Federal Government proposes a price on carbon.

[Q.]

Just in case it wasn't obvious...

Everyone (nearly) hates the carbon pricing scheme

[Sky Pilot]

According to the 'believers' the CO2 in air has
risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last
50 years.

To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in
a clearer perspective;

If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x
3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would
occupy in that room would be .25m x ..25m x ..17m
or the size of a large packet of cereal.

Australia emits 1% of the world's total carbon
Dioxide and the government wants to reduce
this by 20%t or reduce emissions by 0.2 % of
the world's total CO2 emissions.

What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?

By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has
risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years.

Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by ...004%.

Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = ...00008%. (Getting confusing -but stay with me).

Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided by 100 = ..0000008%.

Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the governments
wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th of .0000008 = ..00000016% effect per year they would have on
the world CO2 emissions based on their own figures.

That would equate to an area in the same room, as
the size of a small pin.

For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and Roofing Installations, Clean Coal Technology. Renewable Energy, etc, etc.

How ridiculous it that?

Doesn't prove or disprove anything ... try ingesting 0.027% of cyanide and you how you fare

Gee I just checked and I dont think we are talking cyanide?

[redandblack]

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2800654.html

[Q.]

According to the 'believers' the CO2 in air has
risen from .034% to .038% in air over the last
50 years.

To put the percentage of Carbon Dioxide in air in
a clearer perspective;

If you had a room 12 ft x 12 ft x 7 ft or 3.7 mtrs x
3.7 mtrs x 2.1 mtrs, the area carbon dioxide would
occupy in that room would be .25m x ..25m x ..17m
or the size of a large packet of cereal.

Australia emits 1% of the world's total carbon
Dioxide and the government wants to reduce
this by 20%t or reduce emissions by 0.2 % of
the world's total CO2 emissions.

What effect will this have on existing CO2 levels?

By their own figures they state the CO2 in air has
risen from .034% to .038% in 50 years.

Assuming this is correct, the world CO2 has increased in 50 years by ...004%.

Per year that is .004 divided by 50 = ...00008%. (Getting confusing -but stay with me).

Of that because we only contribute 1% our emissions would cause CO2 to rise .00008 divided by 100 = ..0000008%.

Of that 1%, we supposedly emit, the governments
wants to reduce it by 20% which is 1/5th of .0000008 = ..00000016% effect per year they would have on
the world CO2 emissions based on their own figures.

That would equate to an area in the same room, as
the size of a small pin.

For that they have gone crazy with the ridiculous trading schemes, Solar and Roofing Installations, Clean Coal Technology. Renewable Energy, etc, etc.

How ridiculous it that?

Doesn't prove or disprove anything ... try ingesting 0.027% of cyanide and you how you fare

Gee I just checked and I dont think we are talking cyanide?

What dedja is alluding to is that your figures are meaningless without an understanding of how much CO2e is too much CO2e.

[Q.]

http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2800654.html

He stole my line that I stole.

[Sky Pilot]

I'll just email Christine Milne and ask her. Hang about...........

[dedja]

What dedja is alluding to is that your figures are meaningless without an understanding of how much CO2e is too much CO2e.

[Q.]

Where'd you get those figures from SP?

[straight talker]

Also from Laurie Oakes



Howard protested to a newspaper columnist about Gillard using his commitment to an emissions trading system before he lost office in 2007 to help justify her own scheme.

While conceding that he had promised to bring in an ETS by 2012, Howard claimed: "I indicated at the time that we would act in concert with the rest of the world and not ahead of it."

But what did Howard really say back then?

"Australia will continue to lead internationally on climate change, globally and in the Asia-Pacific region," he told a Liberal Party federal council meeting after unveiling his ETS blueprint.

"This will be a world-class emissions trading system more comprehensive, more rigorously grounded in economics, and with better governance than anything in Europe."

In an address to the Melbourne Press Club a month later, Howard said: "In the years to come it will provide a model for other nations to follow.

"Being among the first movers on carbon trading in this region will bring new opportunities and we intend to grasp them."

And there was this exchange at a news conference in the run-up to the election that saw him defeated by Kevin Rudd.

Journalist: Haven't you locked Australia into an emissions trading scheme in the next term?

Howard: Yes, I have.

Journalist: Regardless of what our trading competitors do?

Howard: Yes, but that is precisely the sort of contribution we should make.

So Howard - Honest John was his nickname, remember? - is trying to rewrite history.

So HONEST john you think rednblack how about the big LIE OF GILLARD? THE$RE will be no blah blah under my government???

[straight talker]

GILLARD is the biggest liar in Australian politics by an absolute mile. There will be NO CARBON TAX under the government that i lead.??????? LIAR LIAR LIAR. she has the worst rating of any prime minister in Australias history and has made blue after blue after blue how much longer can the labor spin machine put up with this i wonder before the union thugs knife her as they did with K Rudd???????????? bring on an election and lets see if the PEOPLE OF AUSTRALIA hav had enuf...

