The University [...]]]> Greenland has been warmer that currently several times in the last 8000 years. That is Greenland has been warmer than today, with lower levels of Carbon Dioxide levels that today. Two studies have been released over the past few weeks that show that there was less Artic Sea Ice than today, and higher temperatures.

The University of Copenhagen has a study which examined driftwood deposits over the last ten thousand years, and it showed that “For several thousand years, there was much less sea ice in the Arctic Ocean – probably less than half of current amounts.” .  During a period between 8000 and 5000 years ago called the Holocene Climate Optimum there was half the level of sea ice than there is today. Yet the world did not tip into “runaway climate change” as the doom-sayers predict we will today, with a higher level of ice cover.

Another peer reviewed paper published by Takuro Kobashi and others shows that Greenland surface temperatures where higher than today several times over the last 4000 years. Of course you can be sure that none of these studies will be mentioned on the ABC or published in the Fairfax media.

Greenland temperatures over the last 4000 years

If this had been a long heat-wave the advocates of the AGW religion would be telling us all how this was all caused by global warming. However when its the first significant snowfall in [...]]]> New York City has its earliest snowfall in 140 years. 2 million people are without power in the North Eastern United States.

If this had been a long heat-wave the advocates of the AGW religion would be telling us all how this was all caused by global warming. However when its the first significant snowfall in October since 1879, they all stay pretty quiet.

The earliest snow in 140 years in Central Park New York City

“People with respiratory complaints will most certainly benefit with what will be cleaner air for them.” . [...]]]> I was struck by a comment in this Australian story about the carbon tax passing today through the House of Representatives. Its not the first time I have seen comments that completely show no understanding of the carbon tax.

“People with respiratory complaints will most certainly benefit with what will be cleaner air for them.” . Does Charles of NSW have any idea what the carbon tax is about? Carbon Dioxide is not know for causing respiratory complaints. If the Australia Federal Government removed 100% of the carbon dioxide from the air, there would be exactly the same number of people with respiratory complaints, but unfortunately with no carbon dioxide in the atmosphere there would be no plant growth worldwide, so people who had respiratory complaints would, along with everyone else, starve to death.

Eventually the real effects of the Carbon Tax will dawn on the minority of Australians that support the tax, and they may well join the majority that opposes it.

However on this very day that the Carbon Tax was passed through the Australian Federal Parliament here were the top ten read stories on news.com.au,  as well as that pro climate change paper, The Age. Obviously Australians care little:

Here are links to the carbon tax bills:

1. Clean Energy Bill 2011 

2. Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011

3. Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011 

4. Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011 

5. Clean Energy (Tax [...]]]> Thousands of extra public servants. New public servant bureaucracies.  1129 pages and 255,539 words of legislation. How much will it decrease the earth’s temperature? zero.

Here are links to the carbon tax bills:

1. Clean Energy Bill 2011 

2. Clean Energy (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011

3. Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates Amendments) Bill 2011 

4. Clean Energy (Household Assistance Amendments) Bill 2011 

5. Clean Energy (Tax Laws Amendments) Bill 2011 

6. Clean Energy (Fuel Tax Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011 

7. Clean Energy (Customs Tariff Amendment) Bill 2011 

8. Clean Energy (Excise Tariff Legislation Amendment) Bill 2011 

9. Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Import Levy) Amendment Bill 2011 

10. Ozone Protection and Synthetic Greenhouse Gas (Manufacture Levy) Amendment Bill 2011 

11. Clean Energy (Unit Shortfall Charge—General) Bill 2011 

12. Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Auctions) Bill 2011 

13. Clean Energy (Unit Issue Charge—Fixed Charge) Bill 2011 

14. Clean Energy (International Unit Surrender Charge) Bill 2011 

15. Clean Energy (Charges—Excise) Bill 2011 

16. Clean Energy Regulator Bill 2011  

17. Climate Change Authority Bill 2011 

18. Clean Energy (Charges—Customs) Bill 2011 

England has had its coldest summer since 1993, with an average temperature of 15C. The normal average is 17C. This is not [...]]]> The carbon dioxide levels go up every year. The IPCC (International Panel on Climate Change) forecasts show that the world should be warming more and more, yet observation does not match those computer models.

England has had its coldest summer since 1993, with an average temperature of 15C. The normal average is 17C. This is not just the odd cold day, this is a entire season.  Last December was the coldest December in 120 years in the UK.

