THE Australian Senate just passed the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill with a 39-32 vote effectively axing Australia’s carbon tax. Labor and the Greens voted against. South Australian senator Nick Xenophon was absent.
Greens leader Senator Milne warned the new senators who supported the repeal that it will will be their political legacy. These new senators are Bob Day, David Leyonhjelm, Ricky Muir, Jackie Lambie, Glenn Lazarus and Dio Wang.
Well done.
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Taxing refrigerant gases so heavily has already resulted in all sorts of waste. Now this foul imposition on production has been removed, let’s hope we can again view Australia as clean food producer and processor for the world.
When we have the most modern coal plants and refrigeration facilities we will be truly ourselves, not before. Australia without the absolute best of those two things is failing itself…and wasting precious food and wasting precious coal.
It seems a lot of associated bills were repealed at the same time. I heard Ozone mentioned with repealed bills mentioned a number of times. So it seems the bills with respect to refrigeration gases are gone.
Now the government should get on to repeal the Renewal Energy Targets (RET) provisions..
As an engineer with experience in heat & mass transfer I know that CO2 (and CH4) play no measurable role in weather or climate. So-called climate scientists have no scientific understanding if they believe in AGW. from CO2 emission. Gullible politicians like Malcolm Turnbull have no technical understand and as well have no understanding of humanity.
Jennifer. Kudos to you. You had no small part to play in the years that it took to get here. Your commitment and steadfastness – and the personal sacrifice I guess – is truly appreciated.
Thank you. Love your work!
Arnost
Yippee. Now for the RET.
Congratulations you Aussies.. wow! back to the future. This really is a time to raise a glass. Sanity now prevailing. Has Luke really retired. ?
Three cheers for the ending of this stupid tax. It couldn’t achieve anything even if you accept warmist prof Roger Jones’s estimate of an unmeasurable 0.0038c temp reduction by 2100. That’s about 4 thousandths of a degree C.
But Shorten and Milne have already insisted they will still bring in a useless and jobs/business destroying ETS ASAP. Their unbelievably absurd belief in the pseudo scientific gibberish of CAGW is a disgrace. All the evidence proves they are wrong, led by the latest 2014 RS and NAS joint report.
It must bring a warm feeling to all the denialists who have worked so hard to destroy the only credible action to safeguard the worlds climate.
Well done. You have used your methods of propaganda to the max.
I just hope that you are all the first to get zapped by an extreme weather event caused by global warming.
But take heart this ridiculous state of affairs will change, at the next election.
You can fool some of the people some of the time.
“You can fool some of the people some of the time.”
You finally got it RLP.
Just read this link and check the wonderful people who are sick of being fooled:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/17/headed-into-the-lions-den-in-the-u-k-i-could-use-your-help/
Mr R LePage
There is nothing that we can do that will affect the GLOBAL temperature one iota.
In fact if the alarmist scientists had actually done their jobs properly they should have factored in the data showing that Australia is a net sink of C02 emissions in the global atmosphere…. meaning that we should be paid for this…look up Japanese co2 satellite of the earth.
We are the third biggest net sink of emissions and that doesn’t included the EEZ
…..and that is just for starters
But even if this was left out, numerate people will realise that our effect on global temperatures would not be measurable and certainly not worth the idiot costs. involved
“You can fool some of the people some of the time.”
Fooled, RLP?
Let me count the ways:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/the-pms-address-to-the-lowy-institute/story-e6frg6nf-1225795141519?nk=cdd19455b9d0e5dc17790197fb49bd98
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/13/julia-gillard-labor-purpose-future
http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/v3/n9/full/nclimate1972.html?WT.ec_id=NCLIMATE-201309
http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/media/weowebsite/2013/energyclimatemap/RedrawingEnergyClimateMap.pdf
Just a tiny few of the ways we have been fooled but there’s plenty more.
Robert LePharge: “I just hope that you are all the first to get zapped by an extreme weather event caused by global warming.”
What a nasty piece of work you are.
More delusional nonsense from RLP, but how much longer can these fools refuse to take proper notice of observations and ditch their stupid pseudo scientific garbage.
Imagine thinking that closing down a smelter in Oz will stop someone opening a smelter in China.
Do these climate “safeguarders” and climate change “tacklers” really think we have an Australian National Atmosphere partitioned from the various Asian atmospheres?
I note that gas and oil, Russia and the Ukraine, are once again in the news. So too the Middle East. Can it be that developed Western nations are actually going to stifle, restrict and downgrade their domestic power resources at such a time? Are we living in GetUp world run by self-loathing perennial adolescents (like the person above who hopes we get “zapped”)?
Robert LePage July 18, 2014 at 10:20 am #
It must bring a warm feeling to all the denialists who have worked so hard to destroy the only credible action to safeguard the worlds climate.
What an ego on that guy. Safeguarding the worlds climate? New flash, there is no such thing. Even if there were, you wouldn’t have any say in it.
