people used to routinely analyse other manufacturers newer products and a few of their old to make sure no one was cheating round the norm
“Now here is the difference; you guys are not team players as illustrated by your persistent unwillingness to participate in any change to our energy source as it is happening today.”
That’s because virtually nothing except for maybe coal seam gas makes any sense.
“Who says this Rossi product will ever be available to the masses anyway?”
He does. You could buy one tomorrow for delivery end of year if you want.
“I say if it was any good somebody else would have it or something similar up and running by now despite that fudgey patent.”
If that were true nobody would have ever invented anything.
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/technology/solar-powered-boat-turanor-planetsolar-to-visit-brisbane/story-e6frep1o-1226064307717
Is guess the lads will be down at the docks protesting when the Turanor PlanetSolar comes in – keeping warm sucking on their hard-boiled coal lollies giving the boat the dynamic duo brown eye treatment.
Or perhaps they’ll be out there in Archibald’s bloody big turbo boat doing a USS Cole run.
luke, that 2nd ship looks interesting; it transports solar panels I presume.
Cohenite
“Anyway the point about David’s article is that if there is a non-emitting, non-nuclear base load alternative will the greens still be bleating about gaia and the primacy of nature?”
Yes, because my contacts in the ALP aver that the science is irrelevant – the goal is to force us to live more sustainably, and I guess they will try to implement it “with whatever it takes”. Their ideal of sustainable bliss harks back to an earlier period in human history when, so the various stories or myths describe, humanity live in peaceful co-existence with nature. This is generically described as the golden age before humanity experienced a transformation which led to a departure from that previous bliss state.
I’m wading into philosophical waters here, and I need to stress that I generally support Velikovsky’s views in his posthumuously published collection of essays “Mankind in Amnesia”; the present infatuation with a catastrophic demise of civilisation due to burning of hydrocarbons could be traced back to whatever it was that occurred during the Jewish Exodus times, controversial that that viewpoint is.
Velikovsky’s opinions about humanity having a common ‘racial’, ie species specific, ‘memory’ is not too different to Lovelock’s Gaia model. It also fits in with Amit Goswami’s thoughts about a self aware universe model in which physical reality is an epiphenomemon of consciousness – more popularly expressed as “God”.
Right now I’m studying the science of dust devils and related phenomena, and I’m somewhat stunned with the prevailing assumptions of the existing models – that dust devils are basically fluid dynamical problems yet when I observe them in physical reality, the text-book descriptions are nothing other than wild guesses using limited knowledge, like a mechanic trying to translate an electronic circuit diagram in terms of his own perspective – it fails.
Advances in science happen from cross pollination between disciplines, when scientists in one are also familiar with another and understand commonalities between them.
I’m a typical example of this – as a field geologist I have few peers, but I also dabble in electrical stuff, mainly to do with my interest in Hi Fi (and I have a track record of published articles etc on this since 1972) and more specifically my expertise in kimberlite geology, and these topics allowed me to recognise a common relationship. I accept that I might be a generation too early as well, and that any scientific paradigm shift will occur after I pass this mortal coil.
But getting back to the point of this post, David is right with his assessment of the political position of the Greens – they are not interested in finding new sources of energy, but want to retograde humanity back to a brutish, Darwinian compelled lifestyle.
And the irony is Louis, that a “brutish, Darwinian compelled lifestyle”, with its utilitarian imperative will mean the greens and sundry similar parasites will be the first eaten since they are useless.
‘The entire raison d’être for renewable energy will be history.’
Very good gentlemen, exciting days.
Malcolm ‘Labor Lite’ Turnbull would appreciate hearing about this new breakthrough right now, he’s been wagging and got caught. Now he’s sulking….or brooding. On second thoughts, I think Mal has investments in renewables, so catch Barnaby’s attention instead.
Thanks for the solar cat link, Luke.
“Her crew’s aim is to sail her at an average speed of 7.5 knots – just on 14km/h – which, they say, is about what a conventionally-powered oil tanker makes.”
Yeah, right.
