Scott Morrison. By Office of U.S. Secretary of Commerce - link, Public Domain, link. Office of the Hon. Kevin Rudd, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons. Images Modified

Australian Comedy Hour: Net Zero Pledge Will Not Impose New Taxes or Kill Jobs

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to Australia’s Prime Minister Scott Morrison, Australia can embrace entirely painless Net Zero 2050 commitments without closing coal mines or imposing new taxes.

OPINION 26 Oct 2021 Prime Minister

Australians want action on climate change. And so do I.

But they also don’t want their electricity bills to skyrocket, the lights to go off, for their jobs to be put at risk or for the way of life in rural and regional communities to be sacrificed.

Australians want a 2050 plan on net zero emissions that does the right thing on climate change and secures their future in a changing world. They also want a plan that is fair and practical.

People in rural and regional areas know the impacts of climate change far better than those of us living in the cities. But the burden of taking action on climate change should not fall unfairly on rural and regional Australians, especially those dependent on traditional industries such as mining and agriculture.

Only the Liberals and the Nationals working together can be trusted to get this balance right.

We understand the threats faced but also the opportunities that can be realised.

There have been few issues more challenging for the Liberals and Nationals during the past twenty years than addressing climate change and its impact on rural and regional communities.

Our decision to now agree to a plan to achieve the target of net zero emissions by 2050 has not been taken lightly.

We didn’t just agree to this without carefully thinking through all the consequences and impacts, especially in rural and regional areas.

We have not and would never make a blank cheque commitment or impose new taxes, as Labor has, to achieve net zero. That would leave Australians footing the bill.

Decisions overseas are bringing about major changes in the global economy that will impact on Australia’s future prospects, both positively and negatively.

As Prime Minister I am determined to shield our nation from the negative impact of these changes while positioning us to take advantage of the many opportunities presented, especially for rural and regional Australia.

At Glasgow I will confirm that Australia will continue to play our part. We will set a target to achieve net zero by 2050, and have a clear plan for achieving it. I always said I would not set a target to achieve net zero by 2050 unless we had a plan to achieve it. We now have that plan.

We will do this the Australian way. Through technology, not taxes. By respecting people’s choices and not enforcing mandates on what people can do and buy. By keeping our industries and regions running and household power bills down by ensuring energy is affordable and reliable. By being transparent about what we are achieving, and expecting the same of other countries.

And we will invest in rural and regional Australia to ensure they succeed and are protected under our plan.

I will remind the world that emissions in Australia have actually fallen by more than 20 per cent on 2005 levels. That is more than New Zealand, Canada, Japan and the United States.  We have beaten our 2020 emissions reduction target and are well on our way to meet and beat our 2030 target.

We won’t be lectured by others who do not understand Australia. The Australian Way is all about how you do it, and not if you do it. It’s about getting it done.

We will also not be breaking the pledge we made at the last election by changing our 2030 emission reductions targets. I said we would meet and beat this target and we will. So at Glasgow I will update what we now believe we will achieve, demonstrating that performance is worth more than empty ambition. That’s the Australian way.

The path to net zero is also not a straight line. In fact, as Bill Gates argues, forcing outcomes by 2030 with unrealistic targets can divert resources from technologies with longer lead times that will be essential to achieving 2050 objectives. So we will keep making sensible commitments and doing our best to exceed them.

Key to this approach is investment in new energy technologies, like hydrogen and low cost solar, to ensure our manufacturing, resources, agricultural and transport sectors can secure their future, especially in rural and regional areas.

These technologies are set out in our Technology Investment Roadmap.

We want our heavy industries, like mining, to stay open, remain competitive and adapt, so they remain viable for as long as global demand allows.

We will not support any mandate – domestic or international – to force closure of our resources or agricultural industries.

We have taken the time to deal with the hard issues that need to be confronted to get it right. We have listened carefully and understand both the concerns and the strong aspirations that Australians have when it comes to dealing with climate change.

At the end of the day it all comes down to whether you have a credible plan to get the job done. It’s no longer about the ‘if’, but the ‘how’, and Australians can always trust the Coalition to have the right economic plan to enable Australia to deal with the challenge of climate change.

Read moore: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/australian-way

In my opinion Prime Minister Scott Morrison just signed his coalition government’s political suicide note, with National Party Leader Barnaby Joyce standing in as his co-signatory.

How can Australia “invest in new energy technologies, like hydrogen and low cost solar”, without imposing new taxes, higher costs, or borrowing more money?

As our Willis recently pointed out, even if we were to attempt to hit net zero by building nuclear reactors, it would require an utterly implausible rate of deployment, and cost trillions of dollars.

There is no imaginable zero carbon technology which could significantly bring down that cost. There is no means by which the Australian economy or the global economy can absorb costs of that magnitude without someone feeling the pain.

Greens and COP26 participants will denounce ScoMo’s plan to hit Net Zero without explicitly shutting down coal, or increasing ambition on Australia’s 2030 target, as an empty charade.