Is it just possible that the climate scientists have their computer models wrong? The latest CLOUD (Cosmics Leaving Outdoor Droplets) experiments at CERN show what some climate change sceptics have been saying for years, that Cosmic Rays effect cloud formation. This means that the existing computer models for cloud formation are wrong, and that the sun can have a bigger input on the earth’s atmosphere than previously thought.

However our Prime Minister Julia Gillard says the science is settled.

Just maybe this object 140 million kilometres away, may have more influence of the climate than man made carbon dioxide

The Treasury modelling predicts that GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will be 2.8 per cent lower in 2050 than it would have been without a [...]]]> According to the Australian Federal Government Treasury modelling the introduction of a carbon tax will reduce Australia’s National Income. How much will it be decreased by over the 38 years to 2050?

The Treasury modelling predicts that GDP (Gross Domestic Product) will be 2.8 per cent lower in 2050 than it would have been without a carbon tax. Doesn’t seem much, only 2.8%? Well try adding the reduction in GDP over the 38 years and you get $1.35 trillion dollars.

That is what it will cost Australians over the next 38 years more than one trillion dollars in lost income.

Imagine how many hospitals, roads and schools could be built over the next 38 years with that $1.38 trillion dollars?

Percentage GDP loss from the Carbon Tax

Wayne Swan said only two days ago that “Australia was going to be exporting more coal”.  That way the [...]]]> Treasury modelling shows coal production drops by 30% by 2020

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan might keep saying that the coal industry has a bright future, but the Treasury economic modelling shows a different story.

Wayne Swan said only two days ago that “Australia was going to be exporting more coal”.  That way the Chinese can burn it in their power stations instead of ours.

Perhaps Treasurer Swan should read some of his departments economic modelling. To quote from the Treasury modelling  “In 2020, coal mining output is around 30 per cent lower than it would otherwise be” .

Looking at the attached graph it shows even greater variability, with a possible drop of up to 45% in coal production:

This advertisement features Geodynamics, a renewable energy company that has spend the last ten years trying to develop geothermal energy production near Innamincka in northern South Australia.

How many Megawatts has Geodynamics produced in electricity?

Zero.

Geodynamics has spent ten years [...]]]> The latest carbon ad, paid for again by the Australian taxpayer to further ‘educate’ us about renewable energy.

This advertisement features Geodynamics, a renewable energy company that has spend the last ten years trying to develop geothermal energy production near Innamincka in northern South Australia.

How many Megawatts has Geodynamics produced in electricity?

Zero.

Geodynamics has spent ten years spruiking its grand plans. This Greens/Labor Government ad states that 10 percent of Australia’s power could come from geothermal, yet in ten years with ten of millions of dollars of government subsidy Geodynamics has produced not one watt of power.

Geodynamics got its first $5 million government subsidy in 2005. In April 2007 Geodynamics chief executive Adrian Williams said that by 2010 they would be provide some power into the grid, so far zero.  In November 2009 Geodynamics was awarded $150 from the  Renewable Energy Demonstration Program (REDP), still no power.

In October 2008 Geodynamics announced it would provide a demonstration plant and provide power to the town of Innamincka, population 12, by early 2009.  Now this is the company that this Labor Government advertisement is pushing as potentially providing ten percent of Australia’s base-load power. Have they managed to power the 12 people people in Innamincka in the following almost three years?

No.

The two wind turbine shown are made by Vestas a Spanish company who manufacture their Wind turbines in Spain, China and the USA.

No [...]]]> One of the new carbon tax ads, paid for by the Australian taxpayer to “educate” us.  The start of the advertisement is about Hepburn Wind and there are two wind turbines in view.

The two wind turbine shown are made by Vestas a Spanish company who manufacture their Wind turbines in Spain, China and the USA.

No high-tech green jobs for Australians. We will lose high paid coal-miners and replace them with low paid workers who can dig holes for the foundations for the wind turbines.

And maybe they will need someone to polish the blades?

Are these the same economists that did not see the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) coming?

For example Peter Martin extolling the virtues of the [...]]]> Now we should be really worried

Carbon Tax supporter Fairfax journalist Peter Martin tweets enthusiastically that 59 per cent of economists at the Economic Society support the carbon tax. We should be so relieved.

Are these the same economists that did not see the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) coming?

For example Peter Martin extolling the virtues of the Labor Government and how well it was doing, and how rosy the future looked in February 2008.

Or the Reserve Bank in March 2008 stating that inflation was the real problem, and Australia was just due for a bit of below par growth.

Of course there were those hundreds of economists in Treasury in January 2008 predicting an 18 billion dollar surplus for the Federal Government.

We should so trust economists. They are so good are predicting the future. How could they get a carbon tax wrong?

the GFC so well predicted by economists. We should be fine if they say the carbon tax is OK?

Peabody Energy Corporation are to develop an open cut coal mine that will produce 50 million tonnes per year of coal. This coal burnt in power stations [...]]]> A new coal mine in China, in Xinjiang Uygur being developed by Peabody Energy will produce almost as much CO2 as the CO2 emissions saved by Australia’s Carbon Tax.

Peabody Energy Corporation are to develop an open cut coal mine that will produce 50 million tonnes per year of coal. This coal burnt in power stations (or anywhere else) could produce up to 142 million tonnes of CO2 annually. (the exact amount depends on the type of coal). Thats 142 million tonnes per year of extra CO2 from just one coal mine, versus the 160 million tonnes saved with an Australian Carbon Tax.

Of course the Greens want to close down Australian coal mines.

Just one coal mine in China wipes out the efforts in Australia costing billions of dollars and hurting millions of Australians.

142 million tonnes of CO2 per annum from just one coal mine in China

The Carbon Tax aims to reduce Australia’s CO2 output by 160 million tonnes. World CO2 emissions in 2008 were 29,888,121 million tonnes.

So that makes Australia’s CO2 reduction 0.00053533% . That is such a small number its [...]]]> Labor/Greens alliance Prime Minister Julia Gillard does not like to answer this question, because it is such a small number.

The Carbon Tax aims to reduce Australia’s CO2 output by 160 million tonnes. World CO2 emissions in 2008 were 29,888,121 million tonnes.

So that makes Australia’s CO2 reduction 0.00053533% . That is such a small number its hard to comprehend. Think of it as approximately 5/10,000   or 5 divided by ten thousand  percent.

However that is based on 2008 CO2 output, and the 160 million tonnes saving is aimed to happen in 2020. What is the percentage saving of the worlds CO2 output by Australia in 2020?

Well its predicted that CO2 output will rise by 1.2% per annum. That means in 2020 world carbon dioxide emissions will be 34,487,742 million tonnes.

So Australia’s carbon tax saves 0.000463933% of the worlds CO2 output. Its even less than 5 divided by ten thousand percent.

Billions of dollars of taxes on Australia people and businesses. Extra federal government agencies with thousands more bureaucrats. Businesses closing and businesses moving off-shore.

All to save 0.000463933% of the worlds CO2 output.

Growth in Carbon Dioxide emissions in China

Current Greenhouse gas emissions are at 578 million tonnes of CO2.

In 2020 [...]]]> Prime Minister Julia Gillard and Greens leader Bob Brown don’t want to point this out, but under the Carbon Tax – according to the governments own treasury modelling -the amount of Carbon Dioxide “Pollution” emitted by Australia as a whole will increase by 2020.

Current Greenhouse gas emissions are at 578 million tonnes of CO2.

In 2020 even with a carbon tax they will be 621 million tonnes of CO2.

But then it gets better. In 2050 after 38 years of a carbon tax followed by an emissions trading scheme Australia’s CO2 emissions will be 545 million tonnes, just 5% less then what they are today.

If the Great Barrier Reef and Kakadu are under risk today because of dangerous climate change, how are they going to be better off in 38 years time with almost the same level of CO2 output?

Only 5% less carbon output after 38 years of carbon tax and ETS

And to meet the target of 160 Million tonnes [...]]]> And the rest of the world does not care.

Australia will be the first country in the world to have an economy wide carbon tax. Even though Australia produces 1.32% of the worlds carbon dioxide output, we will be punishing our industry and people with a carbon tax.

And to meet the target of 160 Million tonnes of carbon dioxide, we will not be reducing our own emissions, we will achieve two thirds of it by sending $3.7 billion dollars per year overseas to buy permits.

So how does our 160 million tonnes reduction compare to China’s annual production of CO2? China produces 7,031 million tonnes of CO2 per annum. Thats 2.2 per cent of Chinas output. So if China increases it output by the same amount it did in 2010, by ten percent, the 160 million tonnes of Carbon Dioxide saved by Australia will be replaced by China in 3 months.

Billions of dollars in extra burdens on Australian workers, industry and consumers to be replaced by China in three months.