I’m pretty stoked about Australia destroying the carbon tax. The only thing I regret about it is that we haven’t done the same here in California
RLP , why do you post here? Just to make an idiot of yourself? I am not sure i have ever read a comment from you on any blog that showed you as anything but an ignorant Zealot. And a nasty one at that.
You do not seriously think our carbon tax was going to change the temperatures planet do you? Nobody could be that stupid could they?
Perhaps you are in the pay of big wind?
RLP.
Ditto from here in India. . .you are deluded if you think Australia can ‘safeguard the world’s climate’.
I think you need to get out and about some more.
Compared to here. . .Australia is exemplary.
I would also love to know how you discern an AGW extreme weather event from an ordinary extreme weather event.
The presence of natural forest fires does not imply that arson doesn’t exist.
In any case the probability of a global ETS within a decade is still high unless David’s solar model is correct.
Alas by then the LNP’s plan to convert Australia into an old world rustbelt backwater as a low wage quarry and corporate farm owned by international interests and trade penalised for a high carbon footprint will be complete.
Cue the music https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0kcet4aPpQ
You need to go out more too Luke.
Try India & then justify calling Australia an old world rust belt backwater etc. . .
You should see how Agriculture works here. . .& they produce 99million tonnes of rice , 19 million bales cotton & etc.
They still plant and pick by hand. . .The wage structure is woeful & living standards are heartbreaking.
Your comment is pure rhetorical BS!
Pretty close to TP’s ‘Nigel no friends’ & CM’s ‘Climate criminals’ crapola.
Natural forest fires. Arson. Got that.
Hey, every time some putrid collectivist crap like the Carbon Tax gets flushed I like to play this:
Well the problem Robby is that you don’t. And obviously you well belong to the anti-science abusive crowd here. BTW I don’t click your links either.
Debbie I guess you’ll be importing your study tour knowledge of hand picking and planting back home.
Aw.
As far as ambient co2 is concerned, arson and natural forest fires are absolutely the same thing.
Or not
Luke.
Errrr nope!
My visit here has taught me to appreciate how lucky we are in Australia & even more importantly how environmentally responsible we are.
It has also taught me that comments like yours at 6:45 and RPL’s at 10:20 are absolute crapola.
Oh lookie here. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/blog/2014/jul/18/indias-forest-cover-numbers
The rest of the article is mostly the Guardian trying to color the good news as somehow bad.
Hard to do. Take this para
It’s official. WIth this article you have Al Gore crying in his beer.
Australia Axing Pollution Levy Marks First U-Turn on Climate (Updates with Al Gore in the 13th paragraph.)
For the first time in my life I am proud to be an Australian.
Doesn’t matter that I’m not Australian. I’m still proud of each and every one of you.
Even Luke. (who selflessly demonstrated the unmanicured fanatical temperament of the green movement for all the world to see, on a daily basis for years.)
Just how bogus is Mayeau’s nonsense – http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/flora-fauna/Massive-destruction-of-Meghalaya-forests/articleshow/11778176.cms
Luke, bazza RLP etc couldn’t care less about real historical observations, but believe every jot and tittle of their loony fundamentalist religion. They’re so ridiculous they can’t even understand simple kindy maths or use simple logic and reason. Certainly they’re not worth the time of day.
BTW it seems the new ACORN data isn’t worth much either. http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/was-the-hottest-day-ever-in-australia-not-in-a-desert-but-in-far-south-albany/#more-37189
Here’s the graph that tells the truth about so called renewable energy. Solar, wind and biomass supply SFA of the planet’s energy needs. Remove hydro and you’re left with ZIP. But don’t worry Labor , Greens , Fairfax and their ABC will still lie and try their best to distort the message to the gullible electorate.
And they’ll continue to subsidise these fraudulent con tricks and waste billions $ every year for a ZERO return and no change to climate and temp for thousands of years.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/18/the-stark-reality-of-green-techs-solar-and-wind-contribution-to-world-energy/#more-113190
Same old stuff from the science and climate deniers.
“We will pay for our sins, the world will make us’
“Big business has won”
Well, the big business man who sponsored Big Al, Obama and the ethanol mandate, is reported to have spent,
(at least), a billion dollars getting the oil and gas fight going in Ukraine. The major banks have helped out with that too.
They must be doing it to destroy the evil stuff. Yeah right.
You sure can fool some of the people all the time. ” None so blind as those who will not see”.
Me , I am happy that a few country pubs and supermarkets may now survive the cost of refrigerants and lighting.
Was getting a bit dire out here.
Another new 2014 study finds that the MWP was warmer than the recent warm period. It disputes Mann’s HS study and backs up the work of McIntyre and McKitrick etc.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/new-paper-finds-medieval-warm-period.html There is a link to the study above.
Interesting Luke, whenever anybody here suggests the carbon tax is madness because it damages living standards…you tell us “we have never had it so good”…but now the LNP are driving oz to a low wage quarry??
