guide



Grazing Animals are Carbon Neutral and should not be Taxed


Every atom of carbon emitted by grazing animals was taken from the pasture that animal consumed. Which was taken from the atmosphere. Therefore all grazing animals are carbon neutral.

This leaflet by Jim Hawes explains it simply:

methane-cow-1s
(more…)



Death by Delay


“The difference between taking a part of my life,
and taking my whole life, is just a matter of degree.”

Anon

red-green-tape

Special thanks to Mr. Larry Pickering for permission to reproduce this cartoon. If you like, you can follow him on Facebook or visit him at pickeringpost.com Copyright L Pickering 2014

There was a time, before the baby-boom generation took over, when we took pride in the achievements of our builders, producers and innovators. There was always great celebration when settler families got a phone, a tractor, a bitumen road or electric power. An oil strike or a gold discovery made headlines, and people welcomed new businesses, new railways and new inventions. Science and engineering were revered and the wealth delivered by these human achievements enabled the builders and their children to live more rewarding lives, with more leisure, more time for culture and crusades, and greater interest in taking more care of their environment.

Then a green snake entered the Garden of Eden.

Read more, as well as:

  • The Sky Fell last month, but almost nobody noticed
  • So Much for the Consensus – just 20% believe “the debate is over”
  • The Big Lie
  • Ian Plimer new Book Launch.
  • Peer Review of Tim Flannery – “The Weather Makers Re-Examined”
  • The Carbon Tax is Gone

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/death-by-delay.pdf [PDF, 115KB]

Keywords: Delay, Green tape, Keystone Pipeline, shale gas, Wild Rivers, 400 ppm, consensus, Ian Plimer, Wes Allen, carbon tax.



COLD TURKEY: Repealing the Carbon Tax


The Case for Repeal

We support the immediate repeal of the carbon tax. This tax was introduced by stealth, and the justification for its introduction is spurious. It should be repealed or made ineffective immediately.

We are told its purpose is to “reduce carbon pollution” – just three words, each of which is based on a lie.

  • Reduce”: The effect of Australia’s carbon tax on the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is so tiny as to be undetectable and any miniscule reduction would be totally swamped in the far bigger natural seasonal variations of carbon dioxide levels. The effect on global climate, if any, would also be too small to be measured and of no benefit to the climate or life on Earth.
  • Carbon”: It is NOT a tax on carbon. Carbon is a solid – either soft and black like graphite and soot, or crystalline, hard and beautiful like diamond. It is definitely not the colourless gas created when carbon is burned. The “carbon” tax falls mainly on carbon dioxide, a colourless, harmless natural gas which has always been present in Earth’s atmosphere, usually in far greater amounts than at present. The use of “carbon” when referring to “carbon dioxide” is a deliberate deception. It would be like calling liquid water by the name “hydrogen”, a major element in the water molecule which is a dangerous explosive flammable gas. Based on the carbon example, a tax on water vapour (another “greenhouse gas) would probably be called “The Hydrogen Tax” by government propagandists.
  • Pollution”: Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, and should never have been called one. It is the essential gas-of-life for all plants and they support all animals on Earth. It is no more a pollutant than oxygen, which is the gas-of-life for animals, or water vapour which is essential for all life. All three gases have effects on earth’s surface temperature, and on surface life, and such effects are usually highly beneficial. Additional carbon dioxide has been improving and will continue to improve the growth rate and drought tolerance of all plants on earth. Far from polluting the Earth, extra carbon dioxide has been greening the globe for decades.

There has been no attempt at an independent cost benefit analysis to justify the tax.

More, as well as:

  • Petition
  • John Howard Joins the Deniers (well almost)
  • The Many Benefits of CO2
  • Keeping a Sense of Perspective on Global Warming
  • Funds Flow in, in Enormous Dollops

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/cold-turkey2.pdf [PDF, 140KB]

Keywords: Carbon Tax, deceptive advertising, cost-benefits, enquiry into the science, pollution, National Pollution Inventory Scheme, Kyoto Agreement, price surveillance, IPCC, Climate Change Authority, Direct Action, renewable energy targets.



Climate Policy Folly


Election Day – “Put every Labor/Green candidate last”

Our advice on how-to-vote for climate sceptics and against climate alarmists provoked a lot of feedback and comment, mostly positive.

