They’re crazy but as they see it only half as crazy as Labor

The PM, in today’s Oz:

Scott Morrison has said Labor’s 45 per cent emissions reduction target would lead to the closure of every coal-fired power station in Australia.

The Prime Minister said electricity prices were starting to drop and would continue to do so under the government’s policies.

“The alternative is Labor will put into law 45 per cent emissions reduction target, the target we have that has been the commitment of the government for many years now of 26 per cent, that won’t have a material impact on electricity prices, that is my advice,” Mr Morrison told 5AA radio.

“But to take it to 45 per cent would pretty much shut down every coal fired power station in the country, it would increase people’s power bills by about $1400 on average for every single household.”

Meanwhile, from someone self-identifying as the Minister for the Environment, promising to do what cannot be done:

One of my responsibilities as the new Minister for Environment is to ensure Australia remains on track to meet our international commitments.

To be clear on this, Australia will meet our Paris emissions target without compromising the economy. Our approach remains the best way to meet our 2030 target. No country in the world is relying on a single policy. This is the responsible approach to policy, as is reviewing your existing policies to ensure they are meeting your objectives.

The Emissions Reduction Fund — a $2.55 billion investment — is one of the tools we are using to reduce emissions. The ERF has contracted with farmers, landholders and indigenous communities to deliver practical investment in our helping regional communities while reducing emissions.

The message: we are only half as crazy as Labor.

Just in case the evidence mattered

Global Temperatures Drop Back To 2002 Levels
Arctic Sea Ice Back To 2007 Levels

From here

Global temperatures fell back to 0.19C in August. This means the year to date (YTD) average is 0.23C, putting them back to roughly where they were in 2002. —Paul Homewood, Not A Lot Of People Know That, 2 September 2018 

Summer is over, and Greenland’s surface has gained 510 billion tons of ice over the past year – about 40% above normal. Last year Greenland gained a little more ice, about 50% above normal. Last year, the Danish Meteorological Institute reported on the gain in ice, and blamed it on Hurricane Nicole. I wonder what their excuse will be this year? —The Deplorable Climate Science Blog, 31 August 2018 

Arctic sea ice is on pace to be close to last year and above those minima observed in 2015 and 2016. —Ron Clutz, Science Matters, 31 August 201 

To which may be added this.

How Climate Policies Slam the World’s Poor


A new study has found that strong global climate action would cause far more hunger and food insecurity than climate change itself. Models suggest that climate change could put an extra 24 million people at risk of hunger. But a global carbon tax would increase food prices and push 78 million more people into risk of hunger, especially in sub-Saharan Africa and India.

Lomborg argues in New York Post that if we want to eradicate hunger, there are more effective ways, such as a global trade deal. And we need to get smarter about climate change, too, focussing on more investment into green energy R&D

Workers need a pay rise and are therefore determined never to get one

Two kinds of contrary stories, but only contrary if you are not part of the cargo cult mentality of the left. Then we can have higher real incomes and at the very same time throw over the cheapest energy sources available to us. First we have this: ‘Australia needs a pay rise’: Change the Rules volunteers reach out to thousands in door knock campaign.

Union members are volunteering to conduct thousands of conversations with Australians about the desperate need for pay rises during a national door knock in September.

Over two weekends, door knocks and market stalls will be held in more than 40 locations, covering Queensland, NSW, the ACT, Victoria, Tasmania, South Australia and Western Australia.

Volunteers will be hearing people’s concerns about the lack of fair pay rises under the Abbott/Turnbull/Morrison Government, and talking about the union movement’s plan to change the rules so people can get fair pay rises that keep pace with the cost of living.

And then there’s this: $15b European trade deal doomed if Australia dodges Paris pledge.

The Coalition’s internal climate war risks damaging the economy after Europe declared it would reject a $15 billion trade deal with Australia unless the Morrison government keeps its pledge to cut pollution under the Paris accord….

Labor’s climate change and energy spokesman Mark Butler said the government had no emissions reduction plan and would fail to meet its Paris goal.

“The Prime Minister might think he can get away with [failing to cut emissions] domestically, but it is clear it will not be accepted by our international trading partners, who rightly have an expectation the Australian government will act to deliver on our international obligations,” he said.

I used to think they said all those things just because there are people stupid enough to take all this on board without seeing the problem. Now I think they are just this stupid themselves. But at least The Coalition are redeeming themselves. Now they have to get the rest of the country to see the point, or at least 51%. Not really such a big ask and there’s still plenty of time to do it.

Australia in the climate change news

This would certainly be a change. This is how our change of government is being seen from the UK.