You should celebrate the carbon tax being removed then, because it will boost our competitiveness by lowering the cost of production. in theory this should lead to a boost in net exports and also lead to higher consumption and Business Investment (as producers seek to make higher profits and meet additional demand from net exports and higher consumption, and consumer spend their hard earned money on additional consumption not electricity bills and rising prices). This should lead to higher economic growth, stronger employment and reduced inflationary pressures. It will also improve equity of income distribution (cateris paribas) because the carbon tax is a regressive tax because it consumes more of a poor persons income than it does a rich persons. This has the impact of shifting the lorenz curve to the left and lowering the gini co-efficient. In other words the gap between rich and poor shrinks.
Now each of those likely benefits (however small they may be?) are all benefits from removing the tax.
Now what is the potential damage of removing the tax?….we dont lower temp by some irrelevant amount?
Given that the rest of the world is not acting in any meaningful way (surely you dont think they are do you? you couldnt be that blinded by CAGW propaganda could you??!) why are we suddenly going to get penalised as “carbon criminals”?
The tax was always economic insanity, irrespective of your belief in the science.
This Maupin et al 2014 study shows that south pacific precipitation over the last 600 years is consistent with NATURAL variability. And today’s precipitation levels are at the average and there is no sign of CAGW at all.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/new-paper-finds-south-pacific.html
The ingenious bit is that while the “emissions” (and production) went elsewhere we were able to keep our own needless “emissions” (minus production). While taxing it we were wasting coal domestically. Money was never invested in needed modernisation (aka gold plating) of the coal power gen we would continue to rely on (because the other stuff don’t work, duh).
We still haven’t modernised our coal power gen, we will still rely on it. The New Class chatterers who say they support nukes support them as limply as possible. Foreign energy and global politics suck right now and the less we are drawn into energy dependence the better. We have centuries of high quality coal…
What to do? Let me think now…an imaginative use for that stupid Direct Action dough…
One wonders, why then is the CO2 content of the atmosphere rising at such a significant rate and also why is the pH of the oceans falling if it is not due to our increasing use of fossil fuels since the industrial revolution. The causes of variation of global temperature is a very complex subject upon which most of the respondents to this forum including myself are not qualified to even comment.
The tax, which was supposed to slow the emission of CO2 was aimed at the wrong people. It should have been aimed directly at the consumers of electricity. The producers of electricity are only the meat in the sandwich. The government should now be giving them much more incentive to use other means of producing electricity on a 24/7 basis. I have yet to do the sums, but I suspect that in the long run, giving incentives to domestic consumers to install solar panels is not really a viable long term proposition when you take the energy requirements to produce the hardware into account. I could be wrong.
The tax certainly should have been repealed, but it should be replaced by a consumption tax which would bw much more effective.
David
You just have to laugh at Neville’s antics – quoting papers he hasn’t read and doesn’t understand. Bayseian (means it’s made up!). But it saves me doing the rounds of the trash sites to see what the barking maddies are up to.
And someone found a datum point in error in how gazillion records. Oh diddums.
Toby – under the LNP you’ll have the end of Aussie manufacturing and lower wages and higher taxes. So what’s left – the quarry and the farm. But you’re OK as Debs has been to India so we can plant by hand with her new technical knowledge import.
Luke, dont be such a disaster nut! You sound like you have been taking “gloom” pills.
Energy is a significant input cost in manufacturing. Removing the tax will help them more than most govt actions.
And surely you arent suggesting that under labor or the greens that industry would be better off!!?? Goodness gracious what a bizarre thought.
So now the liberals are the high taxing party are they?….I suppose you dont think there is a budget problem of any sort and the structural problems in the budget don’t matter? If the liberals raise tax it is not because that is something they are inclined towards. Whilst on the other hand you have the left believe that tax and control is the purpose of good government and a panacea for the worlds Ill’s.
At least when you talk science you sound intelligent, stay away from real things like the economy and stick to the make believe mate!
Hi Luke,
Both sides of politics have their hand in the till , when it come to holes in the ground and lack of protection for Oz industry.
LNP getting rid of the tax was the first positive thing any of them have done for years.
One industry Deb is involved in was shockingly affected by it, Ricemilling . The growers still own it and it directly relates to their income. Also therefore, the production cost of feeding 60 million people suffered too, but I suspect you are an Agenda 21 fan , so starve the environmental human vermin, eh ?
Dairy and meat were also badly hit.
All so some bankers could get rich trading in plant food credits.
Very bad for dairy, that tax.
Okay, so now we have the chance of cuts in cost, which will be important if realised. But what about the modernisation of coal power generation? The piggy bank has been taken to the pub by Labor and the Greens. We have to make a lot of noise so the Libs don’t take what’s left to the pub.
And never mind that peculiar Posh Left fetish known as The Market. This requires strictly regulated standards but generous government initiatives, as dramatic as Messmer’s move to nukes in France. They say government should not try to pick winners and that’s right. Government has to do more than try, it has to succeed in picking winners.
