Australia’s Absurd Coal Exporting Climate Change Hypocrisy

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

The Australian ABC, a wholly government owned broadcaster, has advocated stronger measures so Australia can meet the IPCC climate deadline – but they also suggest strong coal exports will continue for the foreseeable future.

Can we quit coal in time? IPCC warns world has just 12 years to avoid climate change catastrophe

The Signal
By Angela Lavoipierre and Stephen Smiley

Australia has more than 21 coal-fired power stations in operation, and still relies heavily on coal for electricity.

There are no new coal-fired power stations currently being built in Australia, but Energy Market Analyst Tim Buckley has told The Signal 80 per cent of Australia’s coal is exported.

He said he believes “it’s entirely possible, [but] it’s entirely improbable” that Australia will manage to wean itself off coal by 2050, if the current policy settings remain.

Vietnam, Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines are all planning to build new power plants.

Tim Buckley said if all those plans come to pass, the rest of the world’s cuts won’t be enough to compensate for that increase.

Therefore we have to assume that the world is going to go off the climate cliff.

Read more:

What is wrong with this picture?

Since 80% of Australia’s coal is exported, and coal is allegedly destroying the world, the easiest way to reduce global consumption of coal and reduce the alleged risk would be to immediately ban all coal exports.

If I believed coal was a threat to the world, this is what I would demand.

Instead, Australian politicians who claim to believe in the IPCC warning persist with allowing coal to be dug out of the ground as fast as it can be extracted.

Australian politicians are not alone in their hypocrisy. Canada’s Justin Trudeau once said “No country would find 173 billion barrels of oil in the ground and leave them there”. Whatever his climate rhetoric, Trudeau is busy facilitating the extraction of oil sands as fast as they can be shovelled into the processing plants.

Either the green politicians in charge of some of the world’s fossil fuel export nations are so selfish they don’t care that their failure to act is abetting the destruction of the world, or all these green politicians who make such a noisy show of their climate piety are really utter hypocrites who don’t believe their own rhetoric.

Leading green politicians don’t take the IPCC any more seriously than I do.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 11, 2018 3:37 am

The good news is that the major parties don’t have a bipartisan agreement on energy and will never have one. Our democracy has been refreshed since Turncoat was given the sack, so its full steam ahead under the power of new coal fired power stations.

The other side of politics is offering a Medieval society, full of hypocrisy and self loathing. The electorate is not stupid, but they have been severely brainwashed and I’m not sure how they are going to handle another climate war.

Reply to  ironicman
October 11, 2018 4:38 am

ironicman wrote: “The electorate is not stupid, but they have been severely brainwashed…”

Don’t be too sure about that.

“Stupid people are too stupid to know they are stupid.”


The psychological phenomenon of illusory superiority was identified as a form of cognitive bias in Kruger and Dunning’s 1999 study “Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One’s Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments”. The identification derived from the cognitive bias evident in the criminal case of McArthur Wheeler, who robbed banks with his face covered with lemon juice, which he believed would make it invisible to the surveillance cameras. This belief was based on his misunderstanding of the chemical properties of lemon juice as an invisible ink.


Stupid people are too stupid to know they are stupid.

Smart people tend to assume, at least initially, that stupid people are as smart as they are.


If someone says they believe in dangerous runaway manmade global warming, they are either deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If someone says they believe in dangerous man-made climate change, they are either deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If someone says that “the science is settled”, they are deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If someone says that “consensus makes science”, they are deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If someone just says “just believe the woman”, they are deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If some says that all women are good and all men are bad, they are deliberately lying or they are stupid.

If someone says they believe left-wing politics and all the left’s blatant falsehoods, they are deliberately lying or they are stupid.

Albert Einstein said:
“Nothing is infinite, except the universe and human stupidity – and I’m not sure about the universe.”

October 11, 2018 5:31 am

Thanks for the lecture Allan, I’m more a cognitive dissonance / doublethink man. If we could only get balance back into the ABC newsroom then we can snap the people out of their malaise.

Reply to  ironicman
October 11, 2018 3:37 pm

Apologies – I was probably too didactic.

I’m getting tired of the argument, especially from warmists (obviously not you) who have NO scientific education and have spent exactly ZERO hours studying the subject, but are far more certain and dogmatic than I am about the science.

Patrick MJD
October 11, 2018 4:19 pm

Most of the people you talk about simply post a link to NASA and Scientific Consensus…and then just take that as fact and believe everything they read.

October 11, 2018 10:28 pm

It is because to them it is a religion, a belief system and facts have no place in a belief system. You are dealing with frightened people who will be the most enhusiastic mob members because they want to broadcast their adherence to the party line. They live by received wisdom and are at heart cowards. Just feel lucky we are not living a couple of hundred years ago because the real nut jobs would whip up their acolytes into doing their dirty business and burning us at the stake.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
October 11, 2018 3:49 am

Great article. What is going on is the stupid Australian Labor Party (ALP) is trying to stop the vile Greens and the “anti-fascists” (= commies) from taking over the cosy inner city la-de-da, lazy, overweight public servant pastures that used to be their electoral heartland. The wealthiest suburbs here are like the suburbs of Washington DC, packed out with deep state swamp creatures.

The stupid Liberal Party (supposedly conservative) is following in tow because they lack the guts to stand up to the mob.

The Lib-Labs will regret all of this when the Australia’s version of Donald Trump emerges to take over one of the major parties and restore sensible government to the country.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
October 11, 2018 4:23 am

Sorry, I sign off when I wanted to add that:

these crazies are hypocrites but they are also capable of destroying the economy by banning exports of natural resources.

I hope they just remain hypocrites.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
October 11, 2018 4:22 pm

These nutters are very near to closing the Adani (Indian) coal mine in Queensland. What these people don’t get is that India and China will source coal from another country and continue as if nothing had changed.

October 11, 2018 3:57 am

Co-incidentally (or not) I have just picked up the following from one of my “friends”, most of whom generally buy into the AGW hypothesis, consider me a “denier”, and pass sound-bites like this on to me in attempt to get me to “see the light”. It is so far beyond stupid as to be post-Andromeda. I don’t think even the actors believe their lines.

VICEAustralia: How CO₂ Could Be The Fuel Of The Future. (3 min 45 sec)

Ken Irwin
October 11, 2018 4:27 am

A friend sent me that idiotic link for my opinion.

This is my reply (coutesy of cut & paste)

Short answer – bull (expletive deleted) ! – long answer it’s a perpetual motion Ponzi scheme con-job.

It is certainly possible to synthesise CO2 and H2O into various hydrocarbon chains – and thence into oils, fuels etc.

The simplest being Methane CO2 + 2H2O = CH4 + 4O2 etc. etc. and onwards……..

Problem – it takes more energy to synthesise than you can ever get out of it. Theoretically if you could do all the required transformations at 100% efficiency and then burned it in a 100% efficient energy generating system – then you can get back what you put in – not an erg more !

Just extracting CO2 from the atmosphere requires you compress it to high pressure and cool it – using about 20% of the energy you “might” get from the later combustion of the C back into CO2.

And that’s just for starters….

So if we had a cheap limitless source of energy (Nuclear Fusion Reactors ?) in the first place – it’s entirely do-able. But the energy put into the process will always be more than the energy potential of the fuels produced – refer 2nd & 3rd laws of thermodynamics.

If this process worked – (as stated without mentioning the input energy vs output energy you will note) we could sell some of the fuel produced and use the remainder to drive the generators etc. needed to run the plant. We take the CO2 from those exhausts and plough it back into our process – so it’s entirely self-funding in energy whilst still producing fuel as a by-product – a chemical perpetual motion device – plus a tap off of fuel as a bonus – magic !

They are going to make a fortune selling shares to the profoundly stupid.

Wait until they start promising investors massive returns – get in early you might make a fortune (my conscience won’t let me) before the inverted Ponzi pyramid topples and all the later investors lose everything.

Perpetual motion in a car is much easier – you put sprockets on the front and rear axles and use the front axle to drive the rear axle which propels the car forward thereby rotating the front wheels – which in turn drive the rear wheels – easy – just give it a push and it goes on forever – pull the other leg it’s got bells on it.


Reply to  Ken Irwin
October 11, 2018 4:51 am

Thank you Ken. You are correct and your friend is an imbecile.

“It is certainly possible to synthesize CO2 and H2O into various hydrocarbon chains – and thence into oils, fuels etc.”

And all he is doing is moving energy around, with the usual losses with each transformation.

Kindly explain to him the parallel hypo to his own:
“If frogs had wings, they wouldn’t have to bump around on their asses.”

October 12, 2018 2:27 am

ABC radio are reporting that coal may be the answer to a clean energy future !

By converting it to Hydrogen ,as with the above posts it’s been discussed before more power required to make it than you get out of it but hey it’s good green logic and there isn’t a problem out there that can’t be solved by throwing buckets of money at it and if that fails just get a bigger bucket .

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  Ken Irwin
October 11, 2018 6:30 am

These chemical pathways make sense only if:
1. You have a cheap source of some other energy to drive the process.
2. You’ve run out of every other possible source of liquid hydrocarbon fuels.

The beauty of gasoline and diesel is they are very energy-dense, highly transportable, and easily utilized fuels. Frankly, I don’t see the economics of this ever working out, but people should feel free to try – as long as they put their own money at risk and keep their hands out of the privy purse.

Reply to  D. J. Hawkins
October 11, 2018 3:32 pm

Agreed DJH.

GAs-to-Liquids sounds good when gas is almost free, but how many such plants have actually been built?

October 11, 2018 4:28 am

You are correct Ken Irwin. The lunatics are running the energy asylum.

“Australian PM Scott Morrison has suggested he would allow nuclear reactors to be constructed, to curb Australia’s soaring electricity prices – but he doesn’t think the economics adds up.”

PM Scott Morrison – the solution for Australia’s electrical energy is as follows.

Situation Analysis:
1. CO2 is NOT a pollutant. If you believe that, and that is your planning basis, then you are wrong.
2. Australia has abundant reserves of cheap coal and natural gas.
3. Green energy schemes are typically too intermittent and expensive to be practical for grid applications.

Australia’s Energy Policy should be:
A. Use coal and natural gas (and hydro where available) to supply grid electricity, depending largely on transportation and distribution infrastructure.
B. Get rid of ALL subsidies and use mandates for grid-connected green energy, and set aside funds for reclamation and abandonment as they go out-of-business.
C. Use wind and solar energy for off-grid applications, where economically competitive.
D. Build nuclear plants when they become competitive with coal and natural gas. This may take a while.

Below is an earlier post on this subject.


Why go nuclear when your magnificent country has huge quantities of coal?

Coal-fired power is cheap and clean – contrary opinions are held by certified imbeciles, who worry about CO2 emissions, the basis of all life on this beautiful blue-water planet.

October 11, 2018 4:30 am

My thanks to the 100 leading scholars.

A gentle reminder – I told you so, 16 YEARS AGO – in 2002.

At that time, about 87% of global primary energy was from fossil fuels – oil, coal and natural gas – that number is now 85%.

Grid-connected green energy is now about 2%, despite tens of trillions of dollars is wasted subsidies. All this green energy does is reduce grid reliability and drive up energy costs, which increases winter deaths that especially target the elderly and the poor. Green energy is so intermittent and inefficient, it does not even reduce CO2 emissions.

Good people, just listen to your old Uncle Allan, who is doing his best to take good care of you.

ALL my other predictions from 2002* on climate and energy have proved correct to date. Here are the two major ones from our 2002 PEGG debate:

1) We correctly predicted THE FAILURE OF MOST GREEN ENERGY SCHEMES in 2002, as follows:


2) In the same debate, we also wrote that THE ALLEGED GLOBAL WARMING CRISIS DOES NOT EXIST:

We were correct on both these points 16 years ago – anyone who disputes this is denying reality.
1) Grid-connected green energy is a costly, intermittent, unreliable farce.
2) The climate models that predicted catastrophic global warming are all running ‘way too hot.

In contrast, the global warming alarmists at the IPCC have been consistently wrong to date – nobody should even listen to these climate clowns.

My only remaining prediction from 2002 was for global cooling, staring by 2020-2030 – I‘m now leaning toward the earlier part of that time period, but “the science is NOT settled”.

Regards to all, Allan

October 11, 2018 4:33 am

abc has never found a green scam it wont promote,
they utterly failed to broadcast costs of the SA tesla battery debacle
let alone do anything but rave it up as SA being “such a leader in clean n green”
never mind the cost or the fact theyre spending megamill, to run new lines to NSW to save their butts!

Reply to  ozspeaksup
October 11, 2018 5:51 am

On radio, they don’t seem to waste a day without pushing the subject – in entertainment/news bulletins/talk programs/interviews/science programs.

I’ve been following this climate BS partisan push by the so-called ‘fair’ and ‘balanced ‘news outfit for at least 20 years and never heard a peep from a sceptic.

Patrick MJD
Reply to  ozspeaksup
October 11, 2018 4:31 pm

Well they did broadcast that it would be free if it came in over 100 days. Clearly it was delivered on time, at a cost of AU$90mil. But I have a suspicion it had been started earlier to enable it to be completed within 100 days.

Bruce Cobb
October 11, 2018 5:11 am

“China is half the world’s coal production, half the world’s coal consumption — it’s the biggest importer of coal, and for the last five years the chinese central leadership has been on an absolute mission to decarbonise their economy”.
Sure, sure, uh-huh, riiiiiight. China’s only “mission” is “China First, the rest of you can go to hell”. The Climate Liars have to know that China is telling whoppers, but need the China myth to string what’s left of the True Believers along.

Mark Hansford
October 11, 2018 5:41 am

Australia considers itself as a ‘green’ country as do quite a few others. However if the UN, in whatever form, assessed each country on what it produced in the way of fossil fuels rather than what they used, Australia would be one of the dirtiest carbon countries in the world – right up there with the big oil states. In my opinion each country should do what it can to keep its populace as well as it can and help other countries do the same. Piling huge mountains of money in to speculative climate control, when it is fairly evident that the earth is actually doing ok, when that money would easily pull the majority of the worlds poor out of extreme poverty is sick.

We are talking about subjecting billions of people to awful living conditions to massage a very few but powerful liberal’s self loathing politics.

Reply to  Mark Hansford
October 11, 2018 6:36 am

I have come to the conclusion that Australia is a silly place, an inconsequential mostly empty backwater with less people in it than Texas, a place that objectively has almost no impact at all on the world. And facing this fact, the inhabitants are forever engaged in vast moralistic schemes to try and make everyone else believe they really are relevant, even though they’re not. And to that end they will do an unbelievable number of self destructive and flat out stupid things.

The truth, it should be stated every now and then.

Reply to  wws
October 11, 2018 7:47 am

Harsh but worth considering.
Australia has given us the BeeGees, and many good actors.
The successful coup against the PM skeptic was a wake up call. It did show that the climate fanatics are relentless and we’ll organized.
In the US, a green/”renewable” oligarch named Steyer is funding a lot of the anti-Trump coup, as are the oligarchs running Google, and the oligarch running Amazon/The Washington Post.
It is interesting how the uber rich oligarchs in the West are pretty much aligned with enforcing climate/green policies that leave them richer and more powerful.
Sort of a Platonic techno-aristocracy.
And we are expected to play our parts as the little folk.

Reply to  hunter
October 11, 2018 1:21 pm

Of interest?
Australia to be no longer an ‘inconsequential mostly empty backwater’


Tired of Being Isolated and Ignored, Continent Isn’t Bloody Moving
Sydney, 800 miles S. of Nova Scotia ( After what witnesses described as an all night blinder during which it kept droning on about how it was always being bloody ignored by the whole bloody world and would bloody well stand to do something about it, Australia this morning woke up to find itself in the middle of the North Atlantic.
“Good Lord, that was a booze up,” said a bleary-eyed Australian Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, speaking from his residence at Kirribilli House, approximately 600 nautical miles east of Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.
According to Australians and residents of several countries destroyed or lewdly insulted during the continent’s nearly 17,000-mile saltwater stagger, the binge began just after noon yesterday at a pub in Brisbane, where several patrons were discussing Australia Day (Jan. 26) and the nation’s general lack of respect from abroad.
“It started off same as always; coupla fossils saying how our Banjo Patterson was a better poet than Walt Whitman, how Con the Fruiterer is funnier than Seinfeld, only they’re Aussies so no one knows about ’em,” recalled witness Kevin Porter. “Then this bloke Martin pipes up and says Australia’s main problem is that it’s stuck in Australia, and everybody says ‘Too right!’ “Well, it made sense at the time,” Porter added.
By 2 a.m., powered by national pride and alcohol, the 3-million-square-mile land mass was barging eastward through the Coral Sea and crossing into the central Pacific, leaving a trail of beer cans and Chinese take-aways in its wake.
When dawn broke over the Northern Hemisphere, the continent suddenly found itself, not only upside down, but smack in the middle of the Atlantic, and according to most of its 25 million inhabitants, that’s the way it’s going to stay.
“We sent troops to Afghanistan. You never hear about it. We have huge government scandals. You never hear about it. It’s all ‘America did this,’ and ‘Europe says that,'” exclaimed Perth resident Paul Watson. “Well, we’re right in the thick of things now, so let’s just see if you can you ignore us.”
Officials on both sides of the Atlantic conceded that would be difficult. “They broke Florida,” said U.S. State Department spokesman Richard Boucher. “And most of Latin America is completely missing.”
Meanwhile, victims of what’s already been dubbed the “Australian Crawl” are still shaking off the event.
“Australia bumped into us at about midnight local time,” said Hawaii governor David Ige. “They were very friendly – they always seem friendly – but they refused to go around unless we answered their questions. But the questions were impossible. ‘Who is Ian Thorpe? Do you have any Tim Tams? What day is Australia Day?'”
“Fortunately, somebody here had an Unimportant World Dates calendar and we aced the last one,” Ige added.
Panama, however, was not so lucky.
“Australia came through here screaming curses at us to let them through,” said Ernesto Carnal, who guards the locks at the entrance to the Panama Canal. “We said they would not fit, so they demanded to speak with a manager. When I go to find Mr. Caballos, they sneak the whole continent through.”
When Caballos shouted to the fleeing country that it had not paid, Australia “accidentally” backed up and took out every nation in the region, as well as the northern third of Venezuela. They then made up a cheery song about it.
By late morning today, however, not everyone in Australia was quite so blithe. “We’ve still got a good part of Jamaica stuck to Queensland,” said Australian army commander Lt. Gen. Richard Burr. “I think we might have declared war on it. I don’t bloody remember. Maybe it’s time to go home.”
Burr, however, is not in the majority, and at press time, U.S., African, and European leaders were still desperately trying to negotiate for Australia’s withdrawal. But the independent-minded Aussies were not making it easy. In a two-hour meeting at midday, Australian representatives listed their demands: immediate inclusion in the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a permanent CNN presence in all 6 Australian states, plus the Northern [now Southern] Territory; an indefinite worldwide ban on hiring Paul Hogan; a primetime U.S. television contract for Australian Rules Football, and a 500-mile-long bridge between Sydney and New Jersey, with a similar one from Perth to Dakar.
U.S. negotiators immediately walked out, calling the Australian Rules Football contract request “beyond absurd.”