GWPF Newsletter 30/08/18
Australian Govt Promises To Abandon Green Subsidies & Ignore Climate Targets
Climate Change Action Off The Agenda Under Morrison Government
Australian’s new Energy Minister Angus Taylor has unveiled a new energy policy focused exclusively on reducing electricity prices, in a strong signal the Morrison government will abandon all efforts to lower carbon emissions. The move comes a week after the issue of climate change precipitated the ousting of former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull.  —The New Daily, 30 August 2018

 

Renewable energy subsidies and emission-reduction targets will be replaced with a focus on lowering electricity prices under the Morrison government. New Energy Minister Angus Taylor said the federal energy policy has been “a mess” and says the fact prices have soared while blackouts persist means something has “gone terribly wrong”. The Daily Telegraph understands emission-reduction will also play no future role in ­energy policy. —The Daily Telegraph, 30 August 2018

The new Prime Minister — who took a lump of coal into parliament and accused Labor of “coalaphobia” — is under pressure from colleagues to support clean-coal technology. Whether it’s marginal seats in Queensland, western Sydney or Victoria, the message is clear: voters want action on energy prices, not emissions targets. –Geoff Chambers,The Australian, 28 August 2018

The most climate-skeptical nation on Earth

This is how our political troubles have been viewed in the US, at least according to the Crackpot News Network: Why not wreck the planet? It could save your political skin. Although already overtaken by events, there you may read:

(CNN) There is a certain mindset in politics, present the world over and across the political spectrum, which distrusts expertise. That mindset is presently revealing itself in Australia, where this week a small group of conservative-minded members of parliament held the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, hostage over climate policy.

Turnbull’s center-right Liberal party had pledged to reduce emissions from Australia’s energy companies more than a quarter (from 2005 levels) by 2030, a key part of its efforts to meet its international obligations.

 

But several of his own MPs, led by his predecessor as prime minister and long-term rival Tony Abbott, forced him into a climbdown by threatening to vote against the legislation. Turnbull’s government barely has a majority in the House of Representatives, and losing such a key vote could have led to a leadership challenge. Cowed, he dropped the pledge, and on Tuesday narrowly survived the revolt.

 

Yet for large parts of the political class here, and the people who vote for them, climate change is seen as a scam perpetrated by liberal, anti-business scientists.

 

One in five Australians, a poll last year showed, believe that climate change is a “hoax.” Another poll in 2015 declared that Australia was the most climate-skeptical nation on Earth.

 

Abbott himself has said that the “settled science” of climate change is “absolute crap” and that efforts to reduce its impact are like “killing goats to appease the volcano gods.” Another politician, the anti-immigration populist Malcolm Roberts, has clashed with scientist Brian Cox, claiming that NASA data was “manipulated” to make climate change appear worse than it was, to Cox’s astonishment.

 
And you can see here the evidence we are ignoring, from that same report.
 

Australia is a country where environmental damage is obvious, in the form of the hole in the ozone layer over the Antarctic caused by use of CFCs decades ago, the steady bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef from warming, carbon-dioxide-acidified seas, and the ever more prevalent bushfires.

Makes me proud to be an Australian.

 

A positive story about both coal AND Donald Trump

The world may really be about to change. From Donald Trump saves coal from renewables surge from The Weekly Standard and published in The Australian.

No country has a greater abundance of hydrocarbon energy than the US. The corollary is that no country was as big a loser from participating in the Paris Agreement and its intention to progressively decarbonise the world’s hydrocarbon superpower. On July 10, the Energy Information Administration forecast that next year the US would produce 12 million barrels of oil a day and overtake Saudi Arabia to be the world’s No 1 producer. When it comes to the politics of energy, the interests of the US and European green ideology are irreconcilable.

Trump understands this. “Our country is blessed with extraordinary energy abundance, which we didn’t know of even five years ago and certainly 10 years ago,” the President said last year. Those remarks were not only a paean to America’s energy resources, they were a full-dress rejection of the policies of his predecessor and of the Democrats’ goal of Europeanising US energy policy.

“We have nearly 100 years’ worth of natural gas and more than 250 years’ worth of clean, beautiful coal,” he said. “We are a top producer of petroleum and the No 1 producer of natural gas. We have so much more than we ever thought possible. We are really in the driving seat. And you know what? We don’t want to let other countries take away our sovereignty and tell us what to do and how to do it. That’s not going to happen. With these incredible resources, my administration will seek not only American energy independence that we’ve been looking for so long, but American energy dominance.

“And we’re going to be an exporter — exporter. We will be dominant. We will export American energy all over the world … These energy exports will create countless jobs for our people, and provide true energy security to our friends, partners and allies all across the globe.”

For the first time since 1992, when George HW Bush went to the Rio Earth Summit, a US president was outlining a global energy strategy diametrically opposed to the tenets underlying the UN climate process. Trump was establishing a rival pole based on energy realism and energy abundance.

On just this alone, PDT can lift the American economy into a prolonged period of rising growth and higher incomes. It’s amazing that no one else has the strength and courage to do the same anywhere else.

What did Australians use before they had candles?

Electricity!

Maddening because all of it is destructive of wealth and community but with absolutely nothing in return. If you see global warming and climate change as the biggest hustle in the history of the human race, repulsively stupid, where the community is defrauded and robbed to benefit a handful of grifters in a way that will make some of them very wealthy indeed [see Al Gore], or will raise incomes and status for quite a number beyond any worth provided whatsoever [the halls of academia and the business community are filled with such vultures], then the world as you see it has truly gone mad. Infuriating for the rest of us, but without the slightest idea how to change direction before we go over the cliff.

Something interesting happened in Canada!

The vid above is about policing in the most woke (= idiotic) city on earth in the most woke (= insane) province in Canada’s fair domain. The rest is about energy policies which provides a lesson to us all.

Ontario was once the wealthiest province in Canada, but is in the process of proving that while there may be much ruin in a great nation, eventually you really can ruin the place if you work at it long enough and hard enough. Here is a cautionary tale proving there are some people for whom no level of ruin is ever enough: $312 Billion: Green Energy Makes Ontario the Most Debt-Ridden Province on Earth. Not long, worth your time, in my view, but here is something to get you started.

A major issue has been crippling energy and environmental policies. It began when, in 1992, then-premier Bob Rae appointed businessman and former UN Under-Secretary-General Maurice Strong to be chairman of Ontario Hydro. At the time, Ontario was a prosperous, economically sound province. Strong changed that when he applied the energy and environmental policies he proposed for the entire world. In 1992, he introduced them through his creation of the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) and the conference he chaired in Rio de Janeiro.

At the conference, Strong introduced his creation of Agenda 21, a global energy and environment policy of world-shattering implications, and got it ratified. It was at the same conference that world leaders signed the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC set the ground rules for the UN’s climate science body, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In Article 1 of the UNFCCC treaty, it specified:

“Climate change” means a change of climate which is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to natural climate variability observed over considerable time periods.

It is a definition that predetermines the outcome of the IPCC’s work. You cannot isolate human causes of climate change without knowledge and understanding of natural changes and mechanisms. The fact that we cannot forecast the weather beyond 72 hours demonstrates how little we understand about natural climate change and its causes. Accurate forecasts require accurate science, and yet the science is still highly immature.

To further his anti-development agenda, Strong needed “science” to isolate and prove that increasing carbon dioxide emissions from industrial activity, a natural outcome of increasing production, would cause runaway global warming. Once the science was determined, the bureaucracies of national weather offices such as Environment Canada (EC) could push policies to cripple energy production, industry, and development. It is not coincidental that Gordon McBean, later assistant deputy minister of EC, chaired the founding meeting of the IPCC in 1985. Other countries and regions were slow to adopt these principles, but in Ontario, Strong was able to use his position at Ontario Hydro to implement with impunity the crippling policies he orchestrated in Rio.

You’ll never guess what happened next.

 

The politics of the environment

Steve Hayward who wrote the article discussed on the decline but sadly not the fall of the politics of climate change wrote an earlier and related article on Conservatism and Climate Science. This is the core of the issue discussed:

The conservative ambivalence or hostility toward the intersection of science and policy can be broken down into three interconnected parts: theoretical, practical, and political. I begin by taking a brief tour through these three dimensions, for they help explain why appeals to scientific authority or “consensus” are guaranteed to be effective means of alienating conservatives and spurring their opposition to most climate initiatives. At the root of many controversies today, going far beyond climate change, are starkly different perspectives between left and right about the nature and meaning of reason and the place of science.

This is his final conclusion found at the very end:

Liberals and environmentalists would do well to take on board the categorical imperative of climate policy from a conservative point of view, namely, that whatever policies are developed, they must be compatible with individual liberty and democratic institutions, and cannot rely on coercive or unaccountable bureaucratic administration.

Nice thought, except that for liberals and environmentalists, who are largely the same group, the very aim is to achieve coercive and unaccountable bureaucratic administration. They are not interested in the issues or in finding the dimension of the problems involved and seeking solutions to whatever problems there are. Their only interest is taking control over our lives and running things themselves without interference.