They should call it the white elphant. What a WOFTAM!
How to make a simple job under-performing and complex.
Just put a set of sails on it!
But you have to give the man points for trying to make a point, however badly.
That kite-powered tanker must have been the oil tanker he was talking about, speed-wise.
“but want to retograde humanity back to a brutish, Darwinian compelled lifestyle.” sort of like prospecting in the Kimberley eh or manning drill rigs?
Luke, you are a typical city dwelling tax consuming member of society.
There is a crude saying, that in a polite form means “if farmers don’t exist city folk don’t eat”
This goes for all productive professions.
People like you can disappear from the face of the earth instantly and by and large nobody will know it happened.
If people like Louis and his expertise disappear we will all know!
You can be as rude as you like and carry on like a fool but the facts remain, sitting in an office dreaming up schemes does not produce wealth or anything tangible.
Unless of course you are an engineer, architect etc. ie. one of the productive classes, in which case I apologise.
Read “Animal farm” again or do it if you had not.
So I guess hair dressing and cross dressing don’t count as productive. Gee Wilkesy when you put it like that I can see your point – time to leave the collective and get a job.
Touche Luke: but seriously that solar ship should definitely be able to move our product. You are taking the piss, right?
“but seriously that solar ship should definitely be able to move our product.”
Wow! How many containers could you stack on that deck?
I’m thinking of doing the same thing with a hot-air balloon.
Thanks to our libertarian host the resident troll lives out his life in apparent bliss in this sheltered workshop – ‘taking the piss’ is on Luke’s CV.
The solar panels produce 93kW, the motors are 2 Permanent Magnet Synchronous Electrical Motors – 60kW each (max) @ 1600 rpm and 2 Permanent Magnet Synchronous Electrical Motors – 10kW each (max) @ 1000 rpm
do the maths – don’t add up.
Moonbat has a lot to say on the subject.
http://www.monbiot.com/2011/05/27/turning-together/
I don’t like being a wet blanket but how does any of the above help with our stupid co2 price and the problem of the two ratios.
The FACTS and MATHS are these, we are only burning one tonne of coal at home to every three tonnes we export to burn overseas.
And guess what while we wreck our industries and jobs here the exported coal is used to provide more industry and jobs overseas for our competitors.
But be assured if we remain pure and refuse to export that coal any number of coal producing countries will gladly fill the gap and take all the money, industry and jobs as well.
Of course only criminal lunatics ( like the greens)would refuse to export that coal, but Labor still can’t understand the simple maths that should rule out an adjustment at home even at 5% or whatever because it just won’t work.
It can’t change the climate but it will wreck our economy for a zero return.
Next we have a ratio of 20 to 1 whereby the developing world will emit 20 times the co2 than the developed world for the next 25 years.
Effectively the developed world will flatline its emissions and the developing world will be soaring.
Just overnight another US state has pulled out of this lunacy because it just doesn’t make sense and will only damage their economy. So why can’t we do the same?
If Luke and Gav have some insight into new maths that disproves the above then let it rip and enlighten us please.
Of course come October and we find that Rossi etc are really onto something then it will be the biggest game changer in history.
Australia’s top economics writer puts it so much better than my paltry effort above.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/opinion/dont-fight-a-hotter-world-prepare-for-it/story-e6frg9k6-1226064391794
Hey!
While this about Science, I know it’s off the main topic here, but it makes me think.
I got an email from a friend I have in the U.S. It seems that this is big news in the U.S. and is gaining traction, while here in Australia it barely rated a mention. I did see this one short article at the ABC News site, but everywhere else ….. nothing.
That friend of mine would have as much interest in Science as the average Australian ‘punter’ in the street, eg, almost zip.
So I was surprised that it seems to be better known in the U.S. than it is here, especially among average people who, let’s face it, have little interest in any Science at all, other than what they implicitly believe out of faith, without understanding it, from what they have been told by people with, er, other agendas.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/27/3228554.htm?site=news
The interesting part I liked from the article was almost added as an afterthought, where it was mentioned that:
“He says the discovery could change the way telescopes are built.”