Climate skeptics like myself will reinforce green denunciations, by pointing out the utter absurdity of Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s zero cost technology claims.

The implicit argument “vote for us, or you will get something worse”, simply won’t carry, in an Australian political arena dominated by mistrust of establishment politicians, and bursting with small parties offering credible alternatives to the Net Zero omniparty position.

5 13 votes
Article Rating
89 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
October 25, 2021 10:08 pm

Declaring “Net Zero” is like dealing with the Devil and thinking you can outsmart him.
Maybe you can, but maybe you can’t. It’s stupid to even go there… just for a fiddle of gold.

SxyxS
Reply to  Joel O'Bryan
October 26, 2021 1:45 am

The biggest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing people the communist threat no longer exists after the USSR collapsed.

Streetcred
October 25, 2021 10:09 pm

Meh ! Our politicians are idiots.

SxyxS
Reply to  Streetcred
October 26, 2021 1:52 am

They are no idiots,as theu know a saboteur will be punished while an idiot always gets the benefit of doubt.
They simply read from the same playbook.

Bidens(?)3.5 trillion dollar social engineering and banrup… infrastructure bill cost 0 Dollars.

The unification of Germany was said to cost 0 Marks.

And guess what :Net Zero has the same price tag.

IanE
Reply to  Streetcred
October 26, 2021 5:57 am

And you are NOT alone in that!

John
October 25, 2021 10:18 pm

SCOMO is a haz-bean marketing executive
I could sell sand to the Arabs
unfortunately they wont buy it anymore
Just like in the UN survey
out of the 10 questions you were given
Climate change was number 10

well SCOMO will loose the upcoming election
WA doesnt want the idiot and without WA he cant win the next election

At the state election Liberals/ Nationals screwed up and Labour got 99+% majority

Nobody believes his BS anymore

Dennis
Reply to  John
October 26, 2021 1:29 am

No he was never a marketing executive, the Labor Opposition called him “Scotty from Marketing” to denigrate him.

Before entering politics he was in various roles including the travel industry where as a senior manager he assessed marketing proposals for advertising which is the way advertising decisions are made, the creative people present their proposals for approval and funding.

Lrp
Reply to  John
October 26, 2021 12:31 pm

Not just WA; they’ll lose those seats in Queensland they only won in 2019 on the basis of their stance on climate change.

aussiecol
Reply to  Lrp
October 26, 2021 1:21 pm

The coal mines are staying open. If Labor were elected they would close. There’s the difference between the regional Queenslanders voting appeal that got the Liberals over the line last election.

PeterD
Reply to  aussiecol
October 26, 2021 4:18 pm

Last Queensland State election, Labor reluctantly allowed a few new mines. The State Liberals promised to block new mines. Labor won. This was identical to the WA election.

The Liberals are toast in Queensland.

aussiecol
Reply to  PeterD
October 26, 2021 4:42 pm

Yeah right, well we will just see what Labor’s policy’s are before we jump the gun.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  John
October 26, 2021 12:56 pm

I could sell sand to the Arabs

Interestingly, Australia actually sells camels to the Arabs, which is a fairly similar concept.

John
October 25, 2021 10:19 pm

funny to see Kevin 007 as the back drop
he tried a carbon tax and guess what the coal miners sent him to the naughty corner

SCOMO will be the next in the naughty corner

October 25, 2021 10:25 pm

With renowned Cartoonists like Bob Moran and Leunig being banned from the MSM, it is gratifying to see that Australian Politicians are taking up the comedy space void and filling it with stunningly funny economic spoofs on the benefits of Net-Zero. Unfortunately, a lot of their voters and Australian workers will not be laughing after a few years of Net-Zero

Dave Fair
October 25, 2021 10:37 pm

I can’t find any specifics as to what is actually in his “Technology Investment Roadmap.” Earlier articles are just bland “ambitions.”

Dean
Reply to  Dave Fair
October 26, 2021 2:36 am

That is the entire point.

H.R.
Reply to  Dave Fair
October 26, 2021 7:46 am

Look again, Dave. If you follow his roadmap, it takes you down a blind alley with the inevitable crash at the end.

“Turn left NOW!”
😜

Peter
October 25, 2021 10:41 pm

“The implicit argument “vote for us, or you will get something worse”, simply won’t carry, in an Australian political arena dominated by mistrust of establishment politicians, and bursting with small parties offering credible alternatives to the Net Zero omniparty position.”

That is exactly what has always worked in Australian Politics, along with a healthy lathering of greed and self interest from voters. Why should things change now?

Dean
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 26, 2021 2:39 am

But Eric where will those votes go? The least worst option, which the LNP has just offered.

MarkW
Reply to  Dean
October 26, 2021 5:52 am

If your vote is being going to be wasted anyway, then vote for a minor party that “has no chance of winning”.

aussiecol
Reply to  MarkW
October 26, 2021 1:28 pm

And, you vote personnel ideology that has nothing to do with the big picture.