If we Australians don’t soon lead the world in efficient coal power gen and big-scale refrigeration what are we doing here? That’s why we’ve got the minerals, the land and the great rural industries Debs is talking about. As for the right way to approach all this development, one old-fashioned word will cover it: Conservation.
Plant by hand?
I have at times suspected that our green betters have a romantic notion about such things.
Good job of completely missing the point Luke.
Let me spell it out for you:
Aus ag = world leader, environmentally responsible, sustainable, high yield/ML & / ha, relatively small subsidy etc.
Indian ag = primitive methods, little attention to environment, low yields, heavily subsidised, increasing expansion etc.
Geddit??????
We’re way ahead & able to assist supply & technology globally.
Your sneering at Aussie ag is just rhetorical crapola. . .and is demonstrating a lack of global perspective & a lack of knowledge about current methods.
White House opens door to exploring the Atlantic for oil
Obama is having a tough week, and looking to shed the enviros.
July 18 (Reuters) – South Korea’s finance minister has called its impending emissions trading market “flawed in many ways”, hinting that he would pressure other ministries to delay…
See what you did? The snowball is rolling.
World leading ? – another advert by Debbie – gold, gold, gold for Australia – native vegetation remover, definitely not sustainable, water guzzling, turns river systems into regulated ditches, overgrazed, eroding, place overrun with ferals,
Technology, machinery and agrichemicals – errr imported.
And for some a totalitarian single market desk.
I rest my case 🙂
Thanks Luke for confirming.
A last word from me.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/cartoon/2014/jul/18/carbon-tax-first-dog?CMP=ema_632
Let’s hope the Guardian is the first trashy rag zapped by commonsense change.
Ferals are in the National Parks. Rice is the most water efficient food crop. The rivers are still clean , away from the big cities. The emus are gone from Emu Plains and Meadowbank is covered in concrete, but I guess the supermarket trolleys and Maccas wrappers filter the Yarra,
So , yup, Farmin’ bad Green City good. Lets build another airport at Sydney, for the carbon religious to fly in and out.
If they had a drop of faith in their beliefs , they would be ALL lobbying for fast rail down the East coast.
How can Sydney to Melbourne be the third busiest, intercity air route in the world and the people in the middle of both are GREEN voters ? Must be all Deb’s mates flying about . Greens would want a train.
And RPL confirms what we always knew.
It is about politics. . .not science.
Our green betters are mangling the so called ‘settled science’ for political purposes.
Heard that “First Dog ” bloke on the radio. To me he is nearly funny, like the try hard thing they have on ABC radio Friday arvo.
Give me Larry any day, he calls a dick a dick?
http://pickeringpost.com/cartoon/3367
Luke you are a first class hippo and you have more hide than Jessie the elephant. You’re the upside down plonk who loves to follow the fools who use data upside down and then whine when they get caught.
So much for your understanding about proxy records. And you even failed to understand or properly read the Pages 2K study and the implication of the temp record for Antarctica over the last 2000 years.
Face it Luke the Mann HS isn’t even used by the IPCC anymore and the latest 2014 PR study I linked to just highlights more doubts about Mann’s methods AGAIN.
It seems like snake oil Timmy needs even more money to make some more dud forecasts. But don’t worry I’m sure silly Lukey will be more than willing to fund his dopey hero.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/18/hard-times-for-aussie-alarmists-flannery-begs-in-new-video/#more-113197
Neville you don’t read half the papers you quote nor do you have the intellectual ability to understand what you’re reading. You always take the op ed reviewers take and often only skim the abstract. The blind Tisdale quoting was your high point. You’ve confessed you’re a stats dweeb. The high point of this blog was virtually noone here could even understand percentiles – which would be about hour 2 of any basic stats course.
Give it away mate.
I love the way you make sweeping pronouncements about “you failed to understand blah blah…” – you’d first need to be sure I was even focussed on what you’re actually saying (or trying to say, or maybe think what you’e saying) which is normally little more than screeching and cut and paste. And you love to cherry pick the latest ” LOOK THIS IS IT !” papers. No balanced literature reviews from Neville.
Ian Thomson – LOL I had to fall off my chair
“Ferals are in the National Parks.” REALLY ! Nowhere else Ho ho ho. Maybe we should clear fell the parks so we can see the ferals.
“Rice is the most water efficient food crop” yep – but still uses heaps and therefore we’d hope they were efficient. (yes I know pastures and cotton too).
“The rivers are still clean , away from the big cities” except for all the sediment and carp – yuh ! We’re glad that they’re not filled with heavy metals and pesticides but that can arranged.
But most of us like to eat and wear cotton clothes so it does become a larger social and national responsibility (sort of like greenhouse gas mitigation).
Deflecting to the hypocrisy of inner city greens doesn’t change the fundamentals of the rural landscape and related land management and at last count I don’t see much control or land ownership by the greens, so on a day to day basis we do know who’s running the joint.
