A Professor of Climate Change at Adelaide University thinks we should halve Australia’s domestic ruminant numbers within two years.

When we have removed our cattle, sheep and goats, when water buy-back has diverted our irrigation water to Environmental Flows, and Australia is covered by regrowth brigalow, carbon credit forests, ethanol crop farms, protected remnant vegetation, Wilderness No-Go areas, National Parks, aboriginal reserves, World Heritage Areas, marine parks and Wild Rivers Reserves, I have just one question: “What are we going to eat?”

Viv Forbes

As an interesting fact on solar, I had a quote done for my house in Florida for a 2.5kw array (not enough to power the whole house, about 1/3 of the average requirement). The cost benefit worked out as follows:

Cost to purchase and install: $25,000 – this yielded a return of less than 1% on investment (about 0.7%)
Federal tax credit of $7,500
State rebate of about $9,600
Yield after subsidies (if qualified) – a total net cost of $7,900 with a return on my investment of just over 6%.

In other words the state and federal governments (taxpayers) would pay $17,100 in subsidies to support an overall yield on the total investment (theirs and mine) of 0.7%.

Every scrap of the product installed is of foreign manufacture sending the bulk of the taxpayer money overseas.

As a business person, if my company invested in 0.7% return projects, I would be out of business. I wonder if that applies to the Feds and States?

John in Maryland, USA

The Department of Climate Change base their case for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW), now referred to as ‘Climate Change’, on an uncritical acceptance of the IPCC’s Reports. Claims are made that these findings are supported by a ‘consensus’ of scientists and scientific opinion.
 
This however is increasingly not the case as literally thousands of peer reviewed and published papers and many thousands of highly respected scientists, including some who contributed to the IPCC Reports, are now concerned that these findings lack an adequate or convincing scientific base.
(more…)

Congratulations to Paul Howes of the AWU for fingering the vested interests of the banks in promoting Emissions Trading.

But don’t forget the lawyers, accountants, auditors, regulators, bureaucrats, merchant banks, stock brokers, option traders, climate modellers, wind promoters and cynical politicians, all lined up to benefit from grovelling to green extremists and creating a new sub-prime market trading in hot air.

But we need to look further than that. Not only will carbon taxes decimate real industry, they are also completely unnecessary.

There is no scientific or empirical evidence to support the view that carbon dioxide controls climate. Just computer models like those that failed to forecast the market meltdowns.

Climate change is always occurring, and is controlled by factors far bigger than man’s activities. We are faced with an economic recession, and soon will face a food crisis caused by natural climate change and stupid policies like mandating the use of grains for car fuel instead of for food.

Australia should make ZERO offerings to the religious revival meeting in Poznan.

Stay home, reduce our flying footprint and look after real jobs producing real things not spruikers, spivs and speculators seeking to create a new financial house of credits.

Viv Forbes

Everyone is relieved that we are only getting a 5% carbon tax penalty with lots of refunds, exemptions and electoral bribes.

This is the worst possible outcome.

Better they stayed at 25% tax, which would have provoked such a revolt that even the Liberals would have objected. The whole thing would then have been abandoned at the first opportunity.

But this sneaky Fabian tax will get onto the books and we will all be trained to submit annual returns to the Greenhouse office. Then later, exemptions will be abandoned, the tax will become a permanent feature of the mess called the Australian Tax “System”, and 5% will creep to 10%, to 20%, where they wanted it in the first place.

Meanwhile, climate change will continue regardless.

And those looking forward to their Green subsidies and handouts need to remember:

“The benefit you get from Canberra is the tax you sent to Canberra, less bureaucratic charges both ways”.

Viv Forbes

The editor,

Did you know there is a “St. Andrews Sustainability Institute”? (I suppose before global warming alarmism became a fungible activity, their role was recovery of – er, lost balls.) See this link:

St Andrews golf course ‘could sink into sea by 2050’

Now, I’d like to see a “Cinque Ports Sustainability Institute”, which will show that rising sea levels will restore 14th century Rye (now stranded inland on the Romney Marshes, about 5 miles from the Sussex beaches of southern England) to its status as a sea port, doing what it used to do best — smuggle in French Brandy and Burgundy wines under the noses of HM Customs! A positive effect for catastrophic global warming at last!

Any takers?

Malcolm Ross
Annandale, Virginia, USA

The Editor,

Currently 99.96% of the atmosphere is made up of the non-carbon dioxide components.

If we don’t mend our ways, by 2050 that number will plunge all the way down to 99.94%.

Love your stuff.

Jack Sturgess
Kooyong, Victoria.

I have noticed in the news that after twenty years of slapping a hefty price on carbon dioxide emissions, Norway’s carbon emissions have increased by 15%. Not that it matters, as carbon dioxide is not a pollutant anyway.

And China and India don’t even want to discuss carbon dioxide. But when they do they insist that, as it is we who are the carbon dioxide enthusiasts, we should pay.

But here we are, with a credit crisis and politicians panicking about infrastructure, they are tied in knots over how to go about imposing a carbon tax on the population.

The futility of carbon dioxide taxation has been ably and practically demonstrated by Norway. But our lemming like politicians on both sides of the house are as enthusiastic as ever to impose yet another tax on the public.

Why don’t they be honest and just say “We intend to close Australia down.” Rudd wants to close us down in 2010 and Turnbull in 2012 or so. They both deserve to be bushed. (No pun intended).

Then we can select at random some sensible officials out of the phone book, and get on with the job of growing food and mining products for which the world is scrambling to acquire.

Ronald Kitching

Last year Lehman Brothers released a report about climate change. High profits from the Kyoto carbon trade scheme was the essence of it. It met with the applause of politicians, the entire media and the greens. PM Rudd and Malcolm Turnbull were very keen on it and remain so.

Lehmans predicted the climate 100 years ahead. Green militants have been using the Lehman report as a proof of global warming and impending chaos.

Lehmans scientific advisor is James Hansen, Al Gore’s scientific adviser.

The report is driving climate change policy in Europe, Argentina and several other countries; it is used by economy professors playing being climatologists; by newspapers editorials and essays and even by a U. S. State Secretary.

But Lehmans couldn’t even predict their own demise less than a month ahead, though there were many people that had been warning about this present crash for years.

Lehman’s failure provides a preview of our future if more nations and companies bank their future on the speculative advice of these advocacy scientists, politicians and environmental groups, while ignoring common sense.

If we let them, our politicians will drive the nation to bankruptcy, using the policies that have destroyed Lehmans.

China and India have been and remain much more sensible.

The facts above are the basis of the carbon dioxide scam. To understand the psychological origin, read “The Crowd” by Gustave Le Bon. The English translation has not been out of print since 1960. [However, there is an on-line version: http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/445 -Editor]

Ronald Kitching

Opinion piece by Prof. David Bellamy
28 June 08
Cows and Sheep May Safely Graze?

As a youngster in a post war London I was brought up on lamb and anchor butter from New Zealand.

My first dabble into TV commercials was with WOOLMARK NZ, in what became a successful attempt to slow down the ingress of synthetic fibre into the carpet market. I still meet sheep farmers around the world who greet me their thanks and a pint of beer.

I still delight in your butter and lamb which I can buy in my local supermarket, the latter at half the price of the local product sold in our village butchers shop.

What a strange world we live in now bombarded with the rhetoric of food miles let alone tourist miles.
(more…)