This was the most dramatic response:

greens-last
Best Election Advice, Edgecliffe NSW

Lots of small parties wrote to tell us how much they opposed the war on carbon and the futile attempts to use taxes to change our climate. We were told that Rise Up Australia Party and Palmer United Party are opposed to all the carbon tax/trading stuff. Good – support their candidates if you like their other policies. Also Cori Bernardi is worth supporting. Our concern with many small parties is that they may have preference deals with the ALP/greens (Palmer votes could end up with Greens, Katter votes could end up with ALP, and even our favoured Climate Sceptics have preferenced Labor above LNP in half of the states, because of the silly utterings of Greg Hunt and his Direct Action Dreams).

There are two ways to handle this Senate election. The lazy way is just vote LNP 1 above the line. That should ensure the defeat of the ALP/Green coalition. But to really vote against the climate alarmists, be selective and vote below the line, numbering all squares. Start with all the sceptic parties you know and vote for their candidates in order. Then vote LNP (this is most important to ensure your vote does not cascade down and accidentally elect an ALP/Green candidate). Then fill out all the other squares in any order PUTTING THE GREENS LAST. We have no other changes to previous advice. If you cannot be bothered taking some time to work it out, vote 1 above the line for the LNP.

We recommend this useful tool for the thinking voter. Decide your priorities and it will show you how to vote: https://www.clueyvoter.com/

Other feedback here:
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com.au/2013/08/senate-voting-for-no-carbon-tax-climate.html

More, as well as:

  • Taxing Air
  • Gambling at 50:1
  • Coal Saves Forests from the Furnaces
  • Burying the Gas of Life
  • Restrictive Work Practices killing Green Energy?
  • After The Ball is Over

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/climate-policy-folly.pdf [PDF, 51kB]

Keywords: Put greens last, how-to-vote, Labor, Greens, LNP, no-carbon-tax-party, coal saves forests, CCS, green energy failures, after the ball, Taxing Air, Cost/benefit climate policies 50/1.



Replace the Carbon Tax with . . . NOTHING


Killing Australia’s carbon tax is a good idea but it should happen immediately, not later.

But replacing it with an ETS is a very bad idea and should never happen.

The carbon tax is a known amount, simple in principle, needs no bankers or brokers, and all receipts end up in Australian hands. And it is easy to abolish at any time.

The ETS is a variable and unpredictable carbon tax. It creates business uncertainty, is complex in operation, encourages brokers, lawyers and speculators and it will drain our money to middlemen and into the European carbon credit casino. And it will create a growing army of vested interests who will forever oppose its abolition.

Neither the fixed tax nor the vacillating tax will have any beneficial effect on climate.

The carbon tax should be axed, but replaced with … NOTHING.

More, as well as:

  • The Heavy Cost of Climatism
  • Who’s Afraid of a Bit of Warmth?
  • Warmists should Go the Whole Hog
  • “Taxing Air” by Bob Carter, John Spooner and friends
  • Stop the Greens who Gamble with our Future

Read the full report: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/replace-ctax-with-nothing.pdf [PDF, 41KB]

Keywords: Carbon tax, Emissions Trading, corruption, speculation, Kyoto failure, ice ages bad – warmth good.



Earth Hour? Play a Real Game – Energy Roulette Week


Energy Roulette Week
(The antithesis of Earth Hour)

A Reality Game for those Concerned about the Future for their Families

blackout
Acknowledgement: Josh at www.cartoonsbyjosh.com

Media Statement by Viv Forbes
Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition.

Any quotes taken directly from this statement may be attributed to Mr Forbes.

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on electricity consumers to boycott Earth Hour grandstanding by pampered people too silly to recognise the realities and benefits of reliable electricity.

The Chairman of Carbon Sense, Mr Viv Forbes, is supporting an alternative proposal that “Earth Hour” be replaced by “Energy Roulette Week”.

Quote:

The Earth Hour people turn off a few lights on a balmy night for a romantic hour in candle-light (incidentally generating twice as much CO2 as light bulbs for the same amount of light.) This is unrealistic green tokenism.
(more…)



Chasing a Will o’ the Wisp while Ignoring a real Monster in the Sky


State and Federal Governments should stop wasting community resources on useless schemes for carbon trading and carbon sequestration and focus on some real world pollution crises.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that the government and media focus on carbon dioxide emissions was totally misdirected and counter-productive.

