Australia’s PM Rudd, Santa Clause of the Global Warming Industry, wants to waste another $100 M per year of other people’s money on his Carbon Capture and Storage Institute.

All life on earth depends on our atmosphere for four essentials – oxygen, water, carbon and nitrogen. This foolish Institute aims to permanently sterilise two of them, carbon and oxygen. It destroys valuable resources and wastes extra energy doing it.

Every tonne of carbon buried in CO2 by CCS takes almost 3 tonnes of oxygen with it. It is more accurately referred to as Oxygen Capture and Burial (OCB).

Planets like earth gradually lose their life-sustaining atmosphere and end up as lifeless planets like Moon and Mars. It just takes time.

The essentials of life are already being continually lost by other processes, largely locked up in rocks as limestone or coal, lost to space, or buried in ocean sediments, land fill or human cemeteries.

These buried treasures are lost for eons, maybe forever, to the cycle of life. The OCB scheme would deliberately accelerate that deathly process.

Burning coal and oil, smelting metals, mining phosphate and calcining cement make small contributions to reverse this long term disappearance of essential elements from our atmosphere and biosphere.

There are no climate benefits of this silly proposal because CO2 in the atmosphere does not control climate – the tiny effect of man’s CO2 emissions is wholly beneficial.

The OCB Scheme will provide cushy jobs and Frequent Flyer Points for the Climate Change Industry, jobs losses in every real industry, and soaring costs in every home.

Green extremists know that OCB is a fantasy but see it as a weapon to cripple carbon industries with taxes, thus making solar and wind power look economic.

Our PM should reduce his carbon footprint and come home.

Australia cannot afford a world statesman.

Viv Forbes
Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition

Gordon Brown and Kevin Rudd want to stimulate the climate conscience of the under-developed world with bribes of $122 billion PER YEAR stolen from western taxpayers and consumers (The Australian 8 July).

Naturally the UN approves. Having failed so spectacularly to combat terrorism, genocide and dictatorship they now see a job they can do – handling the climate change slush fund.

At best, this money will subsidise our competitors in India, China, Russia, Brazil and South Africa to modernise their factories and power stations. More likely, it will evaporate in a carbon credit scam, feed the climate change industry, or disappear into some Swiss bank account.

Our overheated, carbon burning, world travelling PMs needs to do what global warming is doing: pause and cool down.

Viv Forbes

By Viv Forbes, Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition.

Australian electricity consumers can look forward to soaring charges for electricity and blackouts if state and federal politicians continue to undermine the power grid by mandating and subsidising solar power generation.

Solar power can never produce continuous, predictable low cost power. It must always be supported by expensive power storage systems or by reliable power sources such as coal, gas, hydro or nuclear.

No matter how many millions of taxpayer money is poured into “research”, it can never solve the two fatal flaws of solar power.
(more…)

Supply-Demand Characteristics, Storage and Capital Costs
By Peter Lang

This paper provides a simple analysis of the capital cost of solar power and energy storage sufficient to meet the demand of Australia’s National Electricity Market. It also considers some of the environmental effects. It puts the figures in perspective…

Conclusions: solar power is uneconomic. Government mandates and subsidies hide the true cost of renewable energy but these additional costs must be carried by others.

The http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/solar-realities.pdf [PDF, 738KB]

Addendum – Comparison of Capital Cost of Nuclear and Solar Power: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/09/solar-realities-addendum.pdf [PDF, 52KB]

Australia’s EPA (Environmental Protection Authority) has been negligent in listing carbon dioxide (CO2) as a pollutant without conducting an independent public review of the scientific evidence to support that decision.

The Garnaut Doomsday report, the CSIRO Scare forecasts, and the Cap-N-Tax Scheme of Senator Wong are all based on faulty foundations. Like trusting children following the Pied Piper, Senator Wong follows the EPA, which follows CSIRO and Garnaut, who follow the US EPA, which follows the IPCC, which follows the Pied Piper of Gore, whose movie has been found to contain many untruths. Only a few key people in this Conga Line of gullibles know where they are going and why. Even fewer have checked the scientific basis of the Global Warming Theory.

They are all following the completely outdated IPCC AR4 report. This report was published in 2007 but relies on scientific papers at least 3 years out of date, and some such as the NAS 1979 study are 30 years old.