[Q.]

You forgot to use the term 'JuLIAR' to make your argument more robust.

[straight talker]

yes that is true Q i just cant believe that the good people of oz are stuck with the worst Prime minister (who the people of oz didnt vote 4 anyway) and the worst stinking government we have had in history...

[Sky Pilot]

yes that is true Q i just cant believe that the good people of oz are stuck with the worst Prime minister (who the people of oz didnt vote 4 anyway) and the worst stinking government we have had in history...

[Sky Pilot]

Where'd you get those figures from SP?

From here mate - letter to the editor in Rockhampton
T.L. Cardwell

To the Editor,

I thought I should clarify. I spent 25 years in the Electricity Commission of NSW working, commissioning and operating the various power units. My last was the 4 X 350 MW Munmorah Power Stations near Newcastle . I would be pleased to supply you any information you may require.

[redandblack]

If you're serious about looking at both sides of the question, this article is required reading:

Warning - it's a serious discussion, so it may not be suitable for those operating only on anti-Gillard slogans


http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/2804206.html

Plenty of science in it, but I like this bit of political comment.

What exactly are the policies of the Coalition, and would they work? After all, there's been plenty of media scrutiny of the Government's carbon tax. There's been precious little on the Opposition's own carbon policy, which it calls "Direct Action", or the many sweeping statements on climate change and the carbon tax by Tony Abbott.

On Monday night on the ABC's PM program, Stephen Long finally examined some of Tony Abbott's claims. In a stunning piece of forensic investigation, Long single-handedly dismantled the distortions, misrepresentations and bald-faced lies that Tony Abbott continues to advance.

"Full credit to the Opposition Leader's political skill," Long said in his report.

"But he's been aided and abetted by journalists who've continued to report unchallenged claims that appear to contradict facts."

Long singled out Tony Abbott's claims that the carbon tax would be "toxic" for the economy, and that it would shut down the coal industry. There is no factual basis for either argument. According to Long, "every credible analysis including the industry's own says the coal industry is going to enjoy a massive expansion despite the Government's carbon price."

But almost no-one in the mainstream media has bothered to hold Tony Abbott to account.

[JohnnyG]

GILLARD is the biggest liar in Australian politics by an absolute mile. There will be NO CARBON TAX under the government that i lead.??????? LIAR LIAR LIAR. she has the worst rating of any prime minister in Australias history and has made blue after blue after blue how much longer can the labor spin machine put up with this i wonder before the union thugs knife her as they did with K Rudd???????????? bring on an election and lets see if the PEOPLE OF AUSTRALIA hav had enuf...

I see that you come from the Abbott school of rational analysis and debate of issues.....

Our education system has indeed failed us miserably, if this is the level that political & other debate has degenerated into in Australia.

[straight talker]

ok and i guess when you went to school our schools failed to install in you that you should always tell the truth?? I guess our system failed then too?? Gillard lied to all Australians when she said NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT THAT I LEAD and for her then to backflip im sorry but that was a lie and a very sly one at that.but i guess thats labor all over.

[Leaping Lindner]

ok and i guess when you went to school our schools failed to install in you that you should always tell the truth?? I guess our system failed then too?? Gillard lied to all Australians when she said NO CARBON TAX UNDER A GOVERNMENT THAT I LEAD and for her then to backflip im sorry but that was a lie and a very sly one at that.but i guess thats labor all over.

John Howard sent us to a war on a lie. John Howard lied about children being thrown overboard. Politicians lie. Build a bridge....

[straight talker]

John Howard made decisions on the information he was given by the people who were in control of those things eg: special agents,military heads etc:. JULIAR missled the Australian people knowingly she was always going to introduce a half baked tax. How can she bring this disastrous tax in yet still let some of the biggest polluters in the world get away with it? ie: lead and zinc smelters, power stations, coal mining for eg. she either is fair dinkum and stops it altogether or she scraps the whole thing as it wont make a difference anyway and the rest of the world will pick up our work and trade and they are sitting back laughing at us now running all the way to the bank.

[Leaping Lindner]

John Howard made decisions on the information he was given by the people who were in control of those things eg: special agents,military heads etc:. JULIAR missled the Australian people knowingly she was always going to introduce a half baked tax. How can she bring this disastrous tax in yet still let some of the biggest polluters in the world get away with it? ie: lead and zinc smelters, power stations, coal mining for eg. she either is fair dinkum and stops it altogether or she scraps the whole thing as it wont make a difference anyway and the rest of the world will pick up our work and trade and they are sitting back laughing at us now running all the way to the bank.

Bulldust. There was absolutely no evidence EVER of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Evidence of Haliburton shares going up though
As for children overboard...well it's pretty obvious isn't it. Reith was caught out at the very first interview he tried to defend it.