Yes but this is all still about risk management and that is the fundamental point. The risk of doing nothing is unacceptable.
Not to me it's not. Man made climate change is a giant con. Natural climate change is real, cyclical, and cannot be influenced. I'd much rather money was spent on preparing for it than trying to stop something that can't be stopped. What we have now is a giant lefty wealth-redistribution scheme dressed up in a trendy cause, and I'm pleased that less and less people are falling for it.
If you ignore his inputs and outputs it is a good video on risk management. It is, however, very misleading in relation to climate change because "no change if we act" & "change if we don't act" are not the only possible outcomes. If it were possible to return to pre-industrial revolution atmospheric CO2 conditions would that prevent climate change? I argue that climate change happens and therefore our efforts would be in vain.
I'll say it again. Doing nothing is unacceptable. I'm not arguing (in this instance....but I am happy too) about whether its man made or natural. Its happening, so let's do something about it......because at the moment we aren't!! See above
See my original response to video you posted At this point in time all expenditure on combatting climate change is on reducing CO2 emissions... something that is unlikely to be successful. This is what I am arguing against! I do agree with your point that we should be doing something rather than nothing... I just think the something shouldn't be carbon capture and sequestration!
there is nothing that Australia can do that will have the slightest impact on atmospheric CO2. The annual growth alone, in emissions from emerging countries, is larger than our total output. The likelihood of a technology/scientific breakthrough being developed here is nothing but a political delusion being used to justify wealth redistribution (the carbon tax). I have spent my life building technology in Australia, the entire eco system here is massively weighted against innovation and/or commercialisation, one in ten thousand ideas make it through and then are usually sold to offshore companies, because there is no capital here. The global growth in CO2 is coming from China and India, countries which are lifting millions of their people out of poverty. We have no moral right to stop them. If CO2 is causing climate change, it cannot be stopped, we should be focussed on managing the consequences. and BTW, if the Labor party is so passionate about fixing global warming, shut down the brown coal power stations, as they promised when the carbon tax was introduced. Just. Another. Lie.
Who cares about global warming? Once the middle east (Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt etc) and North Korea have atomic bombs, we're all fuicked.
Where didn't I take that into account? I thought I acknowledged your post and focussed on adaptation? I know. Thats why I didn't focuss on man made vs natural climate change above. I can and I'm happy to argue that, but I specifically said I wasn't? I thought I acknowledged your position? The rest of your post I agreed with but this is crap and you know it.
Please explain how it is crap "LABOR'S PLAN TO CLOSE some of Australia's dirtiest coal fired power stations is teetering on the brink of being abandoned, or severely scaled back..." Source- ABC, 9th Aug 2012. If we were serious about cutting emissions we would be pushing ahead with nuclear power. It is madness that we don't in this country, given our enormous reserves of uranium. And ironically the clowns who are most against it are the ones who most want us to reduce emissions!
http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1689319/Labor-scraps-plan-to-close-dirty-power-stations while being a nuclear advocate myself , the problem I see from this article is that the energy moguls are just greedy bastards who wanted even more money to close down than they are worth and have still passed on increases in billing even though they received carbon tax relief via $100Ms of taxpayer money
Because it is an over simplification of a very complex issue....but upon reflection.... you and Ian are right. The government continues to shoot itself in the foot on these issues and deserves the public's criticism....so I apologise for my comment
Very gracious of you Darren. I try not to be emotive when posting on this topic, but I am so dismayed at the rank hypocrisy of the govt and the Greens. We have a carbon tax because it was the deal Gillard needed to do to get power. But she sells it as a virtuous "reform". Typically, the tax they came up with is dysfunctional. The Greens want carbon pricing because they are socialists at heart and want wealth redistribution. None of them have ever run a business or invented anything, they deal in the world of academic theory and polemic spin.
"energy moguls" - have you been reading your "Socialist Daily" again? The State Govts were happy to sell the power stations and spend the money on nice new infrastructure. The companies who bought were spending their shareholder's (and banks) money and are obliged to produce a return on investment. The incompetent Federal Govt obviously hadn't had sufficient negotiation with the owners before they announced their carbon tax dream. This has been the hallmark of the Rudd/Gillard govts - a mad rush to get the media attention before the details are sorted. If their budget wasn't a shambles, if they hadn't p*ssed money away on useless pink bats and school halls, if they weren't spending $1.6billion on the boat people fiasco, we could have got rid of the dirtiest power stations in the southern hemisphere. That would have been real reform.