Here, at Jennifer’s blog, we mostly have an interest in Science, but it seems that the average person when seeing an article like this, then it would not even register among the latest news of what’s happening with Oprah.
When an article like this gains more traction in the U.S. than it seems to have done here, it tells me that Australians have less than zero interest in Science, any Science, and as much as we discuss that Science here, it’s a losing battle, and it was lost somewhere during that first year of High School, where it seems, more important things need to be taught.
Just an observation.
Tony.
Well it juxtaposes sophistry and sceptic sluttery (jumping on anything) on your CV El Gordo.
So isn’t this a hoot – the usual dweebies have no problem with the mystery nickel dust cylinder but are OUTRAGED at the prospect of any attempt to solar/wind power a boat/ship.
And still happy to piss away billions on fusion research – shouldn’t Nova be screaming how many little 3rd world kiddies this would save?
Time to put the “Licence sceptics not guns” sticker back on the bumper (Prius of course).
Alas Neville is right. We need a global deal on CO2 to achieve anything with major new emitters including China and India in the deal – prospects – not good.
We need baseload power capacity – I don’t begrudge new energy research on solar and new nuclear. And I don’t mind mixtures including old technology in a transition. But with not clear economic driver against CO2 energy production how will this happen?
So left with adaptation. There will be winners and losers. Major issue will be water supply, drought and how the climate rearranges itself. A world with 9 billion people.
Hope China isn’t a loser. And hope we’re not a loser too ( or maybe start speaking Mandarin).
Wind power a ship; we’ve had the age of wind luke, it was called the 19thC; but anyway, pack your bags; at least we won’t hear from you for 105 days; unless you take a few carrier pigeons;
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/11/Hornetclippership.jpg
“just waiting for the right conditions to make them work”
David (from above), agree with you wholeheartedly. I’ve found that windows of opportunity open from time to time, then you get a chance to develop your ideas until the window closes. Unfortunately the typical window is at most 4 or 5 years before something comes to close it, whereas the development time required is an absolute minimum of 10 years.
Rossi reminds me very much of Andrew Forrest in the mid ’90’s nickel boom. He saw the opportunity window and built a plant. That plant is in operation but the investors lost all their shirts.
If anyone is working in the technology R&D area I’d suggest strongly that they try to patent their work, because when the window closes the idea will be available for all to see even if the patent lapses. Then the next person can take up the baton. A lot of useful stuff is buried in lab books around the world lost forever because it has not been published. The hurdle for patent filing is lower than for academic papers and industrial people regard patents much more practically useful than papers. Also through the EU patent office website you can search all patents from all countries rapidly without having to muck around with paywalls.
Luke: Oh you were serious about those billionaire toys.
Luke,
Have you considered the possibility, and I mean possibility, that the CAGW hypothesis might be pathologically flawed?
I suppose not – it’s much like asking the Pope whether he believes in the existence of the almighty.
David – not really. But it is important that someone has a go. And don’t you find it interesting that the bloggians never have problems with fusion research? Very speculative wanky stuff too.
Louis have you ever considered that you have some eccentric ideas. But to answer your question – oh of course … what is actually more important each year is ENSO and IPO. AGW is a secondary issue but they’re all linked.
So do you have doubts that you might be wrong?
Cohenite – you see there you go again … it’s EITHER OR – no compromise – if one could devise a system of sails that did not interfere with cargo, was low labor and computer controlled. And that system saved lots of fuel – more than it cost to install – wouldn’t it be rational to use it in combination with conventional propulsion.
Why are you so ideologically opposed to solar cells/wind. You would prefer me to use a generator on my data loggers would you?
Why does any renewable energy source make you nauseous – did a fan fall on you as a child?
Luke, short of an act of parliment we have no control over the energy mix because its determined by the economics. The side effect of a massive subsidy of a fundamentally unviable solution is for the looters to move in until the subsidy is arbitrarily withdrawn (sound familiar). They can rise or fall on their own IMHO. As will Rossi. I don’t think Oz should contribute to the ITER because I think its too expensive and flawed. LENR is another issue, as it has history of excess heat, and not so expensive to develop.