Sorry Luke,
You miss the point. FOOD. Sorry you guys need it mate
And I guess you do not know that VAST amounts of Southern NSW have been turned into National Parks. Most of that was actually ” White man’s forest” Not there before foresters grew it . Now as Bob Carr say’s they are ” Cathedrals of Redgums”
Yes the major ones , like Yanga, need neighbours to employ people to shoot the FERALS harboured there .
Because they emerge
Luke I think we all understand how committed you are to your cause. I had to chase you for years on this blog to get a answer about AGW mitigation and you failed miserably there as well. One new nuke isn’t going to make zip difference at all. Even a thousand new nukes will make zip difference.
You’ve proved over the years that you are an empty vessel who makes the most stupid statements one could imagine.
Like……Abbott was responsible for the blue mountains bushfires and they were unusual at that time of year.
we are all climate criminals, we should be sent to re education camps, you still believe that the OZ 1940s drought had an AGW origin but the IPCC states that AGW only has an impact after 1950. And you still believe that SL trends are unusual since 1950 when at least 25 recent PR studies show they are not, of course you still believe that scientists using upside data is okay as well?
But let’s look at the Hoskins, Lawson interview con job from the BBCs today show. Steve McIntyre shows that Lawson was correct about UK rainfall and flooding and even Hoskin agreed with his position in his previous interviews. Your side are just con merchants and liars and cheats and it’s about time you woke up. They may fool you every time but they won’t fool me.
Here is that link from Steve McIntyre.
http://climateaudit.org/2014/07/13/was-lawson-right-about-the-uk-floods/
Anyone interested in arranging heavy metals and pesticides in Australian rivers might want to consult with the former official Climate Change advisor for the Australian Government, and author of the Garnaut Climate Change Review.
If you think I’m nitpicking at a great and good icon of the New Class, 80 million tonnes yearly of mine waste over twenty years is hardly a nitpick. A hall of fame polluting effort, some say. That’s just the Ok Tedi and Fly Rivers. Then there was Lihir. Our icon was a busy boy, though he never did anything as drastic as irrigating rice. And he’s shocked, just shocked, at the shooting of the climate by the Libs and he wants the usual suspects rounded up.
Did you know that Lihir was funded by the Australian government’s EFIC, after OPIC, the US government agency, rejected the Lihir project on environmental grounds?
No rice or cotton, mind you. Nothing as wicked as that. Just gold, gold, gold!
Yes Ian more trees have grown in some areas but vast areas not in those locations annihilated and fully converted to wheat paddocks. It’s not simply the gross number of trees.
Too much to ask for some left-over representative ecosystems? Just a bit?
And Australia is a big country – the perfect storm of cats, wild dogs, cane toads, and for the top end too much fire continues unabated.
“Your side are just con merchants and liars and cheats and it’s about time you woke up. They may fool you every time but they won’t fool me.”
“Fool” you – well you’ve admitted you’re not a scientist and have no knowledge of statistics – so your information base is from op-eds by those who wish to manipulate opinion. You wouldn’t know. You only read one class of blog. Ones that reinforce your POV. Confirmation bias.
Honestly Neville – here’s how it is – it’s about time you woke up how much rot you’re piped and how indiscriminate you are in your consumption of it.
My “Cause” – not really – I just like to add some balance. And believe you me – you need it. AGW isn’t a perfect story but you are uncritical of your fellow travellers in their utterly fanatical destruction of science and promotion of sophistry.
Sophistry – see Mike’s Nature trick.
Luke?
Where are ag practices better than in Australia?
Who/what in particular is practising an utterly fanatical destruction of science?
Which science?
I do think you need to get out more.
Well Luke tell us where my sources been utterly, fanatically, destructive of science? And don’t forget to name them and quote what they’ve said.
As I’ve said before you are the most obvious fool I’ve ever encountered who just seems to ignore all the real fools who prance about the world’s public stage. For example their ABC’s Science show Williams who thinks that a SLR of more than ONE METRE a year until 2100 is POSSIBLE. Or Flannery who thinks that a SLR that covers an 8 storey building is possible, or GORE Hansen ( Pearman ex CSIRO is also an advisor) who think that 6 metres is possible, or a scientist who thinks that Antarctica will have the last few breeding pairs of humans, or another scientist telling us that young children won’t know what snow is like, or a BOM scientist agreeing with Flannery that we may have a permanent drought in OZ and our dams may never fill again, or ETC, ETC.
So tell us when you’ve ever condemned any of the above idiocies in the past and why not? They’ve certainly been UTTERLY, FANATICALLY, DESTRUCTIVE of science. Time you woke up to them and to yourself you silly fool.
Anthony Watts and Bob Tisdale try to help out the Risbey et al authors. But isn’t this more of Luke’s PR science? Very decent of them I’d say.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/19/a-courtesy-note-ahead-of-publication-for-risbey-et-al-2014/#more-113208
Jo Nova points out more of the recent stupidities from some of the non science donkeys that Luke the fool admires.