MarkW
Reply to  aussiecol
October 26, 2021 4:21 pm

Voting “big picture” has been a losing strategy so far.

aussiecol
Reply to  MarkW
October 26, 2021 4:43 pm

Unfortunately it seems that way.

PeterD
Reply to  Dean
October 26, 2021 4:22 pm

At two State elections, the Liberals have promised to block new coal mines, while Labor didn’t. The Liberals lost.
Personally, I see little difference between Liberal and Labor.

aussiecol
Reply to  Eric Worrall
October 26, 2021 1:26 pm

I Scomo sticks to his word, I can’t see Labor getting getting a shoe in.

Dean
Reply to  Peter
October 26, 2021 2:37 am

I agree, this gives a lower pain for voters option.

Lrp
Reply to  Peter
October 26, 2021 12:34 pm

It’s too much now, and there are smaller parties alternatives which can jam the works both in the house and senate

October 25, 2021 10:54 pm

Australia is already net zero as evidenced by the OCO2 results of  29/09/2014 to 28/09/2015, and much supporting research since.
The upcoming election is going to be entertaining. “Repeating the same mistake and expecting a different result.” (not Einstein apparently. Rita Brown?).

michel
October 26, 2021 12:09 am

How can Australia “invest in new energy technologies, like hydrogen and low cost solar”, without imposing new taxes, higher costs, or borrowing more money?

The right question, and obviously its impossible. Its only one of a number of impossibilities about these schemes, but its a very big one.

It seems to be a characteristic of the present phase of the green movement, that it has totally lost touch with reality.

In the UK at the moment the Government appears seriously to be proposing to replace natural gas with hydrogen, while at the same time moving the entire country to heat pumps instead of gas.

This involves replacing the entire pipe network and all appliances which use gas. An enormous project, nothing like the scale of going from coal gas to natural gas, which at least could use the same pipes.

But why bother with the hydrogen if you are eliminating with heat pumps the gas which it will replace? And where are we going to get the hydrogen anyway?

We will get the hydrogen from processing the gas which we will no longer be using. This will be done by electricity. The electricity will come from the wind turbines, which, with solar are going to replace our current fossil fuel generation. This is the same electricity and the same grid which is going to support the greatly increased load from all those heat pumps. The same grid that right now is dependent on imports from Europe to meet the load.

This is going to make us the Qatar of hydrogen.

But it gets better. Not only is the wind and solar going to support all the current demand, and the heat pump demand added to that, and the electricity used to generate the hydrogen that no-one is going to burn because they have moved to the heat pumps, its also going to support EVs, because we are moving all cars, and probably trucks too, to EVs.

We are going to do this without having any storage, because even the British political class realizes that batteries on this scale are impossible, impossible to either afford, or if you could afford them, you cannot buy enough of them.

The answer of the Climate Change

So at the same time as we double or triple the demand for electricity, get and train a workforce to install heat pumps at the rate of 600,000 a year, replace all boilers, replace all the gas transmission lines to every house so they can have hydrogen even if they don’t burn it any more, we are also going to be meeting this increased demand by converting the grid to wind and solar without any material amount of storage.

This last is justified by assuming that the wind in the UK is suddenly going to start blowing more consistently strongly than it ever has before in history, that is, the usual summer and winter high pressure calms are going to just vanish, so don’t worry, there will always be wind powered electricity for your heat pumps and cars and hydrogen. Even if there are are usually around 70 calm days, no problem, in future there will only be about 7.

How did they come by this figure? Who knows? Made it up probably.

What about costs?

At the moment there is a subsidy of about £400 per year per household to wind and solar generation. In the wonderful green electricity future what is going to happen to this? I haven’t come across any explanation. If it rises with usage (right now a lot of it is raised by taxing electricity use and passing the proceeds to the wind and solar generators) then the cost of heating homes and cooking and washing in hot water is going to soar. Right now in the UK there are lots of people who think hard before making tea or filling a hot water bottle, because they are worried about the cost. What is going to happen to them when everything is powered by unreliable and far more expensive electricity?

The progressives, in support of the green agenda, have moved to advocating the most regressive form of taxation of necessities that anyone could think of. And some also want to tax not only heat, but also food, to reduce meat consumption. The only tax in history that comes close to this in immorality was the French tax on salt before the Revolution.

Even if this insane project were feasible and affordable, even if it did what is supposed to be its reason and took UK emissions to zero, which it plainly is not going to do either, it would have the effect of reducing global emissions by one percentage point! We are supposed to be doing all this because climate, when it obviously cannot have any effect on the climate.

There is however a silver lining to this particular cloud. And to the Australian cloud as well.

It is that now, for the first time since the global warming hysteria started, the proponents are having to come clean about exactly what they are claiming to be necessary. And as that happens, the absurdity becomes apparent, and the resistance is rising.

Circumstances, and their success in moving opinion among the policy making classes, have led to the activists being forced to make the worst possible error: they have been forced to start advocating a specific program. This is the worst possible thing that could happen to them. Put it out there, which they are now having to do, and all its disastrous stupidity becomes apparent. But worse still, start implementing it, and you will be accountable for its failures.

My own prediction? If the goverment really does go ahead with this full throttle, we will see Nigel Farage, or a Farage look-alike, as Prime Minister sometime in the next 10 years. Don’t laugh. Quite reasonable people in New York are going to vote for Curtis Sliwa. People will do very strange things when you force them to it. Because they seem less mad than what you wrongly think is their only alternative.

Ron Long
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 3:51 am

Michel, many of your points are defined by the Laffer Curve. The Economist Arthur Laffer drew a curve (on a napkin at an airport) that showed the amount of tax a political entity collects based on taxation from 0 to 100%. The curve rose at first, then business moved and the upward trend slowed own, then as it got higher persons and business started avoiding paying tax outright and the curve turned downward, and at 100% tax no entity paid any tax (100% tax is pure Socialist fantasy).

Spetzer86
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 5:25 am

You’re missing the really great thing about a hydrogen economy! When it finally all goes up in flames, you don’t have to see them.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 9:10 am

Its also going to support EVs because we are moving all cars, and probably trucks too. to EVs

That’s pie in the sky too. There are around 1.4 billion cars in the world today and that is projected to rise to 2 billion by 2050. Earlier this year the International Energy Agency, in its best scenario, estimated that EV car growth would reach just over 70m worldwide by 2040. So EVs are going to be niche for a very long time and well over 2 billion people are not voluntarily going to give up their means of transport.

Last edited 1 month ago by Dave Andrews
AndyHce
Reply to  Dave Andrews
October 26, 2021 1:03 pm

The government solution is to forbid the production and sale of fuel for ICE automobiles.

R. Terrell
Reply to  AndyHce
October 26, 2021 1:44 pm

Biden is trying to do it from behind, by eliminating the fuel for ICE vehicles. I think that when the civil war is finally over, he will be BEGGING the oil companies to resume business! Like he’s doing now, with OPEC!

Dave Andrews
Reply to  AndyHce
October 27, 2021 7:17 am

In the UK ICE vehicles are no longer to be sold after 2030. There are currently about 40m cars in the UK and only 600,000 EVs (Roughly 50/50 BEVs & PHEVs) There is no way that all cars will be EVs by 2030 so ICE cars will be in the majority for a long time after that. Any Government banning the production and sale of fuel for such cars would not survive very long and I wouldn’t be surprised if the 2030 target is also dropped when its impracticability becomes obvious.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Dave Andrews
October 27, 2021 7:47 am

According to the IEA Update on EVs (Aug 23 2021) in 2020 the global stock of EV cars reached 10m but was still only 1% of the total car stock.

In Europe new EV registrations doubled but still only amounted to 1.4m whilst in Japan the EV market declined by 25% and had fallen in absolute and relative terms every year since 2017 when it peaked at 54,000 registrations.

China has the largest EV fleet (BEV &PHEV) at 4.5m, Europe 3.2m, US 1.7m Other 0.7m.

Amongst car manufacturers 40% did not support government targets to phase out ICE vehicles.

The idea that everyone will soon be driving EVs is pie in the sky.

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  Dave Andrews
October 28, 2021 3:57 pm

Paraphrasing the Great Instapundit – “When something can’t happen, it won’t”

PeterD
Reply to  Dave Andrews
October 26, 2021 4:27 pm

Australia will not move to all EVs. In the last 10 year (roughly) Australia has cut electricity generation. An all Australian EV fleet will require a dramatic increase in generation capacity. Australian policy is to blow up all coal generators in the next few years.

Unless everyone walks. Our rural areas can be lethal for walkers.

Dave Fair
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 11:47 am

The approach of political tipping points seem to miss the notice of the ruling class. The collapse of the Soviet Union is a classic example.

Less appreciated, Donald Trump’s rise in 2016 was truly a political tipping point in the U.S. The ongoing movie “Weekend at Brandon’s” proves that our elites’ didn’t get the message. They mistake President Trump’s loss (because of Covid19 and screaming MSM hatred) as an indication that the public accepts their insane economic and social positions.

Depending on conditions on the ground at the time, our 2022 and 2024 elections should tell the tale. [“Its the Economy, Stupid.”] In any case, there is a popular groundswell of governmental and institutional mistrust in the U.S.

R. Terrell
Reply to  Dave Fair
October 26, 2021 1:45 pm

Yeah, I wonder why???

Chuck no longer in Houston
Reply to  michel
October 28, 2021 3:55 pm

Great analysis. We need to hear a lot more like this.

Vincent Causey
October 26, 2021 12:27 am

The whole premise that you have to reach net zero by 2050 is completely bonkers. It is obviously an arbitrary number picked by the powerful who stand to gain financially.