Oh come on KIAI! Surely someone as intelligent as you didn't swallow the "pink batts fiasco" BS - roof insulation is THE SINGLE MOST EFFECTIVE item any home can have! Volunteering to remove same from YOUR roof?The insulation wasn't the problem - dodgy 'business' people were the problem. And the school halls might not make any difference to your kid's learning but they were all that kept many small -medium builders (and a few bigger ones) afloat between 2008 and now. Again, this was a lateral thinking solution which doesn't take much to see. Boat people - $1.6b would pay 66,000 people $24000 a year (more than welfare pays I believe...) but let's see how the opposition, 'press' and chattering classes would squeal if we just suggested saving the $1.6b and giving welfare to 22,000 immigrants for 3 years... We have the crap government we deserve based on a electorate that doesn't look beyond 'what's in it for me' - an attitude most recently cultivated to it's full glory by little Johnny Howard. No government in Australia will ever push 'real reform' because the average Aussie won't face up to the reality of what that means for them (living within their means, taking responibility for themselves and their families).
No, the problem was/is the Labor government. Their collective lack of any real world business experience led to all these programs being executed in a half assed manner and created the "dodgy business people". The "school halls" program was an utter joke. Public schools paying upto 60% more for an equivalent building than private schools. Lol.
Agree entirely There was political urgency to implement the insulation program which resulted in a poorly executed scheme, some installers being killed and some houses burning down. The minister overrode his departments advice in his rush to implement the scheme. Interesting too how every roof insulation cost exactly $1500 , the maximum amount of the scheme. How do you spell RORT? Apart from that it was great. Rinse and repeat for the building scheme. In many cases it allowed a bunch of small & medium sized builders to rip off the community with overpriced school halls. Wonderful that, I would have hoped these are the builders that you want out of business permanently, rather than drip feeding them work so they can "rip off another day". Both of these were fundamentally good ideas, but the execution was CRAP. And its not due to the public servants, it's about the political push from the government to get things done to meet a politcal agenda & timetable that ended up compromising these schemes I'll also add in the implementation and subsequent withdrawl of rebates for solar panels. That's also created another shambles. M
totally agree Mike, but, even if the govt of the day HAD instituted proper guidelines the rorting crowd will always find a loophole, in these cases they weren't holes but huge tunnels with arrows pointing the way. I have this sneaking feeling that there is a bug in the solar panel scheme that will come back to bite the implementors of the scheme just like there was for the solar heating rebate. If you installed solar heating in QLD the local electricity suppliers were changing the general usage rate to the higher heating rate thereby ensuring they were getting the same or higher fees for supplying electricity I subsequently dismissed solar heating as an option due to the number of years it would take to recoup the initial outlay and knowing the thinking of the local electricity commission there will be a mechanism to recoup the loss from solar powered houses. As to the insulation, I haven't looked at the guidelines for the suppliers of the insulation but the biggest issue seems to be with the training the installers received (or lack of it seems). With a boy just finished high school and wanting him to get some experience I would have been extremely angry if he had applied to become an installer of insulation for some startup shyster who didn't supply training and subsequently due to inexperience he was killed because he was unaware of the dangers of working in the roofs of houses. Who have been charged in these cases so far ?
You can guarantee it wont be anyone in the Labor Party JM. There have been some though. Here is just one of a few. http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/company-fined-100000-over-insulation-death-20110830-1jjwd.html
so, according to that press release it seems the company supplied training and non-metallic staples but somehow this poor bugger was still using them. If it was my boy I'd want to know who got the metal staples and if it was my boy then why was he not told AND supervised as to the correct equipment to use. From where I sit it still falls on the shoulders of the company and it looks like OH&S have been bought off as there have always been electrical procedures that need to be followed when working in the roofs of houses. There is a reason ONLY electricians are qualified to install circuits, lights, GPOs, fans, etc. I have documentation for all the electrical work done on my house, if someone gets in my roof and dies I know I'm not accountable but my electrician had better be sure he did the right thing. If any govt institutes a scheme like this there are institutions with workplace rules that have been around for many years to cover the implementation of anything that goes into a roof place Seems another was being charged back in 2010 : http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/insulation-death-charges-laid-20100506-ufwl.html
OK, I agree the execution could have been better, but as you said, they were fundamentally good ideas. Contrast that with the Liberal compulsory health insurance - a rort cooked up in collusion with big business where the only 'winners' were the ad agencies! And you're right, it is the 'political imperative' that forces/buggers all these things.