“All it will do is delay the spread of coal powered electricity to many areas now desperate for clean invisible power. It will also give an enormous boost to the demand for uranium fuel, whose mining and use is deterred by politicians in Australia.

“There is already a groundswell of opposition from well informed scientists and engineers to the whole basis of the Greenhouse Religion. Even the PM’s own backbench contains well informed sceptics, and the ranks of scientific sceptics are growing all over the world.

“This irrational and hysterical focus on carbon dioxide is diverting attention and resources from real pollution which is altering local climate and affecting many areas of the world.

“For example, the “Asian Brown Cloud”, a haze of pollution about 3 km thick and sometimes covering an area as big as Australia, is causing real human health and safety problems. At times this cloud drifts right across the Pacific Ocean and is noticed in America.

“China now emits more sulphur dioxide (SO2) than anywhere else in the world. This chokes their people, causes acid rain and damages buildings. This brown haze is already affecting local climate and melting glaciers in China and the Himalayas. In Arctic areas, soot is covering snow and absorbing more heat from the sun. Soon the brown haze will obscure the sun in some polluted Asian cities.

“This pollution is caused by millions of cow-dung cooking fires and open-air cremations in India, cooking with wood, coal and cardboard all over Asia, forest fires in Indonesia and millions of small obsolete and dirty wood, charcoal and coal stoves and furnaces all over Asia and Africa. Similar problems are obvious in places in South America.

“The western world went through this pollution phase fifty years ago, and although improvements can still be made, we have banished the notorious smoke pollution of places like London, Manchester and Pittsburgh.

“London smoke pollution was so bad that the city became known as “The Big Smoke”. Children developed rickets from the lack of sunshine, plants and animals died and lung disease was widespread. During its last and worst ever pollution event, “The Black Fog” of 1952, caused by a temperature inversion over London, visibility was reduced to less than a foot and 4,000 Londoners died from SO2 poisoning (50 in one small London park alone). This shock brought action – cooking and heating with open fires of wood and coal was banned in big cities. Clean electric power saved the forests and cleared the air.

“The world’s worst pollution is caused by open air combustion of wood, dung and coal which produces not only the harmless greenhouse gases of water vapour and carbon dioxide, but also real pollutants such as soot, smoke, ash, dust and chemicals containing sulphur, chlorine, nitrogen, fluorine, and metals. In dilute quantities, these trace elements are not a problem, but when concentrated in city air, they can be toxic.

“Ignoring this real monster threatening human health and the environment, the media and politicians are chasing the CO2 mirage.

“Carbon dioxide puts the bubbles in your beer, the fizz in your soda water, the holes in your bread, the dry ice in your Esky and the gas in your fire extinguisher. It is colourless, odourless, and non-toxic and does not form polluting smog or acid rain. It encourages the growth of all plant life on land and in the oceans. The whole plant world breathes in CO2 during the growing season and releases much of it again when the leaves fall. It is the key recycler of organic matter for the whole food chain, including the human race.

“Man’s emissions of CO2 are a miniscule factor in determining Earth’s temperature. But while are we are wasting time and money trying to catch and imprison this harmless Will o’ the Wisp, an ominous brown smelly choking cloud of real pollution is growing in our northern skies.

“Removing most of the pollutants from combustion emissions is difficult but not impossible. Removing or burying all carbon dioxide emissions from the combustion of carbon fuels is an impossible dream. “Zero emissions” and “carbon sequestration” for key carbon fuels like coal, oil, gas and wood are nonsense goals, and their pursuit is diverting attention and truck loads of money from a worthy goal such as “Zero Pollution”.

“The western world has largely beaten its pollution with inventions such as the chimney, the stove, but most of all by a clean, silent, invisible energy called electricity, generated in clean, concentrated and remote power stations while delivering lighting, heating, cooling, cooking and motive power into the most humble home in the poorest suburb.

“To fly over a clean modern coal-fired power station at say 10,000 m is to put it into perspective – a puny cooling tower or two emitting wisps of water vapour and a small amount of (invisible) carbon dioxide and which is dwarfed by any passing cloud, no matter how small.

“This third world problem presents a real opportunity for Australian energy companies to make profits and clean up the environment by promoting clean non-polluting modern power stations burning high quality Australian coals. This will allow cow dung to be used for soil improvement and allow re-afforestation of areas denuded by centuries of scavenging for fire wood.