There is no scientific basis for this 2050 target, even if you believe the IPCC. By 2050 CO2 levels won’t even have reached 500 ppm and the impact on temperatures will hardly be noticeable. It is time leaders go off their knees and stood up to the bullies and bed wetters, stood their ground and stuck to a more sensible approach, such as a reduction in emissions but with no arbitrary goals or time scales.

Gates was right in one respect, that trying to force unrealistic targets will divert resources into the wrong technology when better ones may come to fruition at a later time. For example, by 2030 or 2040 Thorium fission may be the way forward.

Personally, I would prefer to see a modest rise in CO2 to at least 600 ppm, but until this erroneous scientific premise is overturned, it will be politically impossible. But then again, trying to impose these targets will also turn out to have a political price. I suspect it is a case of kicking the can down the road – let some other politician deal with the fallout.

AndyHce
Reply to  Vincent Causey
October 26, 2021 1:05 pm

If only the west is playing the stupid game, CO2 levels will be determined by others. Maybe 800 ppm is possible.

eo
October 26, 2021 12:38 am

I could not understand why countries with much smaller emissions than China will not simply benchmark their commitments with the Chinese commitments. If China promise their emission will peak in 2030, then countries like Australia could just commit for their emission to peak in 2040 and for smaller emitters to peak in 2050. The leaders of the countries with low emission seems to put their personal pride over the interest of their countrymen. After all by 2050, it is doubtful if any of the leaders at COP26 will still be around leading their country. So the game is to out promise everybody else and claim the acclaim of being champion for the environment.

AndyHce
Reply to  eo
October 26, 2021 1:10 pm

CO2 as boogeyman is the last, best chance of establishing a socialist world government. That is the point and, it being the last and best, it cannot be abandoned, no matter what.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  eo
October 26, 2021 4:31 pm

The woke gov green policy war on fossil fuels (re pipelines, regs, divestment, refusal of Russian gas deal, bad publicity…) and failed green power tech is going to give us a terrible Green Holocaust in Europe .

There was never a doubt of it eventually occurring. What Marxist/totalitarian gov in the past has failed to produce one?But these ugly, woke folk are going to have one early – before they’ve even achieved their final ideological ends. Going into winter with a major food shortage, a power technology from the 11th Century and a totally crashed goods transport system from source to delivery sea ports guarantees it.

Moreover, with a tenfold increase in shipping cost because of the fuel crisis and collapse of logistical components (millions of shipping containers in the wrong places, e.g. empty in UK!) who can afford shipping costs. This is classic socialist “Building Back Better”.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Gary Pearse
October 26, 2021 4:40 pm

At least they do know that windmills and solar need to be twinned with coal or gas fired power, notwithstanding hopes that magic batteries are just around the corner. This, and all things they should have known drops any human catastrophe at their feet.

What did they think was going to happen to demand with recovery from two years of Covid?

michel
October 26, 2021 1:04 am

There are two really interesting pieces on the UK Conservative Woman site:

First, an account of the arithmetic of the current Government proposals:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/you-volt-dolt-wheres-the-energy-coming-from-for-boriss-green-pipedream/

l need about 120 TWh. Using hydrogen will require about 390 TWh. 

All of which means that we need to acquire lots more electricity generation that will work on cold, dark nights. As my book (Net Zero: The Challenges, Costs and Consequences of the UK’s Zero Emission Ambition) shows, that’s some 30-plus nuclear power stations with the capacity of Sizewell C.  This government has yet to pass the planning on one … Sizewell C itself.

This is simply mad.

Then, a piece about the policy phenomenon, governments insisting on doing things which are predictably disastrous:

https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/johnson-marches-to-glasgow-via-folly-road/

Tuchman said that to qualify as folly, a policy must meet three criteria. Net Zero ticks all these boxes.  

1. ‘The policy must have been seen as counter-productive in its time, not merely in hindsight.’ Counter-productive doesn’t begin to describe Net Zero. We know right now that it’s unworkable, unaffordable, unnecessary and immensely damaging. 

2. ‘A feasible alternative course of action must have been available.’ Simple – scrap Net Zero, scrap wind turbines, scrap solar panels and build nuclear power stations.  

3. ‘The policy must be that of a group, not an individual, and should persist beyond any one political lifetime.’ The Labour Energy Secretary Ed Miliband’s 2008 Climate Change Act started the bandwagon rolling and the policy has been ramped up through three subsequent Tory administrations. 

Tuchman also perfectly summed up the situation that we are now facing with Johnson. She said: ‘Wooden-headedness, the source of self-deception, plays a remarkably large role in government. 

‘It consists in assessing a situation in terms of preconceived fixed notions while ignoring or rejecting any contrary signs. It is acting according to wish while not allowing oneself to be deflected by the facts.’ 

Moderately Cross of East Anglia
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 1:26 am

So the destruction of our industries, hundreds of thousands of vulnerable people dying of cold in their freezing dark power free homes every winter ( a real vote winner ) and all to reach NOT ZERO.

I’ve seen garden slugs with more brain power than the bozos peddling this climate change threat crap.