Sorry here is that Jo Nova link. http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/if-you-ask-questions-about-our-theory-you-are-a-horrible-person/#comments
“I do think you need to get out more.”
He most certainly does, Debbie
Sophistry = mentioning Mike’s Nature Trick as try-on.
Neville – which sources = your usual list of putrid filth sites will do. Personalities aren’t the science you moron. As I said Neville you haven’t the intellect for science as is evidenced by you ongoing stupid unquestioning climate porn cut and pastes. But I guess you get your science from news paper clipping don’t you.
Debs – which countries – try Israel, USA, Canada – you don’t have a monopoly on innovation – and most of your high etch and machinery are imported. But after your India trip you’ll be able to introduce hand planting technology.
And let’s not forget Tisdale – what source quality from Nifty shonks Nev.-
“I displayed my very limited understanding of statistics in this post. This was pointed out to me a great number times by many different people in numerous comments received in the WattsUpWithThat cross post.The errors in that initial portion of the post were so many and so great that they detracted from the bulk of the post, which was about the El Niño-Southern Oscillation. Please disregard this post and the WUWT cross post, and any other cross posts that may exist.”
“Originally, when I wrote the post about Foster and Rahmstorf (2011), I had not included my error-filled discussion about their regression analysis. That was a last minute addition. Lesson learned.”
You’re a clown Neville.
Yup Luke, most of the machinery is imported. You might just ask why?
Would energy costs and transport costs, (because of same), have anything to do with it?
I can tell you , Luke , that it actually cost more in freight to get 5 pallets from the wharf , to Essendon, than it cost to get them from Sacramento, via LA, to Melbourne.
Work that out, if you made farm machinery.
Ian – err nope ….
According to Debs (Aussie punching above our weight, “gold gold gold” for Australia medal winning expectations, the usual best in the world Aussie bragging etc) we’re the best aggies in the world. If so you’d think we’d be the ones with the big John Deere export industry, precision ag technology experts, and rip roaring agrochemical and gene tech industries. But alas not. Like a lot of places we’re just integrators at the quarry and farm.
Luke we know you can’t back up your stupid claims while I’ve given you numerous idiotic forecasts by your climate scientists. You are a silly fool who doesn’t even comprehend simple english and has no understanding of simple logic and reason or common sense.
funny I have always thought we were at the cutting edge of agriculture …whether it be creating our own grains ( william farrer), to our own merino sheep
“It is generally acknowledged that Australia has a strong comparative advantage in the production of agricultural products. This is a result of our size, geography, use of technology and workforce skills.Consequently, agriculture is one of the most productive and internationally competitive sectors of the Australian economy.” http://www.aust-immig-book.com.au/business/overview-australian-agriculture
Its pretty rare for a country to be inefficient at something and yet have a strong comparative advantage……….?? They are generally considered contradictory statements!
We also provide very few subsidies compared to most countries in the world and yet we are still globally competitive, adding to our nations wealth and helping to provide cheap food for the world.
Pretty sad that you want to sneer at something so successful Luke?
What are you on this weekend??
Toby I think your last question at least provides an answer for his silly upside down science. Very good question.
Yes Toby,
The contradictory statements from Luke are rife at the moment.
Has Luke been to Israel & Canada and investigated their farming practices?
In what way can he prove that they use better practice than Aussie ag?
I wonder if he knows how heavily subsidised Israeli agriculture is?
I wonder what he thinks Aussies should change/copy so they are like Israel & Canada?
I also wonder why he keeps using those straw man thingos and claiming stupid stuff like I think all is perfect.
German wind farm investors close down after only 13 years. This company ended up in the courts over high cost of repairs and even with the high govt subsidies they still lost money. Just proves once again that so called renewable energy is a fraud and con.
I wonder how much this loony fiasco cost the poor and taxpayers as well? As I’ve said many times, if you take away the taxpayer subsidies these stupid technologies fall in a heap. What a farce.
http://notrickszone.com/2014/07/19/german-wind-turbine-investors-dissolve-operating-company-after-13-years-of-poor-returns-technical-failures/
Neville, this article says the US has had wind farms since 1981 but I know they had them even before that and they have been abandoned in droves:
http://toryaardvark.com/2011/11/17/14000-abandoned-wind-turbines-in-the-usa/
When will we ever learn….
Pretty much all sceptics are prepared to accept that AGW is a possibility.
But until the alarmist lukes can point to just one piece of evidence that truly validates AGW you would think that occasionally they would accept that they might be mistaken.
The next step on the ladder: is it a problem?
We have a long way to go before we need to commit suicide with a carbon tax that no one else will come into.
Debbie you asked a question and received an answer. Did I say you should import any specific technology or practice from these countries. No. Simply that Australia does not have a monopoly on smart agriculture, high yields or water use efficiency. But we’re clever at gluing imported bits together.
