Click for print sized Al Gore Halloween Mask, courtesy Forbes.com
SAFETY NOTE: Please don’t use this image to frighten children, oh wait, that happens in schools everyday when AIT is shown, nevermind…
From The West Australian newspaper
Climate change could haunt humanity forever: Garnaut
30th September 2008, 14:00 WST
Failure to deal with climate change now will “haunt humanity” forever, the nation’s top greenhouse adviser has warned as he issued a rallying cry for action.
Professor Ross Garnaut has warmed to the idea of a deep, fast cut to Australia’s emissions in his final report, released today.
After infuriating green groups earlier this month by calling for a 10 per cent cut in Australia’s emissions by 2020, he’s now more open to a deeper 25 per cent cut.
Prof Garnaut issued a blunt assessment of the dangers of climate change as he launched the 620-page report.
“If we fail, on a balance of probabilities, the failure of our generation will haunt humanity until the end of time,” he told reporters in Canberra.
“We are entering territory here that humanity has not been in before.
“We will delude ourselves if we think that uncertainty about the climate change science… is a cause for delay.”
And Australia would probably be “the biggest loser” among developed countries from climate change, he said.
Prof Garnaut has recommended Australia push for a strong global climate pact, which would mean a 25 per cent cut in emissions by 2020.
“Strong mitigation, with Australia playing its proportionate part, is in Australia’s interests,” the report says.
This ambitious target would be in the context of a global deal to keep atmospheric carbon concentration to 450 parts per million (ppm).
However, Prof Garnaut is pessimistic about the possibility of the world agreeing to this “strong mitigation” deal.
If his scepticism proves correct, Prof Garnaut wants the nation to push for a global atmospheric carbon concentration of 550 ppm, which means Australia cutting emissions by 10 per cent by 2020.
And if no climate deal is forged out of the United Nations process, Australia should cut emissions by five per cent, Prof Garnaut says.
“There’s no point in hiding from reality,” he said about the possibility of a strong global climate pact.
He wants Australia to start emissions trading in 2010, and warned consumers would pay more.
“Consumers will wear the majority of the cost of an emissions trading scheme, paying more for a range of goods and services as businesses pass on the emissions price,” he said.
Electricity would cop the biggest price rise, rising by 37 per cent by 2020 if a deep emissions cut was made, and by 21 per cent if a more modest cut was made.
Other prices would rise too, although the impact would be less than the GST had been.
“Petrol and food prices, general prices, will increase to some extent as a result of the ETS.”
Prof Garnaut wants Australia to spend $2.7 billion a year on research on low-emissions technology.
He wants emissions trading to start in 2010, with a fixed, rising carbon permit price until 2012.
Less than 30 per cent of the permits should be given to trade-exposed, emissions-intensive companies. Coal-based electricity generators would not get free permits or compensation.
Prof Garnaut thinks half the revenue from emissions trading should go to households, 30 per cent to businesses, and 20 per cent to research.
Householders would be able to access a “green credit” arrangement to install energy-smart appliances.
Prof Garnaut said the global financial crisis, which worsened overnight, was no excuse to delay acting on climate change.
“Financial crises are short-term phenomena … climate change is a long-term structural issue.”
He also lashed out at various business groups and industries which have warned they will have to shut plants, cut jobs and move offshore due to emissions trading.
“Why would you expect public policy advice in the national interest from the chief executive of a business who’s responsible to his board and shareholders for maximising the profit of that business?” Prof Garnaut asked.
“I think you are just looking at the world through the wrong end of the telescope if you think that that’s where you go to for objective public policy advice.”
AAP
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Again, just a run-of-the-mill dire prediction of the distant future.
Meanwhile, a real disaster is taking place in the banking industry.
This economic disaster was created by pols themselves, and without the help of nature.
It really stinks when the AGW alarmists have to compete against a real-life, today disaster.
The silver lining is that climate will be taking a backseat to economics for a few years. By then we may find ourselves with cold winters.