AndyHce
Reply to  Moderately Cross of East Anglia
October 26, 2021 1:13 pm

When everything is desperate, collateral damage is no great price. Nothing is cheaper than human life. Always has been, probably always will be.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  michel
October 26, 2021 1:53 am

Thank you micheal – and Ma Tuchman.

For me, this is The Hammer Meet Nail quote of hers:

Tuchman:”For such leaders, she says, ‘intelligent mental process seems not to function”

Exactly as we see with Boris and ScoMo (obese through eating sugar) and Boris esp. well-noted for the last decade at least for being in endless rows/arguments and verbal fisticuffs with women while drunk

  • No. We are not evolved to eat sugar and no, sugar is Not A Staple of the human diet
  • THE very minute me/you anyone asserts that they can ‘handle alcohol‘ is the same very minute that alcohol effectively and totally handles them.

Sugar and alcohol are potent chemical depressants that cause:

  • muddled & slow thinking
  • lack of mental agility and self-confidence
  • magical thinking and feelings of self-importance (e.g. Walter Mitty, Superman, Captain Kirk
  • chronic depression leading to fixation of all things ‘negative’
  • buck passing and laziness
  • tribalism, fake consensus and political correctness
  • cancel-culture and belligerence (this is how wars are started)
  • confusion of empathy with sympathy (diametrically opposite things)

Even before the poor state of contemporary food & nutrition, esp where (perfect exemplar) The Mediterranean Diet is touted as the perfect way to health and happiness.

Fine yes it is if you define rampant autism (diagnosed and subclinical) Alzheimer’s & Parkinson’s to be = ‘happy states to be in’
But who’s going there to find out?
Maybe Heaven and or Nirvana in their purest and most beautiful forms exist inside all the Black Holes that NASA keeps finding – you wanna go there too? ##
..

Wanna fix The Climate, the driver shortage, food picking handling packing?
Wanna fix XR and Greenpeace?
Wanna fix fuel costs, Vladimir and Net Zero?
Wanna fix Government Creep, Red Tape and petty bureaucracy?
Wanna fix The World?

Simple.
Put in place leaders (and their close advisers) who are not obese and who don’t drink alcohol

## was tidying up all the sleppigs eororrs and ohter gafafss when it dawned what sugar does to human minds/brains/personalities
Sugar Turns Your Head into a Black Hole
ha ha ha

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  Peta of Newark
October 26, 2021 4:28 pm

I like your thinking…but where is Joe Biden in relation to your contention?

Dennis
October 26, 2021 1:26 am

When the Gillard Labor Australian Federal Government introduced a Carbon Tax 2010/11 the Minister responsible admitted that 10% of the revenue was pledged to the UN.

When pushed by a radio interviewer he then admitted that the plan was to merge Australia’s Carbon Tax into the European Emissions Trading Scheme at a not much later date.

Another example of the money side of climate hoax politics.

Dennis
October 26, 2021 1:31 am

I repeat;

Like a pioneer period commercial aircraft pilot telling his passengers that they must jump out before the aircraft crashes.
And then explaining that in the future technology will probably invent a parachute.

tomo
October 26, 2021 1:55 am

Will all arriving dignitaries at Glasgow COP26 be required to pose with Bonnie the mascot ?

I hope so

  • bad taxidermy anybody?
Last edited 1 month ago by tomo
Dave Fair
Reply to  tomo
October 26, 2021 12:15 pm

Why only two genders of rats to represent CliSciFi?

AndyHce
Reply to  Dave Fair
October 26, 2021 1:17 pm

Rats are too smart?

GregK
October 26, 2021 1:56 am

Why should ScoMo not hop on the band wagon along with the leaders of all the other countries that are declaring that they will be net zero carbon dioxide emitters by 2050 ?
It’s essentially a meaningless virtue signalling exercise but necessitated by the adoption of the “target” by the western world’s financial managers. Don’t declare you’re for net zero and you won’t get loans.
And to achieve the target ? Run your power stations on non-carbon dioxide emitting wood chips imported across oceans like the Brits or only farm non-methane producing sheep like Jacinda’s Kiwis.Easy.
Or, like Xi Jinping, watch the whole exercise with bemusement while building coal power stations and flogging solar panels and turbine blades to the west.

Reply to  GregK
October 26, 2021 2:23 am

> And to achieve the target ?

Do what SoMo just did. Predicate it on “‘technology breakthroughs’” without specify what technologies, or how they will be developed. After all, we all know it’s just empty promises, but in this case he’s probably been more honest that most pollies.

Klem
October 26, 2021 2:05 am

The year that every government has targetted to reach net zero is the same year China has chosen to acheive global hegemony. Is that merely coincidence?

