Suddenly we are in the real battle against a Big New Carbon Tax. We must also expect that more silly de-carbonisation initiatives will come from the cocksure coalition of Greens and Union Leaders now controlling Australia. Worse still, they will be supported by some misguided leaders in Big Business such as BHP and Origin Energy, and some in the Liberal Party.

For more comment on the latest proposal by BHP for a carbon tax see:

http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/stop-the-carbon-tax.pdf [PDF, 116 KB]

The Queensland Government is proposing to create a new category of restricted land use called “Strategic Cropping Land”, which is reserved for “cropping” and closed to almost every other type of land development. This would create No-Go zones covering as much as 4% of Queensland, representing an area more than twice the size of Holland and including many areas likely to contain the mineral and energy resources for tomorrow.

This proposal will affect every landowner and every rural industry in some way, almost all negatively, but its most immediate effect will be on landowners and coal explorers.

Read the submission from Carbon Sense: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/coal-or-crops.pdf [PDF, 581 KB]

Today, 27th October 2010, is Climate Fools Day.

For the last 20 years politicians, jet-setting bureaucrats and vested interests have been plotting how to make Climate Fools of the western world, taxing industry and consumers to fund green schemes, carbon speculators and international wealth redistribution.

The fightback by sceptical scientists and public was greatly boosted on the first Climate Fools Day when, in October 2008, British politicians passed with little dissent “The Climate Change Bill” a piece of legislation that future generations will come to accept was “the most absurd Bill that this Parliament has ever had to examine”.

Since then, sceptics all over the world have exposed the lack of evidence, the manipulation of data, the misuse of scientific process, the corruption of vested interests and the powerful influence of natural factors in climate cycles.

Despite the now discredited projections of dangerous global warming, the globe itself has continued its normal weather defining cycles such as El Nino, La Nina, the Pacific Oscillations, the powerful solar cycles and the massive ebb and flow of oceans and atmosphere. On a longer time scale there is no evidence that the globe’s long history of recurrent ice ages and violent episodes of volcanic and earthquake activity have suddenly ceased.

Unfortunately, a whole generation of Climate Fools will have to be rooted out of our parliaments before Climate Sense reigns again. We will then see the massive flood of community resources currently being wasted on windmills, solar toys, alarmist junkets, silly subsidies and climate bureaucracy more sensibly directed towards preparation for coping with the real natural cycles of heat and cold, floods and droughts, cyclones and earthquakes, vulcanism and ice ages. We will then regret the destruction of industry and wastage of real energy opportunities now taking place.

Climate Fools Day will be celebrated today by organised meetings of sceptics in Westminster and Brisbane.

Brisbane: King George Square 12 noon. More info contact Tim Wells:  timobrienwells@yahoo.co.uk

PS for more information on Climate Fools Day see:
http://climatefoolsday.com/

And on the activities in Westminster:

Cabal of climate sceptics to descend on UK parliament: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/oct/25/climate-fools-day-sceptics-parliament

The Carbon Sense Coalition said today that to introduce a carbon tax would be to wage war on consumers for the benefit of vested interests.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, also accused Australian PM Gillard of deceptive advertising in her support of a carbon tax.

“When our PM says “we need a price on carbon”, she is just sprouting another misleading Wongism like “we must reduce carbon pollution”.

“Most forms of carbon already have a price – coal, oil, gas, petrol, diesel, beef, bread, butter, diamonds and whiskey – all have a price (which usually includes a few taxes).

“What Ms Gillard wants, but dares not say, is another tax on our usage of many carbon products.

“Who wants a tax on carbon?”

Read the full article for more: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/who-wants-carbon-tax.pdf [PDF, 105KB]

Also these topics are covered:

• Climate Fools Day
• Coal – Australia’s Industrial Heart
• A Few Facts about Wind Turbines

Since the beginning of the industrial revolution, Earth and its inhabitants have benefited from the rise in airborne CO2 by an average growth increase of about 12% for plants and 18% for trees. This has improved Earth’s habitats and ecosystems, including increasing food production for an undernourished population. These benefits have helped offset the many negative impacts upon nature caused by other human activities.

These are some of the many benefits of increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere:

1. Additional CO2 causes an astonishing increase in plant growth.
2. More CO2 causes plants to need less water to produce the same amount of growth.
3. Certain health-promoting substances such as vitamin C and antioxidants, are increased with additional airborne CO2.
4. With much more food production per acre, Earth should be able to feed an expanding population and save habitats and ecosystems.
5. Existing habitats and ecosystems will have higher plant and wildlife capacity.
6. The greening of Earth will continue and extend into the deserts as plants become drought tolerant.
7. Plants can better resist various stresses when grown in a CO2 enriched atmosphere.
8. Dramatic increases in the growth of Earth’s forests will help them recover from recurring natural disasters and aid a renewable resource industry.
9. CO2 is Earth’s greatest airborne fertilizer.
10. CO2 is the staff of life for Earth’s plant kingdom which is the beginning of the food chain; without it there would be no life on Earth.