Luke, the only thing I’m ideologically opposed to is stupidity; people can use whatever they want as long as they don’t expect me to subsidise them or live in the dark.
The magic of Mr Rossi.
http://coldfusionnow.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/andrea-rossi-cold-fusion-video-the-magic-of-mr-rossi/
Luke,
I have indeed found myself frequently wrong – my most blatant mistake was believing you to be intelligent. As for a disbelief in CAGW – the facts are in – it’s not happening – mind you I not predicting an ice age or a period of prolonged cooling either.
For the first time the mantra “the science is settled” on CAGW is being seriously challenged.
An alternative mechanism was suggested by a Danish scientist called Svensmark. Evidence is now starting to trickle in that his mechanism is a major effect.
The CLOUD experiment at CERN is going to start to report its findings in the next three months, and the rumour is that the papers will strongly support Svensmark.
See http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/multimedia/45950
See http://www.drroyspencer.com/
These findings have the potential to be vastly embarrassing to the governments and scientific establishments fixated on carbon dioxide.
More likely 20 years of cool/wet, then temps upward again, depends on Sol. There are tipping points where cycles appear to collide, which might take us into a cooler regime.
At the end of the Eemian there was a warm hiatus similar to now, but in fear of the logical fallacy I wouldn’t dare hazard a guess on that. Except to say thank the gods for Rossi.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/05/an-incremental-step-blown-up/ – sigh
(and I so seldom quote RC these days too)
Oh dear Gav
““The ONLY guarantee from R&D is that you will find answers that you do NOT want. That is why R&D is so expensive and risky” I don’t agree, sorry.”
That IS the only guarantee from R&D – that you will find answers you do not want. Sometimes it actually works – you do find useful answers, as my post said, and so we can all quote cherry-picked successful examples. It’s the sheer number of unsuccessful attempts ( > 80%, from the Fed Govt’s own Statistics Bureau) that is never publicised and cannot be predicted
So again, wrong, Gav, wrong. Please try to understand my posts before replying
Congratulations luke; that is the 1000th time one of your links has come to bite you on your backside. As the RC article goes to great pains to state, the connection between CR and cloud formation has just incrementally increased. That does not change the relationship between clouds and climate. Pinker shows that cloud level is in itself sufficient to explain the bulk of AGW since the 1980s.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/308/5723/850.abstract
Spencer explains it for dummies:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/22/spencer-ssts-headed-down-fast/#more-20883
Incrementally ween-some. Sigh…..
“It’s the sheer number of unsuccessful attempts ( > 80%, from the Fed Govt’s own Statistics Bureau) that is never publicised and cannot be predicted.”
In retrospect, you can look at the large number of cold fusion experiments that did not work and see that some made more sense than others. Pd-D in solution had a lot against it as a scalable concept from the the start. Focardi was getting 110% heat from Ni-H bars, with decades of research into how to treat the bars. Rossi was an industrialist and inventor who asked: ‘What is the approach most likely to scale, and is there any reason why not?’ So by simply increasing the surface area of the Ni he turns a laboratory curiosity into a product.
There have probably been LENR researchers skirting around this, but the leap out of the lab takes a certain approach to industry thats often lacking in Government labs. There is probably more to it than this, and when it comes out its going to be a fascinating story.
There are parallels between climate scientists and hot fusion (ITER) scientists, who dominate the research agenda, and push out in the case of CS, research not pro-AGW, and in the case of ITER research other than fusion. There are a lot of human factors involved.
“There are a lot of human factors involved.”
Incredibly so. And on top of those human factors [if it works] would be the huge devaluation of existing multi-billion energy systems everywhere.
What a seismic shift!
Spangles,
That is the primary reason some of these new developments are occasionally still born – if for example I figured out a way of tapping into the earth’s electric field to produce electrical power, for example, what will that do to the existing infrastructure? Fuel prices would plummet, no one would find it profitable to pump oil, etc, and tings would grind to a halt since the new energy source would not be able to be easily mass produced to allow an organised transfer of systems.
