Category Archives: Climate change

Political madness on three fronts

Posted on by
Reply

I will mash these all together rather than put up three posts since they really are all about the same kind of thing: political madness.

First there is the disaster with the re-election of Dan Andrews, but I am not sure that electing Matthew Guy would have been much less of a disaster. That there was even an election going on in Victoria was something I only barely noticed. Labor will only raise my taxes and shovel heaps of money into useless construction projects – my favourite being the one billion being spent on the new train station at The Shrine. Not only will no one take the train there around 364 days of the year, but there are around half a dozen tram lines that go there already from the city. But if your aim is to create wealth-depleting forms of employment, it’s about as good as anything.

The worry is that our Federal Libs will draw the wrong lessons. At the national level, the name of the game is border protection. I realise that it is no longer fashionable to make distinctions between Australians who want to live in Australia and non-Australians who want to live in Australia, but there is a distinction, and the Libs have got to make it an election issue.

Let me meld this into climate change. I understand that there must be no end of people contributing to the party who wish to see subsidised “renewables” but you have to resist. But while some ideas are crazier than others, this one has a kind of madness that really ought to terrify anyone, specially since the probability of a new ice age seems higher than a rapidly heating planet. But how’s this: Controversial sun barrier technically possible, would be “remarkably inexpensive”.

Spraying sun-dimming chemicals high above the Earth to slow global warming could be “remarkably inexpensive”, costing about $A3.1 billion a year to run over a 15-year period, according to a study by US scientists.

Some researchers say the geo-engineering technique known as stratospheric aerosol injection (SAI) could limit rising temperatures that are causing climate change.

As yet unproven and hypothetical, it would involve the use of huge hoses, cannons or specially designed aircraft to spray large quantities of sulphate particles into the upper layer of the atmosphere to act as a reflective barrier against sunlight.

Total costs to launch a hypothetical SAI effort 15 years from now would be $A4.8 billion, scientists at Harvard University said in a report published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, adding that average annual operating costs would be about $A3.1 billion a year over 15 years.

And the last takes us to the next political sensation in the United States: Fox News has found a new ‘villain’ in Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. She is hardly a villain, more a figure of fun, someone to laugh at. But I wouldn’t laugh that much myself, since she really does represent the future of a large proportion of the Democratic Party in the US, and of parties on the left everywhere.

In addition to being a Latina woman, she’s calling for bold, progressive initiatives for America that Fox News has deemed socialism. (In reality, Ocasio-Cortez is a Democratic Socialist and is championing issues like Medicare for all and raising the minimum wage to $15 — not the government taking control of all means of production, as we would see in traditional socialist governments.)

Bringing the political culture of The Honduras to the US.

How to steal so that those who are robbed actually believe they are being made better off!

Posted on by
Reply

Santa-Unicorn

Keynesian economics defined and explained: an economic theory whereby the rich steal from the poor who are made to feel grateful because they are led to believe they are benefitting from the money taken from them and parcelled out by governments to be spent by their friends.

It may create misery, but it is a stable sort of misery in its own way.

Carbon taxes may be a new means of achieving the same end but through a different form of deceit.

The political class is the new aristocracy.

Super Grand Solar Minimum “confirmed”

Posted on by
Reply

The global warming crowd are monsters of idiocy and danger. No forecast ever turns out as stated except as a complete fluke. Sometimes Number 32 really does come up on the roulette wheel. But why stake your future on those kinds of odds? Via Instapundit:

HMM: Professor Valentina Zharkova Breaks Her Silence and CONFIRMS “Super” Grand Solar Minimum.

Even if you believe the IPCC’s worst case scenario, Zharkova’s analysis blows any ‘warming’ out of the water.

Lee Wheelbarger sums it up: even if the IPCC’s worst case scenarios are seen, that’s only a 1.5 watts per square meter increase. Zharkova’s analysis shows a 8 watts per square meter decrease in TSI to the planet.

Forget the arguments, debates and attempts to win over AGW alarmists — and just prepare.

Assuming this is true — maybe it is — how would you prepare? We should be developing fast-growing and frost-tolerant strains of important food crops, suitable for short growing seasons, right? What else?

Just build those coal-fired power plants, and build them now!

A dark age coming

Posted on by
Reply

The headline story in The AFR today begins:

The federal government has slammed plans by business to go it alone on climate and energy policy but industry leaders are holding their ground and have the backing of Labor and the Greens.

It’s a new world out there.

Meanwhile, in the US: Is The Fed Trying To Tank The Trump Economy Before The Midterms? Want to breed uncertainty? Try this on for size:

Dallas Fed President Robert Kaplan said he still favors the central bank raising short-term interest rates three more times before deciding whether more increases will be necessary to keep the economy on an even keel.