However back to the theme of the quarry and the farm – it’s a concern to me that in a world putting premiums on value-added goods that govt policies are driving manufacturing from our shores. And on the point of agricultural machinery – http://www.ibisworld.com.au/industry/default.aspx?indid=275 pretty grim.
And even on the farm itself – distressing and depressing http://www.beefcentral.com/news/opinion/opinion-why-a-new-rural-debt-survey-is-essential/
And that agriculture does take and has taken an environmental toll on the landscape and natural systems. But given most of us like to eat, want produce at affordable costs in convenient neighbourhood supermarkets, then it’s clearly hypocritical to suggest that we’re going to return the most of south-east Australia to some sort of natural estate. You’ll claim there is no environmental toll as it will embolden an already too demanding green “enemy” (which isn’t me BTW) but I’d suggest otherwise.
And a even more demanding purchaser after clean green production systems – http://www.beefcentral.com/news/mcdonalds-sets-2016-deadline-for-verified-sustainable-beef-supply/ (Don’t blame me !)
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-24/project-catalyst-improves-sugar-sustainability/5279858
So purchasers and marketers are increasingly demanding on reducing the side-effects of production. (Again don’t blame me !)
Not blaming you Luke.
As an actual producer I seriously question the practicality of many of these ideas.
We could & would grow all our produce ‘organically’ but it comes at a cost which consumers are either unwilling or unable to pay.
There is a niche market that some of us do supply.
I do not claim ‘there is no environmental toll’ but I do claim that most of that ‘toll’ is the result of poor government policy related to such matters as mandatory clearing.
Recent NRM policy has proved to be expensive and over reactive and more importantly highly obstructive to sensible development.
Neither did I claim that Australia has a monopoly on smart agriculture. . .I simply pointed out that we’re way ahead of most & recognised as a world leader.
The glass is half full Luke
Debt & the loss of manufacturing are also largely a result of policy. . .& the carbon tax placed further pressure on manufacturing & development.
The fact that our economy has survived pressure from obstructive & expensive policy is a testament to the resilience of key industries like Agriculture & mining. . .NOT(!) a testament to the poor policies.
Just because the sky didn’t fall in does not mean that it was a sensible or practical exercise.
Just because the media and academics report that people want & expect green based policies does NOT(!) mean they’re prepared to PAY the price.
You need to be wary of comparing apples with oranges Luke.
An over reliance on stats & conflating with economics & politics often falls into the realm of
junk science.
Those of us who work out in the rough & tumble of the real business world & the real environment can quickly spot the amount of highly risk averse crapola that gets spewed out by so many from so many different perspectives.
As I keep suggesting. . . I think you need to get out some more.
Luke, you dope, the environmental toll is taken by 7 billion of you.
Australian farming practice is reducing the ET probably more than most world farming industry.
But farming thousands of acres with ever reducing numbers of belt-tightening people and smart machines, contributing enormously to our high standard- and low cost- of living and surviving without subsidy is one thing but fattening unionised labour while trying to produce those machines is a bridge too far even for us.
It’s easy to see why you are a climate alarmist.
Yes SD.
even more amusing is that ‘climate alarmists’ and AGW celebs seem to believe that entities like BoM & CSIRO own the climate/weather, are the only ones who can accurately research and can also magically manage the climate/weather via such policies as a CO2 Tax.
They also seem to believe that if we would just listen to them. . .there is such a concept of a perfectly balanced , utopian climate/weather/environment that existed somewhere in the pre
industrial age and which we should all let them restore.
Well clearly agriculture won’t be a major source of employment SD. So boo hoo. As I said – Australia moves to a rust belt economy, quarry and farm helped along by the LNP.
Debbie I see you’re on message with sophistry such as “like BoM & CSIRO own the climate/weather, are the only ones who can accurately research and can also magically manage the climate/weather ‘
Surely you can’t point to any serious sceptic science you can use. It’s just waffle in backwater journals if published at all. All you can do with it is create more and more roadblocks to obfuscate more for your tenuous position.
Specifically, sophistry is when a small group cuts off divergent data using as justification their need to construct an understandable graph for those who were not experts in the field. The “not experts” being the World Meteorological Organization. The graph in question being the spaghetti graph of paleo reconstructions featured in AR4.
1. The WMO isn’t a babe in the woods who needs the hand hold or a spoon feed to understand a temperature graph.
2. The spaghetti graph is most emphatically not designed to be understandable by those not expert in the field. If anything it is made more convoluted so as to cover up the fact they spliced an unrelated temperature record on the end of it to create the “unprecedented hot” bit of their hockeystick blade.
Sophistry – talking about consensus of scientists instead of showing evidence.
“Well clearly agriculture won’t be a major source of employment SD. So boo hoo.”
About the sort of remark I’d expect.
When farmers go broke altogether and the city dwellers have to get down and dirty on their “edible balconies”, food production could well become a major employer.