There are persistent stories about Tesla who was working in this area and one interpretation taht he got little support was based on J.P. Morgan’s realisation he could not attach a meter to the Tesla invention to charge for the energy.
You would think the Greens would unhesitatingly support the development of such energy sources, but no, apparently not. Which leads to the worrying conclusion that their agenda is to de industrialise us, as the looney German ecosocialists are attempting in Europe.
Since they are also hard wired into their Iphones and other communication gadgets, depending on large server farms requiring enormous power delivery, how do they think Google will power its server farms during night time?
I had the same challenge decades ago when the WIlderness Society demanded Rio Tinto use solar power to supply energy to the Argyle Mine – apart from the ecological blight of an enormous area populated with solar panels, the amount of copper needed to route the electricity to the mine site, as well as the need to make a battery storage facility to power the operation during night time, (its a 24/365 operation) suggested Rio needed also to discover a new copper and lead deposit. Scale this up to all the other mining operations in Australia and these idiots want us to have sustainable energy?????????
“You would think the Greens would unhesitatingly support the development of such energy sources, but no, apparently not. Which leads to the worrying conclusion that their agenda is to de industrialise us, as the looney German ecosocialists are attempting in Europe.”
Louis,
It’s these guilty-rich nutters who are responsible for that solar cat visiting Brisbane today.
Chancellor Merkel released her government’s Energy Concept in September last year and in the R & D we got this:
The Energy Research Programme will focus on the following priorities:
* renewable energies,
* energy efficiency,
* energy storage methods and grid technology,
* integration of renewable energies into the energy supply and interplay between these energy technologies.
A very narrow focus indeed.
Poor old Spangled – so angry about a solar boat yet happy to spend billions on fusion research. What ideological hypocrisy. Have a hard steamed coal lolly boys.
Luke,
You really have never understood science have you. You must think its a lifestyle choice or some other politically inane tendency.
Luke,
To take your cutting-edge logic a step further:
Do you really believe that the world can run on solar powered ships rather than nuclear powered?
And I don’t recall spending a cent on fusion research but solar madness is costing me plenty.
I guarantee that solar boat has a couple of diesel generators tucked away deep in the hull. It would be irresponsible and dangerous to sail in it without them.
o/t but
online poll
Voting so far. 6.59 am.
The Greens have offered the Government a deal on emissions trading – minimum unconditional emissions cut of 25% below 1990 levels by 2020, with a commitment to move to 40%.
Do you support that:
http://sarah-hanson-young.greensmps.org.au/polls/do-you-support-greens-plan-emissions-trading
PS Anyone with half a brain would vote “NO”……
Ah well there yo’all go again – EITHER / OR – MUST be diesel or wind – that’s all you get – such extremists moderating as reasonable people.
Meanwhile the world has and is paying heaps for ITER fusion – where’ s the ranting frothing sceptics telling us how many little African kiddies could have been saved with this money. But not a peep coz you’re fundamentally not fair dinkum. Anything big, throbbing 24 x 7 and emitting heaps – you’ll find sceptics cuddling it.
http://blogs.nature.com/news/2010/09/fusion_funding_slammed_in_parl.html
ITER is unlikely to break even. Australia is not in the consortium, fortunately.
Its more that I like high energy density, urban environments to be urban and rural to be rural, wilderness to be wilderness, etc.
You get those on lists like vortex http://www.mail-archive.com/vortex-l%40eskimo.com/ who see Rossi’s device and immediately think “one in every home”, low density distributed systems. Just as misguided as a solar panel or a wind generator on every roof. The left at unleashed who are always speculating on peoples psychology should turn there attention to the vanity of the self-sufficiency movement.
“I guarantee that solar boat has a couple of diesel generators tucked away deep in the hull.”
John,
I’ll bet you’re right but they aren’t about to admit it.
It’s interesting that they don’t declare that is not the case when it is a question that any reasonable person would ask.