Peta of Newark
October 26, 2021 2:09 am

Like all the best, wildly Off Topic but at the same, curiously On Topic
https://www.techrepublic.com/article/apple-is-killing-google-in-one-key-area/

Abolition Man
October 26, 2021 2:12 am

Apparently elites around the world have hit on a new mantra: “Everything is free now, because we can just print the money to pay for it!”
Even if you ignore 2,000 years of economic reality, there is a huge price to pay for such insanity! Hyperinflation and the devaluation of the currency are the most obvious outcomes, but the destruction of the middle class and the impoverishment of all but a tiny elite are likely to follow in short order!
To solve a non-existent problem (CAGW) the Western democracies are going to commit economic suicide! If only the intellectual morons pushing for this self-immolation would lead by example! Then we might be able to get some leaders unencumbered by such deep rectal/cranial inversion

Dave Fair
Reply to  Abolition Man
October 26, 2021 12:28 pm

The fact that the whole of the “Lets Go Brandon” administration was not laughed out of town when our “Weekend At Brandon’s” movie star said that multi-trillion dollar spending would cost people zero dollars is an indication that we no longer have a free press. Imagine WWII leaders Winston Churchill and FDR telling their respective populaces that fighting the Axis Powers would be at zero cost in blood, sweat and tears, much less money.

Lies multiply; they will crescendo at COP26. I assume honest journalistic commentators will be rare.

Krudd Gillard of the Commondebt of Australia
Reply to  Abolition Man
October 26, 2021 4:37 pm

Ah yes, the MMT sales team. Their theory depends on all loans being repayable in your own currency. Their theory depends on there existing sufficient idle capacity in the human resource pool. They do not take into account the effect that more than generous welfare has on the availablity of labour resources but they are big on welfare increases. They say the government is the employer of the last resort but adherents make the government the employer of the first resort with wages that suck the resources out of the more directly productive sector of the economy.

Dean
October 26, 2021 2:36 am

Meh, means nothing in reality. 2030 targets are not changing so the short term is secured.

At least he has wedged Labor by saying it will be done through technology. Whatever that means to different people. You can get there through taxes with Labor, or “technology” with us.

Net zero in 2050 is so utterly impossible to achieve that these commitments are meaningless.

We have spend many trillions in wind and solar getting fossil fuel from 80.3% of final energy demand down to 80.2%. Biomass is not even vaguely sustainable.

Taxes will need to be revolution levels if you try to do it that way.

Technology to my mind can only mean nuclear, CCS is not looking that promising at the scale required.

And going the technology route allows pollies the ability to delay any real pain, while giving time for the forecast catastrophies to not arrive.

AndyHce
Reply to  Dean
October 26, 2021 1:21 pm

Maybe that new technology will be to create a black hole and siphon off energy from infalling matter. If you are going to bet the farm on fantasy technology, why not go all the way.

Alan M
October 26, 2021 3:23 am

The implicit argument “vote for us, or you will get something worse”, simply won’t carry,

Not so sure. Labor will now have to come up with something even more ridiculous which will have to include taxes and Aus won’t like that.

Last edited 1 month ago by Alan M
Dave Fair
Reply to  Alan M
October 26, 2021 12:34 pm

Sounds like the only solution to “guaranteed mutual destruction” is to not play the game. The continual bidding up of even more expensive “solutions” to CliSciFi lies will destroy (happily) the meme.

2hotel9
October 26, 2021 4:29 am

Well seeing as just talking about it has destroyed jobs and increased taxes they are clearly a bunch of lie spewing f**kbags.

Andy H
October 26, 2021 5:24 am

Australia has been involved in “carbon farming” where they offset carbon with trees and undergrowth in their countryside. They offered tax breaks to landowners to do this. You may have seen some of this carbon on your TV in early 2020 when it went up in flames.

October 26, 2021 5:31 am

We will set a target to achieve net zero by 2050, and have a clear plan for achieving it.
Key to this approach is investment in new energy technologies, like hydrogen and low cost solar,

And there is always warp drive and transporter beams if our clear plan does not work out….

Dave Fair
Reply to  dennis topczewski
October 26, 2021 12:37 pm

I wish I could make firm financial commitments and borrow money based on new energy technologies. Normal bankers won’t let me do that. Of course, I’m not a government that controls the banks (or vice versa).

Olen
October 26, 2021 7:08 am

In other words he wants his cake and eat it too. He wants net zero but will not admit to the consequences.

Before going there he should be asking for some proof of climate change as justification for the wrecking changes. And he should be asking where is the authority granted him to make such changes in the lives of the people he represents. It is doubtful emergency powers were ever to be used in such a fashion. The worse part of this grab for power, it is not limited to Australia.

John Kelly
October 26, 2021 8:08 am

I now equate Morrison and Joyce with Australia’s infamous PM of the early 1970s, Gough Whitlam. Whitlam tried to destroy Australia’s economy with his socialist ideas and he lost the 1975 election, a few months after Whitlam was controversially sacked. The election result was a landslide. Morrison and Joyce will suffer the same fate as Whitlam for exactly the same reason; their policies are dangerous for the Australian economy. And NO Mr Morrison, Australian DO NOT want action on climate change.

