Global Warming

[IQS.RLOW]

Don't use my name in your lies darling, I'll eat you for breakfast. Don't care who you or where you are. This is one web site, we own 27 and this site don't wont those problems we can create so long you keep posting, call my bluff!

English? Do you speak it motherfucker?

[DaS Energy]

You wouldn't know English, you only speak the taste of your shit in your mouth.

[IQS.RLOW]

You wouldn't know English, you only speak the taste of your shit in your mouth.

Sense? Do you speak it motherfucker?

[DaS Energy]

I can understand your need to post, so ugly such a tiny dick, and nobody will come near you, aren't you lucky to have me who will at least reply to yourself.

[Rorschach]

Now instead of ignoring the article or shutting your mind to the facts included in it all you true believers put aside your political bias for a change and look at the realities...

OPINION: Green policies putting Australian industry in the red
• by: Andrew Bolt
• From: The Courier-Mail
• February 20, 2014 12:00AM
HOW many more manufacturing workers must be sacked, thanks to green policies that only pretend to stop global warming?
How many of the jobless won’t be able to heat or cool their homes, with these same mad policies helping to hike power prices by 110 per cent in just five years?
And all this pain to make no difference to the world’s temperature. What a fraud.
True, the carbon tax and less-known Renewable Energy Target did not themselves kill Alcoa’s Point Henry smelter or Toyota’s Australian plants this month.
But the carbon tax alone cost Alcoa $137 million last year. How brainless is that, when its Australian smelters were already battling to survive competition from leaner competitors overseas?
The carbon tax also cost Toyota $115 a car. How stupid is that, when Australian-made cars were already struggling to compete against cheaper imports?
Apologists for the carbon tax claim it’s nothing compared to everything else smashing our manufacturers – a high dollar, green tape, crazy workplace restrictions and bloody-minded unions.
But it’s a straw breaking the back of a lot of camels.
Last year Penrice Soda quit making soda ash, sacking 60 people and leaving unpaid the $1 million it owes under the carbon tax it claims was indeed that final straw.
Grain Products Australia sacked half its 68 employees, saying the carbon tax and other green levies cost it $500,000 a year.
Packaging giant Amcor cut 160 workers at its Petrie mill, telling them the carbon tax was in part to blame, costing $400,000 in one year.
Labor is calling for at least $50m in government support after the closure of an Alcoa aluminium smelter.
Hundreds more jobs are being scrapped in Sydney's West, as global Aluminium giant Alcoa closes it's recycling plant at Yennora
In 2012, Norsk Hydro shut its Kurri Kurri aluminium smelter and sacked 300 workers, blaming not only a high dollar and low prices but saying its “long-term viability will be negatively affected by ... increasing energy costs and the carbon tax”.
None of this was an accident. When the Gillard government designed its “Strong Growth, Low Pollution” policy, carbon tax included, it produced Treasury costings showing the output of the electricity-intensive aluminium industry would fall 61.7 per cent by 2050.
And when Alcoa this week announced it would indeed close its Point Henry smelter, former chief climate commissioner Tim Flannery said this was just the price we had to pay to save us from a “filthy” planet.
Around Australia, businesses are paying this “price”.
They struggle with power bills that were once the lowest in the developed world but are now among the highest, in part because of these policies to make coal-fired electricity so expensive that we use less of it.
Electricity bills for businesses have jumped almost 80 per cent since 2009. How many jobs has that cost?
And think of all those other failed global warming schemes we’ve had to pay for – the solar hot water rebates, the Green Loans scheme, the free insulation disaster, the solar cities program, the solar power subsidies.
Think of the millions Labor lost in grants to white elephants – such as the $300 million to the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute and the $90 million for Geodynamics, whose shareholders include Tim Flannery, a spruiker of the geothermal technology that proved a dud here.
You’d weep at the waste.
No wonder many people now demand we stop this vandalism, especially with unemployment now hitting 6 per cent.
Australians have already voted in a new Abbott Government promising to scrap the carbon tax, although Labor and the Greens still use their numbers in the Senate to save it.
The Government this week also announced business leader Dick Warburton, a sceptic, would head a review on the Renewable Energy Target.
This RET forces electricity companies to source some of their supplies from “green” power such as expensive solar and wind farms, costing the average family $102 a year.
But few Australians yet realise these schemes aren’t just unaffordable but mad, making zero difference to the temperature they are meant to lower.
Well, not exactly zero. Victoria University’s Professor Roger Jones, a warmist, figured the carbon tax could lower the world’s temperature in 2100 by just 0.0038 of one degree.
Other experts think it would been even less, since the world’s temperature hasn’t risen now in 16 years, suggesting our emissions don’t make as much difference as once thought.
But consider. Think of the thousands of companies struggling to keep afloat. Think of the sacked workers and your soaring bills.
We’re suffering like this so we can cut the world’s temperature by so little that no one could even measure it?
Mad. This global warming craze has destroyed not just our industries but our reason.

[mantra]

But the carbon tax alone cost Alcoa $137 million last year.

I read somewhere else that it was $40 million and the government subsidised it.

Well, not exactly zero. Victoria University’s Professor Roger Jones, a warmist, figured the carbon tax could lower the world’s temperature in 2100 by just 0.0038 of one degree.
Other experts think it would been even less, since the world’s temperature hasn’t risen now in 16 years, suggesting our emissions don’t make as much difference as once thought.

If we judged this on the huge increase in the use of airconditioners, we could well believe that temperatures are steadily increasing, but for the few of us who don't use them - apart from stretches of extremely hot days every few years - there doesn't seem any obvious change.

The carbon tax was sold under the wrong banner and should have been called a pollution tax from the very beginning. The revenue raised could have been used to clean up Australia in a variety of ways.

I haven't noticed any great difference in my electricity bills - yet so many others have.

We need to grow more trees - not only around urban areas, but on farms as well.

Governments and agencies are taking action through heatwave plans and new pilot programs like the Bureau of Meteorology’s Heatwave Warning Service, due to be launched in early 2014.

However, one thing we are still not talking about are the implications of Australia’s growing reliance on air conditioning.

More air con, bigger bills

Heatwave plans recommend a number of different cooling strategies, but the clear cooling trend is towards home air conditioning.

Three out of every four of Australian households now have a refrigerated air conditioner or an evaporative cooler, which is almost double the rate of ownership back in the late 1990s.

The most obvious problem with air conditioning - and one that will trouble many Australians this summer - is that the cost of running them is rising.

Electricity prices have increased nationally by 70% between June 2007 and December 2012. As a result, air conditioning is becoming much less affordable.

Owners of new homes are often shocked to find that they are using more electricity to keep cool - due to open-plan designs, centralised cooling, and more appliances - despite building efficiency improvements.

The real victims of these price rises are vulnerable low-income households, who are skipping meals, selling possessions and cutting back on essential healthcare to pay their power bills. Sadly, some of these households are also likely to be vulnerable to heatwaves.

https://theconversation.com/australias- ... ered-20258

The government is giving compensation to these people. The steep rise in electricity prices began 7 years ago so it can't be blamed solely on the carbon tax.

[mantra]

But the carbon tax alone cost Alcoa $137 million last year.

I read somewhere else that it was $40 million and the government subsidised it.

Correction - Alcoa received $40 million assistance and free permits for 94.5% of their emissions - extremely generous funding by the government - yet they're still closing their plant. We can't blame the cost of the carbon tax for this.

As Wakeham notes, Alcoa has instead done quite well since the carbon tax was introduced, receiving free permits for 94.5 per cent of their emissions – a package worth $1.7 billion over five years. And in 2012 Alcoa received a further $40 million assistance package from the federal government.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/alcoa-p ... stry-77925

[Super Nova]

If IQ was here he would be pleased with this action by Abbott.

Progressing to renewable energy is still a sensible target even if the taxation of green house emissions goes away.


Tony Abbott, Australia’s prime minister, has appointed a climate change sceptic to review the nation’s renewable energy target in his latest foray against measures to combat global warming.

Following his move to repeal Labor’s tax on carbon emissions, Mr Abbott has announced a review that is expected to scale back renewable energy production.

The review will be conducted by Dick Warburton, a businessman and self-confessed “sceptic”. Another sceptic, Maurice Newman, has been appointed as the government’s top business advisor; he has stated publicly that the renewable energy target should be scrapped.

Mr Abbott has insisted he will stick to Australia’s commitment to the United Nations to cut emissions by 5 per cent by 2020, though critics say his current policies will make it impossible.

Business groups have been urging the government to reduce or abolish Australia’s current renewable energy target, which aims to produce 20 per cent of power by 2020. Critics say the target is driving up power prices and that current planning may exceed the target because electricity demand has been dropping.

The government said the review would be “extensive” but would not say whether the target could be abolished.

"Renewable energy has a role to play and it is now time to see where this scheme is going," said Ian Macfarlane, the energy minister.

Mr Abbott, who once described climate change as "absolute crap" – a comment he later recanted - is abolishing the carbon tax and instead introducing a plan to pay polluters to reduce emissions. Many analysts believe the so-called “direct action” plan will fail to meet Australia’s emissions targets.

Touring drought-ridden farmland, Mr Abbott dismissed suggestions that climate change was causing the low rainfall.

“If you look at the records of Australian agriculture going back 150 years, there have always been good times and bad times,” he said. “This is not a new thing in Australia.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/enviro ... arget.html

[Rorschach]

But the carbon tax alone cost Alcoa $137 million last year.

I read somewhere else that it was $40 million and the government subsidised it. You got a quote? The only $40million I found so far is the subsidy from the last labor government which was to keep it open. Yet another waste of money. hence the $137 million stands.

Well, not exactly zero. Victoria University’s Professor Roger Jones, a warmist, figured the carbon tax could lower the world’s temperature in 2100 by just 0.0038 of one degree.
Other experts think it would been even less, since the world’s temperature hasn’t risen now in 16 years, suggesting our emissions don’t make as much difference as once thought.

If we judged this on the huge increase in the use of airconditioners, we could well believe that temperatures are steadily increasing, but for the few of us who don't use them - apart from stretches of extremely hot days every few years - there doesn't seem any obvious change. No there has been as the UN says... A PAUSE... only deniers deny it.

The carbon tax was sold under the wrong banner and should have been called a pollution tax from the very beginning. But CO2 is not pollution... The revenue raised could have been used to clean up Australia in a variety of ways. Better it not be inflicted on the poor for no outcome in the first place.

I haven't noticed any great difference in my electricity bills - yet so many others have. I have... they've almost doubled.

We need to grow more trees - not only around urban areas, but on farms as well. I agree, I usually plant them when I move or build a new home. Also I read that grass is actually more effective

Governments and agencies are taking action through heatwave plans and new pilot programs like the Bureau of Meteorology’s Heatwave Warning Service, due to be launched in early 2014. Like we don't know when we are having a heatwave... Waste of money.

However, one thing we are still not talking about are the implications of Australia’s growing reliance on air conditioning.

More air con, bigger bills No air con bigger bills.... Most poor people can't even afford air con.

Heatwave plans recommend a number of different cooling strategies, but the clear cooling trend is towards home air conditioning.

Three out of every four of Australian households now have a refrigerated air conditioner or an evaporative cooler, which is almost double the rate of ownership back in the late 1990s. technology marches on... we are after all the most arid populated continent.

The most obvious problem with air conditioning - and one that will trouble many Australians this summer - is that the cost of running them is rising. Gee I wonder why... carbon tax, reusables subsidy, green power, etc, etc, etc....

Electricity prices have increased nationally by 70% between June 2007 and December 2012. As a result, air conditioning is becoming much less affordable.

Owners of new homes are often shocked to find that they are using more electricity to keep cool - due to open-plan designs, centralised cooling, and more appliances - despite building efficiency improvements.

The real victims of these price rises are vulnerable low-income households, who are skipping meals, selling possessions and cutting back on essential healthcare to pay their power bills. Sadly, some of these households are also likely to be vulnerable to heatwaves. yep exactly what I've been saying.

https://theconversation.com/australias- ... ered-20258

The government is giving compensation to these people. Not enough. first they said we wouldn't need it. then they admitted we would, now the compensation is waaaay too little. The steep rise in electricity prices began 7 years ago so it can't be blamed solely on the carbon tax. Nope, but it is a substantial part it also affects 75,000 companies that pass the costs on to us. Other schemes and cost shifting by utilities etc have added greatly to the expense.

[Rorschach]

But the carbon tax alone cost Alcoa $137 million last year.

I read somewhere else that it was $40 million and the government subsidised it.

Correction - Alcoa received $40 million assistance and free permits for 94.5% of their emissions - extremely generous funding by the government - yet they're still closing their plant. We can't blame the cost of the carbon tax for this. Why not it is as I've already explained part of the problem... $137million part of it. Even if you take $40M away it is almost $100million... Just how do you think the permits work mantra? Even with them the TAX still cost them $137million.

As Wakeham notes, Alcoa has instead done quite well since the carbon tax was introduced, receiving free permits for 94.5 per cent of their emissions – a package worth $1.7 billion over five years. And in 2012 Alcoa received a further $40 million assistance package from the federal government.

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/alcoa-p ... stry-77925