Welcome!

By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.

Sign Up Now!

Australian news and politics.

JS96 said:
You look at these charts where Western nations have flattened or lowered their output. Yeah great. Yet the biggest culprits are still churning out at 10 fold since Germany and the UK sacrificed their energy policy eihcihbhas decimated manufacturing.

The same with these stupid paper straws. An absolute speck compared to what the ultra wealthy are still doing and as if any left wing government would ever be able to rope that in unless it were in the form of a Bolshevist takeover.

Keep calling the people suffering under green policies stupid. That'll stop them choosing the other side. Germany is about to introduce new sugar, alcohol and tabacco taxes as the coffers are empty due to failures in green policies that have stopped the flow of tax revenues through manufacturing and export. The business leaders kept calling it out at conferences and millions of jobs have been lost and not replaced over the past few years. 400k gone in Jan to March alone. Ironically, everyone says they haven't met or know anyone who voted the greens.
Click to expand...
I was talking about centrist policies rather than Greens (leftist/woke) policies. I very much agree we should tackle climate change but I do also believe we need to do it in a way that’s feasible and not a burden on ordinary people.

I think a big mistake Germany made was stopping nuclear power (which is a clean energy source believe it or not and about 96% of nuclear fission can be recycled and reused), which is something we should be using alongside renewable energy (solar, wind, hydro, etc). Germany now still uses coal (which is a fossil fuel and releases emissions) and now imports nuclear electricity from France. Australia has a massive supply of uranium and we should explore using it rather than just exporting it. We could effectively phase out coal in a few decades if we used a combination of nuclear and renewable energy (also exploring other renewable options in addition to the traditional hydro, solar and wind energy projects that already exist; Tassie uses mostly hydro for example while SA uses a lot of wind and solar, using 95-98% and 74% renewables respectively).

As for not knowing Greens voters, proper Greens voters are hardcore leftists. People on the extreme ends typically only associate with people who hold similar views and believe others are morally corrupt. Many even cut off family members who openly disagree with them while others try their hardest to have little to do with them.
 
HonestSpursFan said:
I was talking about centrist policies rather than Greens (leftist/woke) policies. I very much agree we should tackle climate change but I do also believe we need to do it in a way that’s feasible and not a burden on ordinary people.

I think a big mistake Germany made was stopping nuclear power (which is a clean energy source believe it or not and about 96% of nuclear fission can be recycled and reused), which is something we should be using alongside renewable energy (solar, wind, hydro, etc). Germany now still uses coal (which is a fossil fuel and releases emissions) and now imports nuclear electricity from France. Australia has a massive supply of uranium and we should explore using it rather than just exporting it. We could effectively phase out coal in a few decades if we used a combination of nuclear and renewable energy (also exploring other renewable options in addition to the traditional hydro, solar and wind energy projects that already exist; Tassie uses mostly hydro for example while SA uses a lot of wind and solar, using 95-98% and 74% renewables respectively).

As for not knowing Greens voters, proper Greens voters are hardcore leftists. People on the extreme ends typically only associate with people who hold similar views and believe others are morally corrupt. Many even cut off family members who openly disagree with them while others try their hardest to have little to do with them.
Click to expand...
That's the most ridiculous part. Countries think removing or sanctioning certain energy sources will work but all they're doing is paying more for it on the B marketplace.

The green voters I know voted naively thinking they were going to be better off and now complain about the cost of everything and all the energy and environmental surcharges built in.
 
HSF - from my take many who have voted Labor/Green are the blinkered young gen influenced by SM in droves might I add.
Little do they know how much leaning this way is going to cost them/us ahead not that its not expensive already ie electricity that albo promised would decrease.
Sheeple are just that even more today.
I have no care what team leads tbh in the end but do a top job, admit your wrongs and correct them as well.
As you mentioned who isn't caring to live cleaner/smarter now that we know more and for the future.
Just stop taking us down the path of NO idea of costs and implement more tax's, net 0 is an utter ridiculous bar lets get real impossible.
No we can't do that for we can't show we may agree with another parties ideal or good suggestion for we look stupid.
Politics all over has gone down the toilet for we have so many utter gutless dummies leading today.
 