“Ah well there yo’all go again – EITHER / OR – MUST be diesel or wind – that’s all you get – such extremists moderating as reasonable people.”
Maybe you should talk to Hans Tholstrup. Ask him about the future of solar powered trucks.
Some things in this life are so bleedin’ obvious. [like getting nonsense from greenies]
“Its more that I like high energy density, urban environments to be urban and rural to be rural, wilderness to be wilderness, etc.”
David,
That is one very pertinent point that I cannot understand about about this whole debate. The so-called greens with their high moral ground on the environment don’t ever discuss how their wind/solar renewables, REDD schemes, carbon offsets etc, spread so invasively and destructively into all aspects of what remains of our natural environment.
They don’t give a shit!
It’s all about ideology, never ecology.
SD talking about ideology, yesterday I attended the march against Coal Seam Gas drilling in Casino. It’s a serious subject around here as they have been test drilling everywhere and there’s talk of a major gas industry being established in the area.
It turned out to be a Greenie love in organised by some hippies from Nimbin. They organised it to be held in a park on the same day as the Casino’s Beef Week Parade so all the streets, including the park, were blocked off for the parade – talk about great timing!!
I found myself in a discussion with a 50 year old lady, well educated etc but living in a pipe dream. She was talking about saving the polar bears and how the Arctic was melting!! She was adamant she knew the subject because she read the Sydney Morning Herald every day. That Ben Cubby has a lot to answer for.
Spangled, I recently walked about 1000k in Spain. People have no idea how just how invasive the spread of wind turbines really is. It’s so bloody feeble they have to spread it everywhere they can. And when all the hardware starts to age, or people start to give up on what is just a revamped medieval technology, junking the stuff will be a massive task.
It’s a pity, because wind may have something to offer on a limited scale, and may even have brighter future if we punt a bit on research. But the determination to mainstream it because of green fetishism and the masses of tax and euro monies flowing before “la crisis” should be a warning to us all in Oz.
Coal is beautiful, it’s chocolate sunshine. It has concentration, it has power. What on earth are we thinking when we vote for a PM who continually talks about “dirty coal” in that grating zombie whine?
Robert: “chocolate sunshine”; that is great!
Robert,
you say that coal is chocolate sunshine.
People look at that and say it’s an opinion of a vandal.
However, it is the absolute truth.
You know what would kill this Carbon (Dioxide) Tax stone motherless dead?
(However, I want you all to realise that this is something that will never happen.)
Turn off all the large scale coal fired plants. Just turn ’em all off.
The Country would grind totally to a halt. Full stop.
No jobs. No industry. No shops. No Traffic. No trains. NO access to any building higher than 3 levels. Nothing anywhere.
Forget about what would happen in your home. Look at the big picture.
Now, why it can’t be done is that it’s an easy thing to say, and to then to shut them down.
The problem is in the restarting.
Four days tops to restart all of them and bring them back on line, and then more days to sequentially phase in the usage levels for the grids.
It would cost (literally) Billions for the Country.
It would be political suicide, and therein lies the cunning, because the Government knows it and wouldn’t dare even suggest it in the first place, hence people will never get the idea of what life without those plants really would be like.
Something of this nature would be crippling, at every level.
The rioting would fill the streets in every city, well it wouldn’t because people would have no way of getting to those riots. There would be absolute chaos
When people realise that there is nothing that can replace those levels of power, then the realisation will never sink in.
That’s why this really is only about the money. Government knows full well there is nothing to replace that power, and even if they started know, it would take literally decades to get something in place that doesn’t even work.
They’re making money from a target that just has to keep doing what it always has been doing.
Big Polluters pshaw!
It’s a con.
Tony.
Tony,
Yoiu hit the nail on the head – it is the money but money to fund the UN, and the unfunded public service pension funds – a global Ponzi scheme in other words. This agenda has been in play for a long time.
As I write this I am watching Channel 10 and that climate ad is being run every ad break – it wasn’t aired during Bolt’s 1/2 hour but is during Meet the Press.