Australia Day – January 26th.


Reply to  auto
October 11, 2018 6:44 pm

Fantastic, in all the senses of the word.
Thank you very much.

Quilter52 near Sydney Australia
Reply to  auto
October 12, 2018 12:41 am

This Aussie enjoyed that story! However the world could use more Aussie Rules. Its a tough game and could be used against the Michael Mann’s of this world. “What , you cant play AFL, what a wimp, we wont listen to you then!”

Patrick MJD
Reply to  auto
October 12, 2018 1:24 am

“Quilter52 near Sydney Australia October 12, 2018 at 12:41 am”

Compared to hurling, AFL is for wimps.

Reply to  auto
October 13, 2018 6:26 am

“According to Australians and residents of several countries destroyed or lewdly insulted during the continent’s nearly 17,000-mile saltwater stagger, ”

destroyed or lewdly insulted – ROFL!!!!

Patrick MJD
Reply to  wws
October 12, 2018 1:48 am

“wws October 11, 2018 at 6:36 am

I have come to the conclusion that Australia is a silly place, an inconsequential mostly empty backwater with less people in it than Texas…”

If Australia was a movie it would not be Croc Dundee. It would be Priscilla Queen of the desert.

October 11, 2018 7:09 am

The only justification for turning CO2 into a liquid fuel would be via a nuclear power station if we ever r an out of oil. For use by aircraft and motor vehicles. As this is most unlikely then forget that one.

As to the behaviour of all the lying politicians, its always been about Power. But the ALP her in Australia face a major problem, results will not come from trying to be Greener r than the Greens. Maybe we will get lucky and Bill Turnbull will be lke Hawke and Keating, a true ALP middle of the road party, the best we ever had from Labour.

The Polls say they will win the May election, but they will not be able to satisfy the voting public with their silly policies, so it will revert back to the Conservatives who hopefully will have come to their sense by then. Fortunity we only have 3 year terms for the Federal Govt.

Anyway how long will it be before the younger Greens realise that without realiable electricity they cannot play with all of their electrronic toys ?


Reply to  Michael
October 11, 2018 10:21 am

But as I understand, the Australian ballot system allows priority voting. This assures that fringe lefty extremists keep getting seats they would not otherwise win if the election was based on realistic binary choices.

October 11, 2018 7:18 am

Yes, this is absolutely true, and I have been thinking it for some time:

or all these green politicians who make such a noisy show of their climate piety are really utter hypocrites who don’t believe their own rhetoric.
Leading green politicians don’t take the IPCC any more seriously than I do

Yes. Not just Australia. There is no evidence that any policy makers anywhere believe the predictions of disaster. As you point out, the best evidence is their behavior, and if they did believe, they would be acting quite differently.

Its a very curious phenomenon. Newspapers such as the Guardian and NY Times, and indeed media broadcasters such as the BBC, proclaim impending disaster unless emissions are reduced dramatically, and then refuse to advocate the measures required to make the reductions they claim to think necessary. And politicians pass all kinds of laws, such as the UK Climate Change Act, which would lower their emissions, and then make zero attempt to implement them.

And we have international conferences culminating in agreements such as Kyoto, Copenhagen and finally Paris, which are described as the last great hope and what is needed to save the planet, which, even if they were fully implented, would not reduce emissions either, certainly not to the levels allegedly required to make any real difference.

You have to conclude no-one believes it. The puzzling thing is why they keep claiming they do.

Reply to  michel
October 11, 2018 7:51 am

Money collects to the powerful interests monetizing the climate social mania.
Think if Google:
Openly disdainful if the American election.
And working against the United States by supporting the coup attempt.
Yet happily working with the largest tyranny the world has known, China.
And specifically with China’s most tyrannical ruler since Mao.

William Astley
October 11, 2018 8:08 am

The Politicians are realists.
The problem is the CAGW Zombies are funded by rouge billionaires. The CAGW Zombie lobby companies are organized. They are winning.
The CAGW Zombies have formed alliances with powerful new ‘liberal’ corrupt/chaos parties, like the US Democrats.
CAGW Zombies’ Evil Plans

1. Create IPCC which is a cabal of scientists and academics who believe in the requirement to create a sciency justification for CAGW

2. Stop all scientific and substantial talk on news channels. Get technical companies such as Google on stream with mission. CAGW is the end of the world, so breaking laws and creating chaos is OK as it will …..

See Don Lemon – CNN, for an example. All emotions. Simplistic ideas. No need to talk about alternatives, budget limitations, reality, …

3. Create Denier scheme. IPCC is the only authority. Anyone who does not support CAGW is a denier.

4. Convince Supreme court of CAGW. Politicians are not taking sufficient action to fight CAGW. Supreme court therefore must create a law that forces politicians, all parties, to reduce CO2 emissions by law.

Dutch Supreme Court take-over is the test case.

dutch court tells government to slash greenhouse gas

The Dutch government on Tuesday lost a legal appeal against a landmark court ruling which ordered it to slash greenhouse gases by at least 25 percent by 2020.

The Hague appeals court upheld a 2015 court victory by environmental rights group Urgenda, which sought to force a national reduction of emissions blamed for global warming.

However despite its environmentally friendly image it remains one of Europe’s biggest carbon dioxide producers. Urgenda said it had only cut emissions by 13 percent since 1990.

The Dutch government had argued that because the lower court that made the 2015 decision “made a policy and political choice” it had overreached its powers.

October 11, 2018 11:16 am

The short answer to the question at the end of the article is:


October 11, 2018 6:41 pm

Off topic, but Kate Marvel, a climate apocalypse promoter who is a scientist, etc. Just wrote a cute metaphorical dragon and witch fable to help explain the evils if “climate change”.
At Scientific American, appropriately enough.
The self revelation she engaged in, while trying to be all condescending and sciencey us world class.

Chris Hanley
October 11, 2018 10:13 pm

Tim Buckley the “Energy Market Analyst” that the ABC quotes as an independent source in accordance with its Charter of course, surprise surprise, is a renewable energy investment enthusiast:

R Davis
October 12, 2018 12:07 am

The ABC Network is funded by the Australia public purse to the tune of $1 billion plus per annum.
A propaganda machine for the Australian Political Arena.
A white elephant.
A Millstone around the neck of the Australian Taxpayer.
The Australian political arena would shut them down in a heartbeat & squander the monies else were – saying they were better spent, but they fear …
a) the ABC who knows where all the dead bodies are buried.
b) the Australian people, because they mistakenly believe that we the Australian people “treasure” the ABC icon.
Mainstream Media, for decades now, had called for the ABC Network to be shut down, citing to may operators on the market floor & unfair advantage.
Mainstream Media could easily & more cheaply provide the same propaganda coverage, so it makes a lot of sense to shut down the ABC Network.
Newton’s 1st law of motion – every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.
Do Australia men still get blind drunk – gosh !!
And booze is so expensive.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights