I don’t claim to truly understand the ramifications of this, but it certainly sounds like a reason for a little tiny bit of optimism… which is certainly something I for one need at the moment:
I don’t claim to truly understand the ramifications of this, but it certainly sounds like a reason for a little tiny bit of optimism… which is certainly something I for one need at the moment:
Not trying to defend the government in their stance towards carbon emissions and global warming, but it’s a tad bit over the the top to blame them for global warming. We produce approximately 1% of the world’s carbon. Even if we slashed our emissions to zero, we’d still be in this predicament…
It’s a valid point, but we mine a LOT of coal and sell it overseas to countries like China. We need to ween ourselves off the coal cash cow, because we are contributing to global warming in a big way by supplying it.
No-one is arguing that the government caused global warming though. The issues are around what we are doing (or not doing) in response.
Our per-capita emissions are the (second?) highest in the world, and that’s without including emissions from the coal we export. We don’t have a leg to stand on in any kind of international forum until we first take care of our own backyard.
This is what shits me. I wish all sides just stopped trying to attribute blame or deny responsibility for the climate emergency.
Ever since the industrial revolution humans have been having a disastrous effect on the environment. No one can claim the moral high ground, no one can change the past. We can all affect the future though and that is what the focus should be but it seems petty politics is all that matters to the people in charge.
Even agreements like Kyoto & Paris are a cop out and in place simply for political pointscoring. Far more needs to be done than meet these arbitrary targets yet if a Government meets them they can claim some sort of victory in much the same way as achieving a budget surplus, cutting taxes or a low employment rate. For example, Australia can do much better but while ever we are on track to meet these targets there’s no political reason to do any better until the polls go against you. The moment they do you ramp up action to a point where you satisfy the masses and are seen as taking “decisive action”.
Why can’t both sides of the argument co-exist? It appears that they’re all incapable of compromise. A carbon tax was unpopular so we just gave up. How about x% of all mining royalties have to be invested in renewables?
How about upping the GST 2.5% with that increase to be spent on projects that either improve the environment or are environmentally sustainable? Increase the Governments superannuation contribution by 1 or 2% with that increase being invested in the renewable energy sector. Not only would they have a positive impact on the environment it would also provide stimulus to the economy and I don’t think there would be too much public push back for any of those changes.
Instead all we continue to see finger pointing and the time to act being used up in petty partisan arguments.
This is not the point. People who are sensible want the world to take action on climate change, not just Australia. At the moment they can’t spend any time campaigning for the rest of the world to take action because Australia is actively making the problem worse, and because the Australian government is actively interfering with global attempts to make it better.
There’s an international climate forum on this month. There’s a Fossil of the Day award handed out to the country that is the shittest international player, that does the most to hinder efforts to do something useful about climate change that day. The winner on Day 1? Australia! The winner on Day 2? Australia! We ended up with four of them.
Are we out there lobbying China and India and the US - you know, our key ally - to reduce their emissions because if they don’t we’re fucked? You’d think so, given how much the government talks about how important they are to our future. But no. We’re out there selling them coal and signing mineral export deals and encouraging them to keep making things worse so our richest people can get a little richer before it all turns to shit.
The 1.3% figure is a distraction. We make the problem worse not just by our own emissions but by delaying the transition to renewable energy, not funding the renewable energy technology and ideas and solutions we could be funding, exporting fossil fuels instead of building and exporting better solutions, hindering international efforts to transition to a low carbon future, supporting the Trumps of the world, and lying to our own people about the scale of the crisis and the state of the science. Our impact, were we to turn those things all around, would/could/should be a lot more than 1.3%.
!.3% is significant. It ranks us 15th highest of carbon polluting countries. This places us higher than most countries in the world. If 75 countries each contributed 1.3% (a supposed insignificant amount) all these 1.3%s would add up to almost the full 100%.
I have no confidence that we will ever return to a pre industrial climate and that the future for human society is going to be brutal. But to give up and let it happen or be worse than it has to be is being just plain self centred gutless.
To say 1.3% is insignificant and we do not have to do more is morally bankrupt.
Correct, there are far bigger polluters than us on a per country basis, but if we think the best way to make them change is to undermine conferences that at least try to reach some form of consensus then I can only see our government as worse than “do nothing” slime bags, who are prepared to sell my children’s and grandchildren’s future for their own egos and dollars.
The rest of the world & all major hedge funds can already see & are doing something about it because they can massive investment & money making potential in climate change related projects. The potential is in the trillions that it can inject into the world’s economy.
Only the backwards provincial climate change denying bogans commonly known as Australia cling onto the teat of the old world. It’s amazing.
This is the crazy thing - our economy would be in far better shape had we gradually transitioned over a 10-15 year period. Instead we’re rushing towards the cliff, lead by the self-declared supreme money managers.
Nah fuck creating a renewables industry, I want to bet it all on coal.
Australia is the world’s worst carbon emitter on a per capital basis amongst developed nations. Plus, emissions of more than 1% is a shocking number when you consider that we are less than 0.3% of the world’s population, Plus, if you account for all the coal we export, we are responsible for more than 3% of the world’s carbon emissions.
It’s not just what we contribute as a nation, but we are going to be most affected… We live in the most arid continent, so if there is a chance of it getting more arid, surely a responsible Govt uses its influence to avoid it becoming less habitable. Because of our relative wealth as a nation, we have political and economic clout to make/grow markets in alternative energy… but we have been negligent in letting others make those profits (let alone any ethical argument to do something about the climate)
Just heard on the radio that the trucking industry reckons the 12 day closing of the Eyre Highway cost a hunjie mill.
It’s only going to happen when the Liberals wake up to themselves by accepting the evidence provided by many scientists who have worked on climate change studies for many years, and finally start working to seriously mitigate the effects of climate change. That has not happened up to this point. If it ever does, then there will be less/no reason for anyone else to jump on them. It really is that simple.
It’s not just the Libs denying or preventing action and this is the petty partisan politics that I’m talking about.
Labor’s climate policy at the last election was confused and ad hoc at best depending on which electorate they were in. The CFMEU has to protect the jobs of its members and duly influences Labor policy in this regard. They were hardly anti-Adani.
Don’t confuse lack of action with lack of acceptance of the science. Apart from the Climate Change deniers, I’m pretty sure everyone accepts the science. Politics prevents them from acting on it.
Politics and self-interest.
If the Coalition accept the climate science but refuse to act, that’s even worse. That’s unforgivable negligence.
And that’s EXACTLY why they, along with others who continue to publicly play the climate change deniers, have no place to hide whatsoever.
I had yet another person in my office today saying, “I blame the greens for stopping hazard reduction”.
Yet another person that couldn’t provide an actual example of that happening.
Wasn’t it all arsonists?
(ABC article the other day worked out only 1% of land lost in NSW was caused by arson. In Victoria it was about 0.3%).