LFC said:
HSF - from my take many who have voted Labor/Green are the blinkered young gen influenced by SM in droves might I add.
Little do they know how much leaning this way is going to cost them/us ahead not that its not expensive already ie electricity that albo promised would decrease.
Click to expand...
This is true, most Greens voters are under 30 and haven’t lived long enough to work out how tough life is. In uni you’re poor as fuck and the Greens come out and raise our taxes whilst giving random money out. As they grow older they probably realise that most Greens policies don’t work and aren’t feasible economically.

LFC said:
net 0 is an utter ridiculous bar lets get real impossible.
Click to expand...
This I disagree with. I think net zero is absolutely achievable and we should be able to get there. Again we could effectively stop using coal and gas altogether by 2070 if we invest in nuclear now. We need to also invest in public transport and make EVs and eventually hydrogen cars more affordable for everyday people as currently the only option for many people is petrol cars. The vast majority of people do wanna protect the environment but it’s just so expensive for many people.
 
HonestSpursFan said:
This is true, most Greens voters are under 30 and haven’t lived long enough to work out how tough life is. In uni you’re poor as fuck and the Greens come out and raise our taxes whilst giving random money out. As they grow older they probably realise that most Greens policies don’t work and aren’t feasible economically.
Click to expand...
No not just under 30's up to 40 or abouts. Dreamers till correct they mature and realise they wronged especially IF they go out into business themselves.
HonestSpursFan said:
This I disagree with. I think net zero is absolutely achievable and we should be able to get there. Again we could effectively stop using coal and gas altogether by 2070 if we invest in nuclear now. We need to also invest in public transport and make EVs and eventually hydrogen cars more affordable for everyday people as currently the only option for many people is petrol cars. The vast majority of people do wanna protect the environment but it’s just so expensive for many people.
Click to expand...
again dream on - I agree maybe one decade/century ahead way ahead and alot needs the ducks inline to achieve it....without many side tracks/surprise's that obviously will occur as well.
Like I said there is no doubt people care about the environment but its not easy transition and keeping living affordable.
Who is going sacrifice lifestyle/commodity purchase's nowadays and pay more for the future.
How do you cycle manufacturing timing from coal to the alternatives.
Do you really think a Gov will have a grip of this and many follow at the sametime and the impending costs involved seamlessly.
Not a chance.
How can China totally close/transition all their coal manufacturing let alone India and still meet Export demands.
Just saying.
 
LFC said:
How can China totally close/transition all their coal manufacturing let alone India and still meet Export demands.
Just saying.
Click to expand...
The UN needs to put more pressure on the Arab League, China, India, Iran, North Korea and Russia. Not just in terms of climate change but in general. They shouldn’t get a free pass to violate international law while developed and Western countries get scrutinised all the time even when they don’t need to be.
 
HonestSpursFan said:
The UN needs to put more pressure on the Arab League, China, India, Iran, North Korea and Russia. Not just in terms of climate change but in general. They shouldn’t get a free pass to violate international law while developed and Western countries get scrutinised all the time even when they don’t need to be.
Click to expand...
Again - who gonna force that change.
 
I see the Climate Change Deniers have moved on from the ‘denying’, and have moved on to the ‘cost’ of action.

So predictable.
 
Son of Sam said:
I see the Climate Change Deniers have moved on from the ‘denying’, and have moved on to the ‘cost’ of action.

So predictable.
Click to expand...
The cost is a fact lived by the most vulnerable. Until the funding comes from those who can afford it, it's not a viable solution and then they're on policies that might work. The predictions about being under water by 2000 were totally wrong and their models are always being proven to deviate. All these climatologists want is funding in their own lifetime and very few truly care enough to find a solution. It's the same as homelessness NGOs.
 
HonestSpursFan said:
The UN needs to put more pressure on the Arab League, China, India, Iran, North Korea and Russia. Not just in terms of climate change but in general. They shouldn’t get a free pass to violate international law while developed and Western countries get scrutinised all the time even when they don’t need to be.
Click to expand...
Call me cynical but as if any of those suits care about implementing change. It's always 'we're looking at doing something' those really effecting change are in the background not getting the plaudits.
 
JS96 said:
The cost is a fact lived by the most vulnerable. Until the funding comes from those who can afford it, it's not a viable solution and then they're on policies that might work. The predictions about being under water by 2000 were totally wrong and their models are always being proven to deviate. All these climatologists want is funding in their own lifetime and very few truly care enough to find a solution. It's the same as homelessness NGOs.
Click to expand...
2000?!!! My goodness … that is king of cherry picking! If in fact that was ever predicted.

You are not a serious person. But people like you ensure we are doomed.
 
Son of Sam said:
2000?!!! My goodness … that is king of cherry picking! If in fact that was ever predicted.

You are not a serious person. But people like you ensure we are doomed.
Click to expand...
There have been plenty of predictions even earlier than 2000 about rising water levels and doomsday like climate events that haven't come to fruition at all. Perhaps they were just farcical articles to begin with.

Even if these climate events become true, running down everyone's standard of living while others don't in an attempt to prevent the inevitable isn't a solution. It's a delusion that fills the pockets of those involved so they can shrug their shoulders when their policies in fact don't work while everyone else stands around penniless because the leaders said so.
 
If you could point to a single person predicting people being "under water by 2000" to any significant extent I'd be extremely interested to read it.

The economic argument for climate inaction is absolute bullshit in my view. It completely ignores that (i) the transition from fossil energy to renewable energy will reduce costs in the substantial majority of cases, and (ii) there will be an extremely large future cost of climate inaction (like natural disasters).

I think about this a lot and I've come to the conclusion that anyone who engages with the evidence with any level of sincerity/rationality would accept that we need to make an orderly and quick transition to a zero carbon economy.

Australia, particularly, is going to benefit massively. We spend at least 30B (and that's conservative, it could be up to 60B) a year on importing fossil fuels from overseas, the vast majority of which is extracted in theocracies that I wouldn't mind seeing fail entirely. Imagine what a difference that would make to our balance of trade!
 
Toey I’m sure you can google.
For the heck of it being JS brought it up and I do recall the fuss.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2288.png
    IMG_2288.png
    396.8 KB · Views: 7
  • IMG_2287.png
    IMG_2287.png
    392.7 KB · Views: 7
Haha thanks for that LFC. To be frank, a single paper from more than half a century ago isn't really what I thought would be presented to me when I made my post. To put it mildly, there's been some pretty significant scientific enquiry into the matter in the time since that article was published...
 
After the recent ( and ongoing ) bullshit I've decided to buy a hybrid. My interest in climate change is zero however I do understand the convergence of economics, finance, energy and geopolitics well. And I have to say just by using your eyes that the leaded petrol vehicles of the 60's,70's and 80's caused a issue with visual pollution ( I'm old enough to remember haze over Sydney ) which any chump could see affected people's health. The car companies got reeled in and now ICE are as minimally polluting than they've ever been due to advances in engine and fuel engineering. I think when the charging infrastructure is in place everywhere which will take at least 10 years in a country as big in Australia for EV's including for the millions that live in & will live in apartments I think fuel cars will have had their day. That will require billions and billions in energy infrastructure upgrades like the billions and billions currently being pumped into AI, yes there will be a cost. However when it comes to mobility and the desire to go where you want and when you want with no hinderance at all people will pay.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LFC
Toebash said:
Haha thanks for that LFC. To be frank, a single paper from more than half a century ago isn't really what I thought would be presented to me when I made my post. To put it mildly, there's been some pretty significant scientific enquiry into the matter in the time since that article was published...
Click to expand...
No worries.
I couldn’t be bothered posting the links for I’ve been I transit but there is docs papers on what I posted.
You only have follow the leads I posted I’m not spoon feeding you :)
Of course there has been significant advances pretty obvious as each decade goes by.
 
erogenouszone said:
After the recent ( and ongoing ) bullshit I've decided to buy a hybrid. My interest in climate change is zero however I do understand the convergence of economics, finance, energy and geopolitics well. And I have to say just by using your eyes that the leaded petrol vehicles of the 60's,70's and 80's caused a issue with visual pollution ( I'm old enough to remember haze over Sydney ) which any chump could see affected people's health. The car companies got reeled in and now ICE are as minimally polluting than they've ever been due to advances in engine and fuel engineering. I think when the charging infrastructure is in place everywhere which will take at least 10 years in a country as big in Australia for EV's including for the millions that live in & will live in apartments I think fuel cars will have had their day. That will require billions and billions in energy infrastructure upgrades like the billions and billions currently being pumped into AI, yes there will be a cost. However when it comes to mobility and the desire to go where you want and when you want with no hinderance at all people will pay.
Click to expand...
Hybrid is the smart buy imo good on you EZ till the charging infrastructure is built.
Best of both worlds save a bomb amd less pollution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top