Guest essay by Eric Worrall
Aussie Prime Minister Scott Morrison appears to be trying to play both sides, promoting coal plants and emissions reduction at the same time.
Scott Morrison announces $2b Climate Solutions Fund to reduce Australia’s emissions
By political reporter Jade Macmillan
Prime Minister Scott Morrison will today launch a new pre-election climate change policy, pledging $2 billion for projects to bring down Australia’s emissions.
The Climate Solutions Fund is an extension of former prime minister Tony Abbott’s Emissions Reduction Fund.
The 10-year program will provide funding for farmers, businesses and local governments for projects such as revegetating land, reducing bushfire risk and replacing lighting and refrigeration systems.
Mr Morrison is expected to unveil the policy in Melbourne this morning.
“Our Climate Solutions Package will ensure Australia meets our 2030 emissions reduction target — a responsible and achievable target — building on our success in comprehensively beating our Kyoto commitments.”
…
Just a wild guess, but I suspect most of Australia’s drought afflicted farmers would prefer the $2 billion was spent on hurrying a slow moving CSIRO recommended scheme to provide water security, by capturing reliable wet season tropical floodwaters instead of letting them drain into the sea.
There’s not much point having more efficient climate friendly refrigeration equipment if you have nothing to put into the fridge.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m putting my money on Patrick Moore when it comes to the ‘ideal’ level of CO2 in the atmosphere. Moore CO2 is better! 😉
My question is, how many of these “climate” projects are actually just ones that would or should be done anyway, since the ones mentioned do sound sensible (at least on the surface)? My impression is that a lot of “climate” stuff is gaming the climate system, so to speak.
Bruce – CO2 mitigation schemes are typically wasteful nonsense – for example, grid-connected wind and solar power are counterproductive with current technology, due to intermittency.
Read about CO2 Starvation and C3 Photosynthesis. Real energy-saving projects are generally a good idea, but beware of false accounting that does not include all the real costs.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/02/19/climate-alarmism-is-still-bizarre-dogmatic-intolerant/#comment-2287679
[excerpt]
BTW, don’t worry about it getting a bit warmer – if you need to worry about something, worry about it getting a bit colder.
_______________________________________________
I wrote the following on this subject on 18Dec2014, posted on Icecap.us:
ON CLIMATE SCIENCE, GLOBAL COOLING, ICE AGES AND GEO-ENGINEERING:
[excerpt]
Furthermore, increased atmospheric CO2 from whatever cause is clearly beneficial to humanity and the environment. Earth’s atmosphere is clearly CO2 deficient and continues to decline over geological time. In fact, atmospheric CO2 at this time is too low, dangerously low for the longer term survival of carbon-based life on Earth.
More Ice Ages, which are inevitable unless geo-engineering can prevent them, will cause atmospheric CO2 concentrations on Earth to decline to the point where photosynthesis slows and ultimately ceases. This would devastate the descendants of most current [terrestrial] life on Earth, which is carbon-based and to which, I suggest, we have a significant moral obligation.
Atmospheric and dissolved oceanic CO2 is the feedstock for all carbon-based life on Earth.
More CO2 is better. Within reasonable limits, a lot more CO2 is a lot better.
As a devoted fan of carbon-based life on Earth, I feel it is my duty to advocate on our behalf. To be clear, I am not prejudiced against non-carbon-based life forms, but I really do not know any of them well enough to form an opinion. They could be very nice. 🙂
Best, Allan
In the U.S., we call that a Farm Bill.
What does the PM have against nuclear?
latest from Australia…
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/02/25/queensland-breaks-ground-on-1-5-gigawatt-solar-farm-with-500-mwh-battery-storage/
do note the project which will export power to SE Asia… replacement for coal exports right there!
Interesting that this project has had no coverage in the usual MSM Media streams, none! Nothing! For such a grand project, and all the media coverage about coal, climate change and China not wanting Australian coal, you’d think they’d be shouting from the rooftops about it. But no. Nothing!
yes… there is an enormous amount of renewable energy going in (built and running) which never makes it to the MSM.
You could ponder why that is.
You do understand that 500MWh corresponds to 20 minutes of storage for a 1.5GW facility? Do you suppose that the sun might not shine for more than 20 minutes sometime? (Like every night)
Exporting electricity from Australia to SE Asia? Seriously? Is that going to be some kind of massive undersea cable? What is it, about 4,500 km from Darwin to Hong Kong? How much transmission loss do you reckon? How much copper do you need to carry 1.5MW over a 4,500 km cable?
You must be daft.
Oh wait it’s actually in Queensland, so it’s way further. Sounds very practical.
I do. But this is enough to allow the smooth ramp own of solar supply at the end of the day and may well help keep the grid up in case of line interruption etc. It also can contribute at peak demand, avoiding need to fire up an expensive fossil peaker plant. That usage has saved millions already with the SA battery plant…
If you’d bothered to read the link you’d have seen the HVDC paths.
https://cleantechnica.com/2019/01/06/how-to-make-australia-a-superpower-in-renewable-energy-exports/
A good example of fake Green thinking is the Snowy Hydro two. In theory the idea of during low power demand is to pump water back to a high point, and to then use it back down again in a time of high demand sounds good. But the real reason is that it makes the erratic renewable look better, in that Hydro can easily be increased to fill the gaps when the Sun is overcast and or the wind does not blow.
But its a 5 year business, and at a cost of about 7 billion it will never pay for itself. So its a “Feel Good” see the government is truly serious about Climate Change.
But wait, the Greens hate Hydro, reason, well they can always find some small creature that will be upset by the diggings or noise. And I don’t think that there are “Full blood” Aboriginals in the Snowy area, but no doughty they will find one. And what about burial sites, must bane some there.
The Greenies are Proto Communist , and if only the population as a whole realised this, we would cease to have this Climate Change nonsense
Finally, while the UN is not a country, it is accepted by our government to represent the worlds countries. the fact that it has largely being taken over by the browns and blacks, many being so called countries of a few hundred on an small island makes no difference, they have the numbers.
And our politicians love to prance on the Worlds stage, signing all sorts of treaties, which end up biting us back.
We should recognise that the UN is just as useless as the earlier the League of Nations, and even thought it was a white body, it was as useless. The present UN is not only useless, but via bodies such as the UN IPCC is a dangerous body.
Perhaps President Trump should withdraw the massive amount that the USA pays to the UN, until the IPCC is abolished, or at least stops telling such blatant lies about the danger the planet is in.
MJE