This suggests the Federal Reserve should lift rates at its December, March and June policy meetings “unless something changes,” Mr. Kaplan said Tuesday in a Wall Street Journal interview.

Fed Chairman Jerome Powell said then that rates remain low enough to continue stimulating economic growth. But according to the Wall Street Journal other officials have expressed a range of views, and some uncertainty, about how high rates would have to go to reach a so-called neutral level that neither spurs nor slows growth.

A COMMENT ON RISING RATES: I have been asked about rising rates in the comments. And as I have said in the past, rates have been too low for too long which has lowered the productivity of our array of investments. The issue is not whether rates should rise – they should – but whether they should rise now immediately before an election. The effect on share markets was obvious enough. Front-page treatment of a falling market can move voter sentiment, specially the way it can be played on by the media. The Fed kept rates down throughout the Obama presidency and there was never any doubt it would push them up once PDT was elected. Optics is all, and even if the adjustments brought on by higher rates are positive for the economy, it may not look that way to anyone who is paying out more on their mortgages or small-business loans.

The most ignorant highly educated fools in history

Posted on by
2

This is from Campus Review: What Scott Morrison doesn’t get about most of the voting public. And what he doesn’t get is that they are ignorant fools. Here’s the text:

When now-Prime Minster Scott Morrison brought a lump of coal into parliament in 2017, pleading “don’t be afraid, don’t be scared, it won’t hurt you,” he made a critical error. That is, assuming he wants the Coalition to retain power at the next federal election.

That’s because to Generations X (b. 1961–81) and Y (b. 1981–96), which together comprise the largest segment of the voting public, combating climate change is their priority.

Australia’s generational spread, per 2016 Census data. Photo: ABC

This is a key finding of the University of Melbourne’s Life Patterns report, released this week.

The longitudinal study, which followed a cohort that left high school in 1991 and another that left in 2006, further revealed that although they both cared about minimising the use of coal, they did so for different reasons. Gen-Xers generally worried about their children’s health, whereas Gen-Yers tended to want to protect future generations.

Report co-author Dr Julia Cook, Research Fellow at the Melbourne Graduate School of Education, explained how the researchers reached this conclusion.

“In 2017, we asked participants to nominate the three most important issues facing Australia.

“One major issue unites both generations: concerns about the environment and climate change …

“… Both groups consistently expressed grave concerns about the general lack of action towards climate change mitigation from the current government.”

Among Gen-Xers (now aged 43-44), women were almost twice as likely to think this than men, yet among Gen-Yers (now aged 28-29), men predominantly held this view, albeit by a slim margin: 40 per cent compared to 34 per cent.

“We’re not going to have air to breathe soon,” a mother living in a country town said.

A father living in a rural area was equally alarmed: “Climate change could ruin their [his children’s] lives and our governments are not acting.”

The other issues the groups aired tended to reflect their respective life stages. For instance, Gen-Yers were concerned about jobs and housing affordability, while Gen-Xers were anxious about the cost of living and education – a worry potentially exacerbated by Scott Morrison’s independent and Catholic schools funding announcement on Thursday.

I actually think this is reasonably accurate. These people will bring on a collapse of our civilisation – their civilisation – and never know what happened. And then by some coincidence, this was in The Oz today: Labor’s mining of millennials’ envy is a cynical ploy that may work. There you find:

Labor’s delusion that government is better able to order economic affairs than markets has cost Australian taxpayers tens of billion dollars over the decade. Its legacy includes unplanned and unwanted school buildings, the National Broadband Network, an unreliable and expensive electricity system and debt that will pass to the next generation, and possibly the one after that.

Yet Labor is doubling down. Bill Shorten is campaigning on the party’s least diluted socialist platform since Gough Whitlam. He promises intrusive government, and more steeply progressive tax. He will re-regulate the Labor market and hand back more power to the unions.

He will attack private health insurance and penalise self-funded retirees. He will throw more money at public schools and public health under the pretence of improving services.

He will resume subsidies to wind and solar farms, bringing more pain to consumers.

Economic freedom fighters like Uber and Airbnb will face a torrid time. Labor’s addiction to regulate, combined with the trade union movement’s determination to keep every worker within their grasp, will bring down the curtains on the sharing and gig economies.

Which sums up to this:

Labor’s politics of envy has a subliminal appeal to millennials. Winding back negative gearing or capital gains concessions for investors appeals to their grievances, even though its effect will be to tighten the rental property market on which most of them depend.

Higher education on demand has inflated career expectations for some. A significant proportion find themselves employed in jobs for which they are over-qualified, on paper at least.

The Opposition Leader is relying on these voters to get him home.

Mis-educated by design, perhaps, but with no actual knowledge – both among the teachers and the taught – the tragic result.

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply
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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
Reply

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

Posted on by
2

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.