Tony is right. It can only be about money. No degree of ignorance could account for this deliberate downgrading of something so essential, so incalculably valuable.
Coal has splendour, and our Australian coal especially. Real splendour. Until we start talking about it as something we love and appreciate, the Bogan and the luvvies will keep us in our apologetic corner.
Just this once, I’ll borrow a mannerism from zombiedom and make my point in shouty upper case:
COAL HAS SPLENDOUR. SPLENDOUR!
What the world needs now to solve the climate problem.
Germany heading for Eco-Dictatorship:
http://www.thegwpf.org/international-news/3095-germany-sliding-head-over-heels-into-the-eco-dictatorship.html
I also like ‘revamped medieval technology’. With Robert’s permission I’ll take it away with me.
Louis, what is the ad like?
Don’t worry Louis; just seen it; vomitous. It’s at Bolta’s.
How embarrassing for Oz to have numbskull Cate and drongo Caton fronting this PIG IGNORANT campaign.
What a load of silly, deceitful garbage to try and sell this lie to the Oz heartland and presented by shysters and fraudsters who have the carbon footprint of a bigfoot or yeti.
Not one of these urgers had the guts to appear on the Bolt Report because they know he will ask the too hard questions these liars can dodge at the ABC or other tame quissling channels and their leftie comperes.
Neville,
Unfortunately they have the numbers so we can look forward to an interesting year from 1 july onwards. Like it or not, we are headed towards even more regulation of our lives, with their associated taxes, but for those who tend to ignore history, or who re-write it to lessen dissonance with their own beliefs. the future may not end up being what they hope it will be with this carbon tax.
Will Abbott repeal it? Depends if he can survive Turnbull’s Machevalian activities. The problem is that once a tax like this is in the legislation, and given the to and fro of the governing political parties in Australia, it will be next to impossible to repeal it, knowing that when the socialists get back into power, they will implement it.
It’s what Hayek described as the slow relenting slide into serfdom, and all because many of us believe that a welfare state is worth having.
The point is this, as I have often mentioned.
If they were to divert ALL the money they raise from the implementation of this Tax to Renewable energy in an effort to close JUST those power plants alone, (let alone to lessen emissions from the other large emitters) they will not have enough.
You can bet Labor has its eyes on that money for more ‘pressing’ things than that.
There’ll be token little efforts, probably one, and with great fanfare and photo ops for all those involved.
If there is, what I want you to specifically look out for is this, not the immense cost, not the tiny amount of power it will generate, not the pitiful time that power will be available for, but how long it takes to get the thing actually delivering power to the grids from when the announcement is made.
If they were (and right now, immediately) announce that there is a ‘Snowy Scheme equivalent’ to construct the plants to replace those large scale coal fired plants, they would not have ANY of them delivering power before the target date of 2020.
Tony.
So kids told me today that nobody likes the black jelly beans. And a person of the world later told me that once you go black you never go back. Were they really thinking about coal – I don’t know?
And I was told a quintessential joke about the Australian condition and power generation – foreign Minister Rudd visits Central Australia and asks the locals their response about the stolen generations report. After a lot of mumbling and whispered discussion the response comes back “Mate – we don’t anything about your stolen generators”.
And if climate is a serious topic would there would be climate jokes – like economist jokes. I only know one – after the 1991 to 2010 AGW induced drought on the lower MDB – the drought has broken in a major deluge (as the sceptics predicted) – and so farmer Bill to talking to Farmer Dave at the black stump on the rear dividing fence.
Bill declares “well now that the drought is over I think I’ll take a big holiday to Sydney”. Farmer Dave asks “Well that sounds exciting – which route are you going to take”. After some beard stroking and grass stalk chewing, Farmer Bill retorts “Well I think I’ll take the missus coz she stuck by me during the drought”.
So mixed messages must be a problem for our sceptics. How to look respectable like Cate.
So Cohenite’s job is how make an anti-carbon tax advert that isn’t a ranter – coz ranters only appeal to the party faithful sucking on coal ju-jubes.