“Invisible energy from coal has already banished most of the terrible pollution that affected cities such as London, Manchester and Pittsburgh, and allowed the regrowth of American forests.

“The public has been misled on this issue by an unholy alliance of environmental scaremongers, funds-seeking academics, sensation-seeking media, vote-seeking politicians and profit-seeking vested interests.

“Anyone with the real interests of ordinary Australians, Australian industry or the environment at heart would divert public attention and political action from the non-problem of carbon emissions and towards the world’s real pollution problems.

“History shows that people cannot and will not live without energy in their homes. Unless we allow coal to supply clean silent invisible energy, they will continue to burn dung, wood, cardboard, trees, oil, charcoal or reject coal to get their warmth or cook their food.

“Just one well designed, well-scrubbed, modern Australian designed coal power plant running on natural fossil sunshine from the Sunshine State could provide the light, heating, cooling and entertainment silently and invisibly to the front door for about 3 million Asian homes, housing maybe 10 million people.”

Mr Forbes called on government and opposition to cease political grandstanding on the Greenhouse issue, where carbon taxes and carbon emissions trading will adversely affect most Australians, and focus on goals that will really benefit all of Australia and the environment.

“Do we wait for the re-appearance of rickets and lung disease before acting?”

[First released in August 2007]



World Wide Carbon Rackets


Bryan Leyland of the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition has explained the problem as neatly as I have ever seen:

“Carbon trading is the only commodity trading where it is impossible to establish with reasonable accuracy how much is being bought and sold, where the commodity that is traded is invisible and can perform no useful purpose for the purchaser, and where both parties benefit if the quantities traded have been exaggerated… it is therefore an open invitation to fraud and that is exactly what is happening all over the world.”

If the world were heating in lock step with the CO2 content of the air, I would be concerned. However, as if to emphasise the variability, Lord Turnbull, in the UK Financial Times of 31/1/13 mentioned that Arctic ice coverage is now back almost exactly to where it was in January 2007. This follows the late Theodor Landscheidt’s predictions which so often proved to be accurate and it looks as though we should be preparing for his 2030 Little Ice Age rather than feeding crooks in the pretext of saving the planet for our grandchildren.

Robert Brooks ASTC, FAusIMM, CPMin, MIEAust, CPEng, NM.
Geraldton WA 6530.



A Tax on Carbon is a Tax on Life


Carbon is the essential building block for all living things.

But life cannot exist without energy.

The primary energy of the solar system is nuclear energy – it powers the sun which floods the Earth with solar radiation; other nuclear reactions release heat deep within the planet. But solar energy alone cannot create or sustain life.

Earth’s primeval atmosphere had three natural gases that contained the essential ingredients for the first plant life – carbon dioxide, the food for plants; water, the drink for plants; and ammonia, which probably supported the first primitive life forms. It also had methane, the first natural (non-fossil) hydro-carbon fuel. Ancient atmospheres had far more methane and carbon dioxide than is present today (but no runaway global warming).

Life emerged in water when primitive plants using solar energy and the magic of photosynthesis took carbon dioxide from the atmosphere to create sugars, fats and proteins in their leaves, stems, roots, seeds and fruits. Their exhaust product was another natural gas – oxygen.

Millions of years passed, and slowly the plants consumed carbon dioxide and added oxygen to the atmosphere.

Primitive animals then evolved; they used oxygen to extract carbon energy stored in plants. They consumed these carbon fuels and exhausted carbon dioxide. Life is truly a carbon equation.

Carbon fuels such as wood, biomass, coal and oil are essentially preserved organic materials that store solar energy. When burnt in air they release stored energy and exhaust the same valuable by-product – carbon dioxide.

The human race depends totally on carbon based foods that are derived from the gas of life, carbon dioxide, plus nitrogen, minerals and water. And since the invention of engines, humans have come to depend on reliable, efficient, energy-dense, portable carbon fuels to grow, harvest, transport, refrigerate, process, distribute and cook food. The exhaust product from all of these engines is an important stimulant to the growth of all plants.

Without carbon dioxide, no life would exist. And without carbon fuels, modern cities would starve within weeks.

A tax on carbon is thus a tax on life.

Viv Forbes



Taxing Fire


By Carl Brehmer

“Evidence of widespread control of fire dates to approximately 125,000 years.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans

Many people assert that environmental extremists want to take civilization back to a pre-industrial state some 150-200 years ago, but the achievement of a “carbon free economy” would take humanity back at least 125,000 years before the discovery and control of fire, because that is the source of the carbon dioxide emissions that have now been declared “pollution.” Even as the somewhat obscure term “cap-and-trade” is a little more clear when called a “carbon tax”, even more clarity would be achieved by calling it a tax on the use of fire, because that is what it is. In their role as fuels, all hydrocarbons are useless until they are burned, which produces the energy that has fuelled human progress and provided the following benefits, which even the environmental extremists and various “rent takers” take for granted:

1) Light; even kerosene lanterns burn fossil fuel and produce carbon dioxide.

2) Heat; ask the victims of hurricane Sandy or anybody who experiences a power outage about the value of heat. Even primitive people use fire for heat.

3) Communication; all modern forms of communication depend upon the power provided by the energy derived from fire.

4) Rapid travel; what form of travel today isn’t powered by the use of fire? Trains, planes and automobiles are all powered with fire.

5) Escape from countless hours of physical labour. Prior to the discovery and use of fire, especially that used to produce electricity, disparate groups of human being were stuck in separate small communities around the world forced to spend most of their time in physical labour.

6) Inventions such as the modern computer and the rapid, worldwide communication network, which includes cell phones, e-mail and the internet would not have been developed nor could they be sustained by the intermittent, low density energy derived from solar cells and wind mills.

7) Satellites, both communication and weather; how many satellites have been launched into space without the use of fire? Many, but not all, are sent to space by hydrocarbon fuels. (Even those satellites that study outgoing long wave radiation and have futilely been attempting to prove that increasing levels of carbon dioxide are causing catastrophic climate change.)

8) One of the consequences of using fire as an energy source is that it has provided many people with enough time on their hands to debate whether or not fire is a good thing, i.e., the global warming AKA climate change AKA biodiversity AKA sustainable development debate.

(Remember also that environmental extremists not only want to ban the use of fire for energy production; they want to ban the use of nuclear energy and hydroelectric energy as well.)

The vast amount of energy that the use of fire has placed at the disposal of humanity has been used to revolutionize the nature of our existence. The mere fact that fire was a source of light and heat independent of the sun meant that humans could roam beyond the tropics into the damp, cold regions of the north with seasons of snow and long freezing nights. It was fire and fire alone that enabled man to become a creature native to the entire world and not just the tropics. In addition, the heat of the fire, i.e. cooking, brought about changes in our food supply that made otherwise inedible food palatable and nourishing. Fire has not only increased the variety of food that humans can eat, it also powers the diesel tractors used in modern farming. Our food supply has consequently multiplied beyond the wildest dreams of our ancient ancestors. Current world hunger problems are primarily distribution problems not quantity problems.

Nor has the importance of fire diminished with time; rather the reverse. Wood was no doubt the first fuel used in building and maintaining a fire, but coal took primacy over wood in the 17th century. In the 20th century these two fuels were join by gasoline and oil. In the 21st century shale oil and natural gas are gaining importance.

If the “powers that be” really thought that the continued use of fire was causing a climate catastrophe they would ban its use all together, but it would seem that they just want a piece of the action. The cap-and-trade scheme is not unlike property tax in which the government just lays claim to your property and starts charging you rent, i.e. property tax. (If you think that you own your home just stop paying your property tax and see what happens.) The cap-and-trade scheme is the government just laying claim on all fossil fuel resource within its jurisdiction and charging people a fee to burn them as an energy source.

“The power to tax is the power to destroy.” (John Marshall in McCulloch v. Maryland 17 U.S. 327)

It could be that humans will eventually run out of things to burn, but that day keeps getting pushed back by innovation. For the present I can’t think of a more efficient way to destroy our society’s prosperity, which has brought us all of the above benefits, than to impose a tax on the use of fire. It leaves me wondering; in what kind of society do we now live in which we have to buy a license to use fire as an energy source, something that has been free for 125,000 years? And who exactly are we paying these fees to in order to obtain the privilege of burning that which nature provides?

Carl Brehmer

(Slightly edited from the original.)

Next Page »

© 2007-2017 The Carbon Sense Coalition. Material on this site is protected by copyright. However we encourage people to copy, print, resend or make links to any article providing the source, including web address, is acknowledged. We would appreciate notification of use.
The Carbon Sense Coalition is proudly powered by WordPress and themed by Mukka-mu