Just not on the most desired terms.
But maybe there’s no cure for low food prices like low food prices.
Luke.
I have always judged by results.
That does not mean I am attempting to undermine the good work or the good research done by science. . .including climate science.
The issue is about focus.
Along with many others I am perfectly capable of recognising BS when I see it.
Entities like BoM & CSIRO have NOT delivered useful outcomes or improved their skill in areas that matter to industries such as Agriculture.
If most of us MDB farmers had taken the doom & gloom projections of BoM & CSIRO from about 2007 as gospel. . .We would no longer be producing.. .luckily we all had our own historical records and knew that much of what they were proclaiming was NOT supported and was underpinned by a hypothesis. . . not historical evidence.
As Jen highlighted in a previous thread. . .it’s time for a new paradigm.
And in this thread. . .The axing of the CO2 Tax is a good start. . .as it was not delivering good results.
Australia needs to get off it and on with it.
We’re a lucky country and we’re mostly very good at what we do. . .including most of our governance. . .instead of kowtowing to global politics. . .in many cases they could learn a lot from us. . .particularly in areas like Agriculture, health care & essential services like water, power, construction, transport & logistics.
But of course we are not perfect.
The grand experiment or the grand challenge via global environmental politics is clearly not
delivering. . .time to let a large part of it go.
Still waiting your detailed critique of the managing for climate variability program. Given your disdain for the entire modern research program I’m sure you have some detailed comments.
New paradigms are great – but what exactly is this new paradigm. Making stuff up? Ignoring the laws of physics.
No disdain Lukey petal 🙂
The issue is focus.
Well your focused critique will be well received then (sound of crickets)
BTW – on the top thread I was suggesting that Jen actually increase deletions not less so Petal I am prepared to suck it up !
Abusive = delete; off-topic = delete, impugn motives = delete, irrelevant waffle like this = delete. Of course apart from myself and Bazza’s science comments this would leave the blog with very little commentary of relevance but quality will improve …
Bob Tisdale pulls apart the Risbey et al study??? that just confirms what sceptics have been saying for decades. And that is most climate models don’t work and most of the warming/cooling or hiatus periods are mostly a direct result of ENSO/PDO/AMO etc.
So at least the authors of this paper have got something correct I suppose, but how long before other scientists and the MSM catch up and start telling the truth?
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/20/lewandowsky-and-oreskes-are-co-authors-of-a-paper-about-enso-climate-models-and-sea-surface-temperature-trends-go-figure/#more-113224
Christine Milne makes a fool of herself AGAIN. Yet so called educated ???? people are supposed to vote for the Greens?
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/christine_milne_taxes_the_warming_truth/
Joe Bastardi thinks that the planet could be on a cooling trend for decades into the future. See 3mins on video. Who knows, certainly not me.
http://www.weatherbell.com/saturday-summary-july-19-2014
Even more adjustments of the BOM data to give an even higher trend. Ken Stewart should be congratulated for his exposure of this fiddled data.
http://joannenova.com.au/2014/07/wow-look-at-those-bom-adjustments-trends-up-by-two-degrees-c/#more-37160
A new study has found there is more heat escaping to space at the top of the atmosphere. This is the opposite to the greenhouse effect that alarmist scientists have berated with us for decades.
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/new-paper-unexpectedly-finds-diverging.html
Luke?
Well received by whom?
I am a producer. . .not a paid govt employee who mass produces climate/weather reports.
It doesn’t alter the fact that us producers have our own historical records & can therefore spot politically based crapola when we see it.
I was raised to believe that the public service was there to serve the public.
Apparently in NRM & particularly climate science.
. .The public is defined as the urban green elite. . .who think us producers are red necked yokels who don’t care about higher level principles & are ‘climate criminals’.
“Like the nationalised industries and obstructive trade unions of the 1970s, the Green Blob has become a powerful self-serving caucus; it is the job of the elected politician to stand up to them. We must have the courage to tackle it head on, as Tony Abbott in Australia and Stephen Harper in Canada have done, or the economy and the environment will both continue to suffer.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10978678/Owen-Paterson-Im-proud-of-standing-up-to-the-green-lobby.html
Debbie – Jen’s point about reiterating the same point over and over now back at you.
it’s your turn to answer a question and not obfuscate. “Still waiting your detailed critique of the managing for climate variability program.”
I think you just grizzle and are not a real user. Otherwise you’d be able articulate some usages. You never do. Now my statement here will be likely met with more questions. If so – don’t bother.
Bunkum Luke.
We refer to all relevant weather/climate sites. . .govt & private.
We then compare & contrast. The last thing we would do is refer to just one.
They contain interesting information, often state the bleeding obvious & nicely present lots & lots & lots of data . . .mostly in the form of averages.
We don’t find them any more useful in terms of management decisions than they have previously been.
I love it whenever people get together and share opinions. Great blog, keep it up!