Now a critical draft report has emerged from inside the US EPA. It was written by very competent EPA staff, warning that organisation that their classification of CO2 as a pollutant was too heavily based on the latest IPCC report “which is at best three years out of date in a rapidly changing field.” This EPA report has been suppressed for months.

The comprehensive 98 page report details six areas where important new findings demand re-assessment of the EPA ruling. These include the end of the warming trend that is now obvious, the gross failure of IPCC forecasts of temperature and CO2 emissions, the lack of correlation between CO2 and temperature, and the “strong association between solar/sunspots/irradiance and global temperature fluctuations.”

The report also finds that the assumption of positive feedback from water vapour that underlies all global warming models is “not supported by empirical evidence and the feedback is actually negative.”

Finally, in a statement that demolishes the key argument for the Cap-N-Tax Scheme, this suppressed EPA report notes: “Changes in greenhouse gas concentrations appear to have so little effect that it is difficult to find any effect in the satellite temperature record, which started in 1978”.

The emergence of this critical report from within the EPA citadel, indicates the urgency for Australia to follow New Zealand, put the Cap-N-Tax Scheme on indefinite hold, and conduct a thorough independent enquiry into the basis for the Australian EPA actions which attempt to demonise CO2.
The best evidence before us now, supported completely by this in-house thinking in the US EPA, is that Australia’s EPA was hasty and negligent in classing CO2, the valuable and harmless Gas of Life, as a pollutant.

This decision should be reversed until an independent enquiry is held.

Viv Forbes
Chairman, The Carbon Sense Coalition

References:
Carlin, Alan & Davidson, John, March 2009 “Proposed NCEE Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act”, National Centre for Environmental Economics, US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington DC, USA (Draft report).
http://cei.org/news-release/2009/06/25/cei-releases-global-warming-study-censored-epa This report was suppressed, and the author was muzzled by the EPA.

See also: http://cei.org/cei_files/fm/active/0/Endangerment%20Comments%206-23-09.pdf

And: http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=330911757213432

PDF version of this article [PDF, 103 KB]

Dr. Heinz Lycklama (PhD in Nuclear Physics, McMaster University)

Earlier this year I started to look into the issue of Global Warming (GW) and attempted to understand why the issue had become such a controversial one. The general public has become attuned to the issue of GW and I (as an independent scientist) wanted to do my part in educating the public on the underlying science so that good public policy would be established. I assumed that science should be able to show the extent of GW and determine whether GW is due to man-made causes or to natural causes. Once we get the science right we would then know how to deal with GW. It turns out that things are a lot more complicated and unsettled than I thought they were. So I dug into the science behind GW much more thoroughly.

Read the complete document. [PDF, 139KB]

Soon our elected representatives will be asked to vote on Senator Wong’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

This scheme is not about carbon or pollution. Its main effect is to provide for a cap on the human production of carbon dioxide, a colourless harmless natural gas. Carbon dioxide is no more a pollutant than oxygen or water, the other two atmospheric gases on which all life on earth relies.

The bill will also levy a tax on whatever carbon dioxide is produced, and levy an excess production tax on anyone whose production exceeds the legal cap. It is a carbon dioxide Cap-n-Tax Bill.

Read the full article and navigate the Cap-n-Tax maze. [PDF, 168KB]

The “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme” which is now in Parliament, starts with a lie and goes downhill from there.

It is not about carbon or pollution. It aims to Ration and Tax man’s production of carbon dioxide (CO2), but it will have no benefits for the climate or the environment. It is better named “the RAT scheme”.

There is no human activity whatsoever that does not generate CO2, and no plant can grow without a generous supply of CO2 in the atmosphere. More than any other substance on earth, production of CO2 measures human prosperity and plant growth.

The RAT scheme thus plans to ration and tax human prosperity and plant growth. Never has a more destructive bill appeared in our Parliament.

Thank goodness we have some terriers in Parliament trying to kill this RAT.

Viv Forbes

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

Ian C McClintock

There is understandably, considerable uncertainty amongst the majority of the general public about the veracity of the claims made by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that anthropogenic (man induced) emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) and other greenhouse gasses, are the cause of the present warming period being experienced by planet Earth. There is no empirical evidence available to demonstrate or prove this relationship, despite the expenditure of some $50 billion directed to this end.

More in the full article. [PDF, 259KB]