Source: http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx?menuitemid=401

For more information on the beneficial effects caused by carbon dioxide in the atmosphere see:
http://www.plantsneedco2.org/default.aspx/MenuItemID/103/MenuGroup/AboutUs/CO2IsGreenAndGood.htm

PDF version: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/co2-good-green.pdf [PDF, 35 KB]

The Carbon Sense Coalition today called on Australians and Americans to join the world in celebrating Climate Fools Day on October 27th.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that Climate Fools Day was named by protestors outside the British House of Commons on 27th October 2008 when the house was debating the Climate Bill.

Forbes explained: “As the first October snow in 70 years blanketed the House (and a big swathe of Europe), MP’s droned on about the need to fight global warming. “For six hours MP’s reassured one another about the desperate need to be the first government in the world to saddle its unfortunate people with a burden estimated at £15 billion a year. As snow continued to blanket Westminster, only two MP’s questioned the huge cost and dubious benefits from the energy taxes and green
energy rorts they were imposing.”

Read more: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/climate-fools-day.pdf [PDF, 136KB]

Senator Bob Brown stated that his Greatest Achievement was blocking the Gordon-below-Franklin Hydro-Electric Scheme

In June 1982, Tasmania’s Parliament passed legislation approving the development of the Gordon-below-Franklin (GBF) scheme for a dam and 300 MW power station which would have generated annually well over 10 million MW hours of electricity, costing then only about 2 cents per KW hour.

The scheme was supported by Tasmanians and passed by both Houses of their Parliament. Construction commenced.

Tasmania’s Dr Bob Brown opposed the scheme based on the false assumption that the scenic Rock Island Bend would be flooded and therefore unseen by canoeists down the river. But this site would have been above the dam water level.

Then Dr Brown circulated a picture of Rock Island Bend, taken by Peter Dombrovski, and a false statement by the Tasmanian Wilderness Society which deluded the public into believing that the scheme should be abandoned. This caused the Federal Government Labor Party to refer the matter to the High Court, where three judges supported and three judges opposed the scheme. However, the seventh judge, Senator Lionel Murphy, opposed it. This enabled the Federal Government to use its External Powers to stop the scheme with the result that all this valuable water flows out to the sea.

The scheme would have obtained most of its water discharged from the Gordon Power Station, powered by water from the Lake Pedder and Gordon Dams which have a capacity of 16 million cubic meters (over three times the capacity of Snowy Hydro’s Lake Eucumbene). There is usually little flow from the Franklin River.

The GBF scheme is very economical and environmentally sound and is well worth supporting. It should be built regardless of the High Court decision and the possibility that it might lie within a World Heritage listed area.

I am deeply concerned by the damage, deliberately inflicted by Dr Bob Brown. To me, Dr Brown should be made to pay for the damage he has caused.

E.C. “George” Fox

PS This ‘blockage’ resulted in the Federal Government having to provide about $500 million for other more costly hydro-electric schemes.

3 August 2010

PDF version: http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/greens-oppose-green-power.pdf [PDF, 73KB]

The proposition that the average temperature of the earth’s surface is warming because of increased emissions of human-produced greenhouse gases cannot be tested by any known scientific procedure.

It is impossible to position temperature sensors randomly over the earth’s surface (including the 71% of ocean, and all the deserts, forests, and icecaps) and maintain it in constant condition long enough to tell if any average is increasing. Even if this were done the difference between the temperature during day and night is so great that no rational average can be derived.

Measurements at weather stations are quite unsuitable since they are not positioned representatively and they only measure maximum and minimum once a day, from which no average can be derived. They also constantly change in number, location and surroundings. Recent studies show that most of the current stations are unable to measure temperature to better than a degree or two

The assumptions of climate models are absurd. They assume the earth is flat, that the sun shines with equal intensity day and night, and the earth is in equilibrium, with the energy received equal to that emitted.

Half of the time there is no sun, where the temperature regime is quite different from the day.

No part of the earth ever is in energy equilibrium, neither is there any evidence of an overall “balance”.

It is unsurprising that such models are incapable of predicting future climate behaviour, even if this could be measured satisfactorily.

There are no representative measurements of the concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide over any land surface, where “greenhouse warming” is supposed to happen.

After twenty years of study, and as expert reviewer to the IPCC from the very beginning, I can only conclude that the whole affair is a gigantic fraud.

Vincent Gray
Crofton Downs
Wellington, New Zealand

This letter was also published by Scientific American at:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=climate-heretic

Mark Lawson

The Federal Government may have dumped (technically deferred) one nutty green scheme (emissions trading) but an equally nutty scheme remains in place – requiring electricity distributors to buy green electricity.

This scheme is nutty because no one has shown that green electricity supplied to an operating power network actually reduces emissions. The government, various green lobby groups and the mass of voters have simply assumed that it does. There are doubts about efficiency losses due to the whole network having to be retailored to accommodate renewables. And more doubts over just how much additional backup generator capacity will be required for intermittent power sources. These doubts are either ignored or dismissed as “myths”.

…

The Australian government has dived head-first into renewables with both eyes shut, and with the general approval of the voters, who mostly have no idea of what they have approved or how much it will cost. The government should drop the whole renewable energy scheme as too complicated and expensive and unlikely to save much carbon.

The full article: blowing-away-money.pdf [PDF: KB]

Mark Lawson is a senior journalist with The Australian Financial Review. He has written: “A Guide to Climate Change Lunacy – bad forecasting, terrible solutions”.
Connor Court – $29.95. http://www.connorcourt.com/ or book stores.