” from Michael Hauber Should I take this post as being indicative of where the skeptic movement is at these days?”
You should be glad there is some humor as you cast contemptuous epithets. When the lights go out and grandchildren struggle, talk will turn to why there is a second amendment.
The last time so much green went over board was at the Boston Tea Party.
Enough
As an Australian I despair of the drivel that Garnaut spouts, all based on dubious climate modelling and economic modelling. Seems the approach is that “we must act because if we don’t act we will have wished we had have acted” or some such rubbish. Spare me.
As for Michael Hauber and his comment. It is a serious post by Anthony, albeit with a light hearted image (not created by him mind you). So I guess we should take Al Gore as typifying the state of the global warming brigade then?
Australia certainly has its fair share of AGW idiots for such a small population.
Professor Garnaut is also on the record lately for dismissing sceptics as “religious cranks”. Not bad for a man who doesn’t make any claim to understand the science. He concedes that he simply defers to IPCC findings with full trust. He is one of a parade of huge ego’s drawn into this sham – thriving on the “crisis”. Matty, Perth Western Australia
Us Aussies love experimenting with stupidity, think rabbits, foxes and cane toads. Fortunately most of us don’t like to give our money away to easily, expect the tide to change sooner rather than later!
Garn nut is urging Aussies to eat Skippy. They don’t fart, apparently, so methane production would reduce in line with fewer sheep and cattle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7645969.stm
At it happens, I’d be all for it, but they don’t stop hopping long enough to catch.
“It really stinks when the AGW alarmists have to compete against a real-life, today disaster. ”
As evidenced by AlGore stating that the climate crisis deserves at least as much attention as the financial bailout.
It had a pathetic sort of “Hey…but what about ME???” ring to it…
Jim
Garnaut wants Australian farmers to replace a third of their sheep and cattle with kangaroos. Maybe they could restock with the ones in Garnaut’s top paddock. For the non Australian readers “a few roos loose in the top paddock” is the equivalent of “a brick short of a load” “a sandwich short of a picnic “etc. Knew someone once whose nickname was “two bricks”.
Michael Hauber (21:26:50) Ha, you just wish this is all there was to the skeptic movement. For more amusement, see Richard Lindzen’s recent report on the ‘warmist’ movement. A real barrel of laughs.
========================================
“We will delude ourselves if we think that uncertainty about the climate change science… is a cause for delay.”
——————-
Let’s see if I interpret this right.
He seems to be saying that it doesn’t matter whether or not we are certain the earth is warming. It doesn’t matter whether or not we are certain that CO2 is the cause.
We have to do something now.
I can’t think of a clearer admission that there is an ulterior motive at play here.
Richard111:”My good wife does wonders with soya ”
Careful, soy is loaded with estrogen. I suspect it is the driving force behind pushing the use of soybased “meat” over real animal flesh. Women and male greenies feel that if they can tone down our natural masculinity then perhaps they can make us knuckle under to they ideology.
You Aussies don’t have a monopoly on AGW nuts. In another post I asked for some input on questions to ask a professor of “Intedicipinary Science” at a local community college. So far, his answer (via my neighbor who is a student)to my questions is that I am simply spouting the right wing conservative party line against global warming and refuse to look at the evidence. He likened me to Joseph Goebbels the Nazi propoganda king. No answers. This man is teaching young adults who are already clueless. We have a long way to go. I told my neighbor the reason he will not answer the questions is that they will take him where he doesn’t want to go. The questions I asked are below and were not argumentative or subjective, they each had a simple answer:
1.What is the actual percentage contribution to the “greenhouse” effect from each of the three main greenhouse gases, water vapor, CO2, and methane?
2.What percent of the atmospheric CO2 is man made?
3.What is the absorption spectrum of CO2 and can it become saturated?
4.How does that compare to the absorption spectrum of water vapor ?
5.Are the effects of increased CO2 linear or logarithmic?
6.What is the lowest level that atmospheric CO2 can drop to before plant life dies?