Chines coal fired power station, replacing Australian carbon abatement

The latest is that the Greens are happy for the Carbon Tax to [...]]]> The Greens have already said they want to close down the coal industry and stop the export of coal. They also want to close down the brown coal power stations in the Latrobe Valley effectively closing down the brown coal industry in Victoria.

The latest is that the Greens are happy for the Carbon Tax to result in One Steel in Whyalla  closing down,  a town where 4000 of its 22,000 people are employed by One Steel.  Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young wants Whyalla to magically become a high capacity wind generator manufacturer, which no one else does in Australia. In fact more and more of the manufacture of wind turbines happens in China.  Senator Hansen-Young wants Eyre Peninsular covered in wind farms even through there is growing opposition to wind farms in South Australia.

The Greens solution to losing 4000 jobs in Whyalla because of the Carbon Tax

Why [...]]]> The Federal Government  Labor/Green alliance would like to close down all operating coal-fired power stations in Australia. The fact that these coal-fired power stations all work perfectly well, and could continue to work decades into the future means nothing. The Gillard government is determined to destroy this infrastructure and replace it with renewables or gas-fired power stations.

Why replace them with gas-fired power stations?  When gas is burnt to produce electricity it emits less carbon dioxide than the burning of coal does. Coal is a more complex molecule, so it emits a higher level of carbon dioxide (CO2).  Natural Gas produces about 45% less carbon dioxide than coal. However proponents of natural gas never talk about the cost of drilling, collecting and processing the gas. All these processes emit carbon dixoide.

Where does Australia get its natural gas from?

Most of it comes from existing natural gas basins, but there is increasing interest in Coal-Seam gas and Shale Gas.

Shale Gas is extracted from shales that have a low permeability, so drillers are required to fracture the rock to get the gas out. This called fracking, and has environmental problems of its own.  Fracking involves injecting large amounts of water, mixed with sand and many dangerous chemicals, at high pressures to break up rock formations and release the gas. As well the production of coal seam releases large volumes of salt that is underground. If you are interested in finding out how fracking has been going in the USA, try to watch a film called Gasland. Coal Seam gas extraction can pollute groundwater,  You can read more about the Australian community reaction to coal seam gas extraction at LocktheGate.org.au

So the Federal Labor/Greens alliance is happy to risk our environment by covering Australia with Coal Seam and Shale Gas drill rigs, pipelines and processing.

Natural Gas drilling rig. Coming to a place close to you soon?

A great description from Urban Dictionary:

Gullible, scientificially [...]]]> People who believe completely in the AGW (anthropomorphic Global Warming) view of the world have been in recent time referred to as “warmists”. While the anti AGW proponents are referred to as Climate Change Skeptics, or Climate Change deniers. There is a new term for warmists, that is “Warmenist”.

A great description from Urban Dictionary:

Gullible, scientificially illiterate, unthinking acolyte and zombie-fied propagandist of the Religion of Anthropogenic Global Warming. One who takes direct orders from High Priest King of Idiocy, Albert J. Gore. One who puts the “mental” in environmentalism. Historical inheritors of those who believed that King Canute could hold back the tides and that the wolf would eat the moon unless their first-born daughter’s virginity was sacrificed to the local shaman.

I have always thought that for a lot of warmist, Global Warming is a religion. They believe, and do not read or accept any evidence to the contrary.

Failed presidential candidate Al Gore - High Priest of Global Warming

He said- ” It’s not the first time we’ve had contests between knowledge and ignorance that are of great significance [...]]]> Professor Ross Garnaut who is an economist, not a climate scientist, says that the debate on the carbon tax is a debate between science and ignorance. If you don’t agree with the Professor, you are ignorant.

He said- ” It’s not the first time we’ve had contests between knowledge and ignorance that are of great significance for the future of our civilisation but this is certainly one of them.” .

This seems pretty clear. If you do not believe in the interpretation of Climate Science as put forward by Economist Professor Ross Garnault, then you must be on the ignorant side of the debate.

News of another Solar panel manufacturer moving to China from the USA.  Australia has no Solar [...]]]> The Greens (the party) and other Climate alarmists will tell you that investment in renewables will result in tens of thousands of new “Green Jobs”. What they don’t tell you is that most of these “Green Jobs” are in China.

News of another Solar panel manufacturer moving to China from the USA.  Australia has no Solar Panel manufacturers (or wind turbine factories).  We have a government subsidised solar panel installation industry, that could not survive with out those government subsidies.

So we make our “old economy” industries uncompetitive by wacking a carbon tax on them, and the “new economy” jobs are in China.

Sounds a great future.

New economy jobs in China