Guest essay by Larry Hamlin
The L. A. Times concealed from its readers the key role played by the repudiation of Australian PM Turnbull’s climate policy which triggered his toppling from office.
Instead the Times mislead its readers by framing Turnbull’s removal as being driven by a challenge from a more anti-refugee populist candidate while failing to ever mention anywhere in its article the key role played by the refusal of his coalition to support his despised climate change legislation.
The Wall Street Journal clearly identified the highly unpopular climate and energy policy failures of Turnbull’s regime which lead to his downfall noting that:
“The trigger for Friday’s internal coup came over energy policy, which has bedeviled Australian politics for more than a decade. Australia has a wealth of coal, natural gas and uranium, but Australians pay some of the highest electricity prices in the world thanks to federal renewable energy mandates that force retailers to buy expensive wind and solar power.
Instead of cancelling these market distortions, Mr. Turnbull mulled curbing gas exports, begged coal producers not to shutter old plants and proclaimed his fealty to the Paris climate pact, though Australia’s contribution to global CO2 emissions is minimal. His proposal for a National Energy Guarantee was essentially a carbon-emission trading scheme that would have expanded wind and solar subsidies at the expense of cheaper fossil fuels and done nothing to lower energy costs.”
Even the New York Times acknowledged the key reason for Turnbull’s unpopularity when it said in an article regarding his climate policy schemes just prior to his final removal:
“Though recent Australian governments have been reasonably progressive on many of the issues that have tested other democracies, such as gun control, health care and wages, and Mr. Turnbull’s achievements include legalizing same-sex marriage, the bitter divisions over climate change have led to the fall of two prime ministers in the past decade. By jettisoning his energy bill, Mr. Turnbull narrowly escaped becoming the third, at least for now.”
The L. A. Times will no doubt continue to provide misleading information regarding the flaws and failures of climate alarmism and renewable energy political advocacy while concealing climate and energy policy scientific and economic reality from its readers particularly in the bizarre “Alice in Wonderland” political domain of California.
The rest of the world however is ignoring the phony climate and energy claims of California and the L. A. Times and charging forward with new initiatives driving increased use of coal and other fossil fuels needed for affordable and reliable energy while addressing the obvious shortcomings of costly and unreliable renewable energy as highlighted with just a few examples of the many articles demonstrating this energy and climate global reality displayed below.
Political leaders in California and at papers like the L. A. Times have failed to grasp that they are losing their climate alarmist, renewable energy propaganda political policy battle with the rest of the world ignoring them and taking actions needed to address their real world energy and economic needs.