It's All Over
The battle to 'decarbonise' Australia ia all over as almost every politician has ceded to the Green demands. It's bad news for the rest of us.
The Prime Minister has said the climate wars are over.
He’s right. The battle for truth in science, prudence and informed policy has been lost in a string of failed forecasts, spin and hysteria.
The Australian parliament will be enshrining a minimum 43% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. The legislation will get through thanks to the Greens and green in all but name Senator Pocock.
A few damp squibs in the Coalition will possibly join them but it will just be virtue signalling ahead of the national rejoicing that we have saved the planet.
It’s the first step on our way to creating a verdant utopian ideal where we all can live in harmony with nature, feasting on our mealworms and crickets, basking in the warm glow of our Teslas.
We’ll all be so happy that wars will cease, they’ll be no more poverty or violence. Black lives will matter and Antifa will keep us safe on the streets.
Sounds like a leftist ideal doesn’t it.
Of course that’s absolute nonsense but it is what the left want you to think.
I think this is a really bad move for our country. Every sentient person knows that whatever we do will make no difference to the climate. It won’t prevent floods or bushfires or cyclones. It won’t lower the temperature of the planet or stop climate variability.
No, it will just make us less competitive as we ‘transition to a carbon neutral economy’.
It sounds so easy doesn’t it. Transitioning, it seems to be the buzzword for everything now days. However, decarbonising an economy isn’t as easy as changing a couple of pronouns and declaring how you identify.
Rebuilding an economy based on Green principles entails pain and huge cost.
The bank of America estimates a net zero by 2050 transition will cost $150 trillion USD.
We’ll have to mine more minerals and ship more steel to build batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. Then we’ll have a brand new industry called green land fill where they can all be dumped when they reach the end of their useful lives.
Sort of like this graveyard for the French electric vehicles.
But that’s all way off into the future.
Before then, we’ll be thriving on cheap renewable energy, after all that’s the cheapest energy available. It’s practically free thanks to the wind and sun.
Speaking of the sun, the Prime Minister told us it’s his very own nuclear power generator for Australia while accusing those advocating for a nuclear industry of being stuck in the past.
“But (they) are ignoring the biggest nuclear reactor of all - it is up there, the sun,”
I guess that includes the Finnish Greens Party
Their party manifesto now states that nuclear is “sustainable energy”
Even a group Fridays for Future started by troubled teen and climate crank Greta Thunberg, released a statement repudiating her claims about nuclear power.
“Opposition to nuclear power will complicate and increase the already enormous task of addressing the climate emergency.
If we want to stop global warming below 1.5 degrees, we need every possible means, including nuclear power, to achieve that goal.”
The Finnish Greens certainly aren’t alone.
The bureaucrats at the European Commission now claims that investments in nuclear and gas are ‘green’.
The draft text stated that nuclear plants should be considered “sustainable” if the host country can ensure they cause “no significant harm” to the environment.
Natural gas can also be entitled to the green label for a limited timespan, making it easier for natural gas producers to attract private investment — provided certain criteria such as a carbon dioxide emission level of 270g of CO2 per kilowatt generated are met
This was backed by the European Union Parliament on July 6.
Perhaps all this has got you a little confused. It certainly has me.
Aren’t we all supposed to be following the science?
It's settled after all and surely settled science can't change from country to country.
If it did it would make a mockery of the entire climate change movement.
I mean the Greens are using that settled science as the basis to save the world by having everyone adopt their collectivist cause?
Why then do some Greens advocate for nuclear power while others, like the motley crue of zealots assembled in our parliament, reject it entirely?
And what about gas? Why is it green in the EU and yet the Greens Party here want a moratorium on any new gas plants?
And while we are at it, why don’t this mob take China to task over the building of coal fired power stations, or building airports in the South China Sea for that matter?
Aside from the fact you can put a pylon into the ocean in this country without myriad eco and indigenous permits, I would have thought creating safe spaces for military planes would constitute an environmental emergency.
They've been strangely silent on that one too. Who needs pesky real wars when you can safely fight a climate war from the comfort of your senate seat?
But back to the PMs declaration that it's all over. I repeat the truth has been lost in the fog of the climate war and we are serving up our economic security as tribute to Gaia of the godless Greens.
But the Greens Party, Labor and the Teals are not alone in their sacrifice. The Coalition are drinking climate kool-aid too.
New leader Peter Dutton has promised to take an even more ambitious emissions target to the next election. I suspect they'll eventually just adopt Labor's legislated 43 per cent by 2030.
That's why I think the carbon battle is all but over.
The challenge is how we can possibly implement such a foolhardy policy with minimal economic pain .
Remember, thanks to the belligerence of China, we have to rebuild our manufacturing capacity in this country. That requires plenty of power.
Unless we want to slip back into third world status, we have to keep the lights on and affordable in our homes too.
In other countries, the agricultural sector has become a target for carbon abatement. That would cost us dearly too.
There are no easy options to what our politicians have signed us up to.
Thanks to a sustained campaign of hysteria and fear, we have made a rod for our own backs. Only the consequences of prolonged economic hardship can ever hope to right this wrong.