7.What is the highest level that atmospheric CO2 has risen to where life still existed?
Let’s see – global warming, trick or treat?
Put it this way, I don’t think we’re in for much of a treat this winter…
Here’s a hypothesis that has welled up in my thinking recently.
Those with ‘influence’ have recognised for some time that, like all previous civilisations, the ‘1st world’ as it is may be in decline. As world power bases, economic and other, shift various financial and political (in the broadest sense) tipping points are reached. The current economic confusion could be part of that.
The influencers’ solution is to attempt to knit the world into a single garment to convince all levels of social and economic development that there is a real and common threat. The energy usage and climate analogies, playing on humanity’s long pre-occupation with resource availability (food and what follows) and the weather, is a pretty much perfect area of common standing that happens to offer a lot of potential control points in the modern technological world that we inhabit and is aspired to by those currently stuck in other states of development.
Garnaut like statements may be thought of as dragging current standards down, which they likely would, but they are also designed to try to prevent existing lower level standards rising too far. So, strangely, one might see it as a form of protectionism with the best outcome to be hoped for being some form of levelling of standards – along the broad lines of communism I suppose.
The greater danger that these seers may fear is that the balance of economics (and therefore power) rapidly shifts away from the current pyramid toppers in the industrialised parts of the world. The chances are that slipping over the economic clifftop, to which we seem rather close just now, would be enough to see that happen very soon. But developing economies, such as China and India and to some extent Russia with their energy resource cache and dented pride, could buck that trend and be ascendant. The AGW concept, if sold widely and deeply soon enough, might just forestall the inevitable for a generation or two. But for the strategy to succeed before financial doom arrives (or even as part of fending off that doom) things have to be agreed by, say, 2010 and implemented immediately afterwards.
Of course there is no way that anyone could admit to such a situation no matter how evident it became to all involved. Hence all the BS and avoidance of debate.
Just a hypothesis of course.
Comments anyone?
“We are entering territory here that humanity has not been in before.”
Yes indeed, Mr. Guano. Never before has there been this level of mass hysteria and general stupidity worldwide, all based on the phantom menace of “carbon”, which is not only completely innocent but is entirely beneficial to us.
Good picture of Al Ghoul, who sold his soul long ago for money, power and fame.
Man made climate change will stop the moment the public is asked to pay for it.
This is an intellectual elitist battle that will dissipate once the average person is asked by their elected representatives to pay for it.
Regards
Michael
KIM: “For more amusement, see Richard Lindzen’s recent report on the ‘warmist’ movement. A real barrel of laughs.”
Can’t download this paper, any suggestions for a URL that works?
I agree with Tom in Florida, it is time that the “warmists” be challenged to answer true scientific questions about the state of the mater. They refuse to answer with honest truthful answers and expect us to have faith in their propaganda.
Some times I get frustrated with their blather.
Bill Derryberry
Oh, I love it. Gerard at American Digest http://americandigest.org/ has linked to this post.
But, dang! Clicking on my two favorite blogs is giving me indigestion:-)
Oh! The horror!
The warmers just seem so 100% sure that global warming will be a 100% disaster when the more a reasonable person looks at the issue, at least a little doubt should enter one’s mind.
I am a little perplexed at how fervent the belief is.
Response to PeteS (01:51:28) :
Yes, we exported them there a long time ago
Neilo (22:32:42) :
“…that mask is just plain creepy!”
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/09/01/obese-people-to-blame-for-accelerating-global-warming/
[snip]
Trick or trick…. lol I love that mask. The clickies are excellent, thanks.
Would you give sweets to Al Gore?
Perhaps we do need to worry about global warming.But I think the debate is still open.
I’m living in the land of Oz and our council here are green nutcases. I’ll be going to a conference where climate change will be discussed. I’m studying up like mad and, Anthony, I’m getting a lot of good info from your site. THANK YOU!!
Tom in Fla, what are the answers to those question? I’d love to take your list with me to the conference.
Thanks, Cait