So then – what is anti-Cate response advert – and how do you avoid looking like a bunch of frothing, rightist nutters. Has to be minimalist – can’t be a lecture.
Luke,
just one question did you have few tonight, (abs. nothing wrong with that) or are you taking lessons from gav?
With Bolta on your side Aussie dosn’t need to worry about a carbon tax .
I notice a channel 10 logo. Does this actually go on TV?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/
It looks like a Gav post 🙂
Anecdotal stuff is nice, but its hardly science.
With the ad I would pick three well known attractive celebrities saying “CO2 does not cause global warming and you have all been conned.”
That will at least have them thinking outside the square.
Luke is farmer Bill.
Yes Mack, the Bolt Report comes out twice on Sunday and its a breath of fresh air.
I’m not sure if anyone has mentioned this but if so it is worth mentioning again:
http://sarah-hanson-young.greensmps.org.au/polls/do-you-support-greens-plan-emissions-trading
yes cohenite
it was mentioned before but I could not vote on the previous link, this one works OK.
Still overwhelmingly negative, wonder when they are going to pull it?
The Say Yes ad: They are so not into it themselves.
The sceptics ad: Sincere, rational, empirical, optimistic.
Yes El Gordo – go with that approach. That will work well.
That SH Dumb add isn’t going too well for the Greens Cohenite, 3/4 voting NO.
Well Luke what about just telling the truth and a few facts to the Aussie people?
Like the developing world will produce 20 million tonnes of co2 to every 1 million tonnes of co2 from the developed world over the next 25 years.
Or for every 3 million tonnes emitted from our exported coal by other countries we only emit 1 million tonnes here in Australia.
But we must deny emphatically that co2 is pollution and call them stupid and liars for claiming that it is.
A tip:
The way to shame the right wing nutters is with facts and results. A camera crew could visit that factory where wind turbines are used to manufacture wind turbines. Then on to that factory where solar panels are used to manufacture solar panels. (Voice-over by some crusty-good-bloke type, after a plummy intro by Cate.)
Finally, the killer punch: a Flannery-escorted tour of the Prius factory out at Geothermia.
That would surely be the end of the tea-party frothers and ravers.
Bolta will not go unnoticed by the other media people. The guys at Sky news, Paul Murray , Richo, etc all seem very savy. Julia is looking more hardened, wooden faced and ashen with every succeeding interview over this issue.
Too much makeup making her sweat? I think not.
More lies and outright fraud, they’ve chosen the wrong power station and in the WRONG country to shut down. What a fraudulent dopey add, can’t they get anything right.
Yeah Luke it works well when it’s all BS and not even in Australia, really fills you with confidence doesn’t it?
See down page.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/a_lesson_in_sacrifice_for_the_planet_from_the_woman_in_the_luxury_audi/
Oh shit – I agree with Neville? Omigod !
Thanx cohenite, both Luke and I have voted.
What you guys need is an Australian ICON. What about Rolf Harris. Would he be sceptic enough?
Isn’t Rolf the second most popular person in Britain? Do you have a link on his sceptic credentials?
No el gordo, no link, he maybe is not even a sceptic but he is well loved by every Aussie and his words would be gold.
If you approached him the worst that could happen would be a door in the face with “bugger off , I’m too old for this shyt.”
Luke must get this frequently.
This is the latest babyish twaddle from our idiot PM and just remember helping her strike the keyboard are Australia’s top scientific brains. ( ????)
Please confirm to me Luke that you too are embarrassed by this embecilic nonsense.
This fool is definitely up there in the worst PM/Govt stocks with darling Gough.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/clime_change_is_real_but_gillards_claims_are_disgracefully_false/#commentsmore
Barnaby is renowned for his colourful expressions and here is his latest on the MDB.
“State governments have belled the cat on the plan. The complete confusion around the Murray-Darling Basin was exemplified today by the announcement that nothing will happen until 2019,” said Senator Barnaby Joyce today.
“It’s like the Labor equivalent of the last statement by Jesus Christ in anticipation of his second coming, “Don’t do anything till I get back”.