I wonder if Tirath Kkemlani is still alive? Probably not, but maybe his son can step in and lend Morrison and Joyce all the money they need to build their mythical wind and solar farms so tax payers don’t foot the bill for technology that is not up to scratch.

Mike Smith
October 26, 2021 10:11 am

You can’t fuel all of the people, all of the time!

October 26, 2021 11:08 am

Net “zero” emissions will cause rationing.

Gary Pearse
October 26, 2021 11:52 am

I was wrong about Morrison. He is as gutless as the rest. Is he unaware that the UK/EU green policy geniuses have put their citizens in very serious and imminent harm’s way with a cold winter, low fuel/power empty store shelves, shuttering industries … because of their war on fossil fuels, and the stupid choices they made? I truly fear for the wellbeing of 10s of millions of their citizens. this winter.

They turned down Russia’s offer of $3/million BTUs of gas (that’s what Serbia, Hungary and a few others negotiated against against the wishes of the EU). Spot prices are now $40/million BTUs. All other fuels are in short supply and high priced vis à vis demand and though food may be abundant grace of the Great Greening bumper harvests, it can’t be delivered at a reasonable cost. I think the brainwashed and the woke are going to discover they are awake in a world that doesn’t exist.

Thomas Gasloli
October 26, 2021 12:20 pm

So Australians want a plan that is fair and doesn’t cause skyrocketing energy prices. They actually think that is possible?

AARGH63
October 26, 2021 12:44 pm

Yes, and inflation will be transitory.

AndyHce
October 26, 2021 12:53 pm

Is Morrison taking his lead from China, not in explicit details but in general strategy?

PeterD
October 26, 2021 4:14 pm

Australia has a long history of picking the “next big thing” for our Government to favour, meanwhile getting rid of the unfavourable. Some Elite group of experts say it can’t be done, another country comes along and dumps cheap subsidised product, and hey presto. This is just another example.

Industries where Australia was once at the cutting edge, or at least competitive. Computers, Space, Batteries (non lithium fully recyclable), solar panels, nuclear, car manufacturing (including hybrids), ship building, software, aircraft industry, other electronics, all eliminated by high taxes, poor policy design, red tape, green tape and more taxes.

Industries slated to be closed under either the Left or Conservative parties are nearly all export orientated our extravagant lifestyle. Aluminium, alumina, coal, agriculture, other mining, associated workshops, steel,magnesium, timber, agriculture and the list goes on.

Australia is proud to have amongst the highest company taxes in the world, the most generously paid unemployed, some of the highest personal taxes, and and unbelievabley byzantine system of red and green tape. Totally ignored by all governments is the almost unbelievable size of capital flight, going anywhere but Australia. Support from this is bipartisan.

I love my country but Australia does not have a great future.

markx
October 26, 2021 6:21 pm

Nah, Scomo is doing the right thing, and in fact it is all he can do under these circumstances.

That is, pay lip service to these grand demands, produce grand and meaningful sounding plans on the world stage, and then, behind the scenes, play the same game as everyone else is playing: dodging, weaving, ducking, diving and doing everything possible to keep an economy afloat in some sensible manner.

Forrest Gardener
Reply to  markx
October 27, 2021 3:13 am

That was my take on it as well. He has kicked the can down the road and there is no can more deserving of a good kicking than climate fraud.

Editor
October 26, 2021 7:09 pm

I think, and certainly hope, that Scott Morrison is being a lot smarter than people here are giving him credit for.

He has to have a plan, in order to avoid being the whipping boy at the Glasgow conference. Please note the definition of a whipping boy: someone or something that is blamed or punished for problems that are caused by someone or something else (Cambridge Dictionary).

He has a plan. That is all he has to have. He doesn’t have to implement it.

There are all sorts of things that I would like to see in Scott Morrison’s statements, but I do understand that he can never say them while the international scene is so toxic.

Dennis
Reply to  Mike Jonas
October 26, 2021 7:35 pm

I agree, adding to consider that the two major allies who recently signed a new defence agreement, AUKUS, are both pushing Australia to do more to reduce emissions while ignoring that Australia is a tiny 1.3% source of global emissions and since 2005 via the Kyoto and now Paris Agreements has lowered emissions in line with targets set and is on track now to achieve the 2030 target.

The Morrison Government (I am very much opposed to net zero emissions politics and exercise in futility) if we listen carefully sticks to the Paris Agreement 2030 target goal.

Ladislav
October 26, 2021 7:55 pm

What a clown! Why should anyone believe him. Isn’t this the same jester, who assured us a few weeks ago, that there is no forced vaccination in Australia?

Dennis
Reply to  Ladislav
October 26, 2021 9:04 pm

I was not forced to get vaccinated, I know of no person that has been forced, but I do know many people who understand and support vaccination of the whole community as a precautionary measure, and not about death so much as not suffering from the onconvenient discomforts of being hospitalised and probably after recovery suffering long term medical problems like heart and lungs damage.

And where I live in New South Wales the benefits are now becoming obvious.

%d bloggers like this: