The Pickering Post
Saturday, 21st July 2018

If you would like to be involved or support the upkeep and further development of this site, it would be very welcome no matter how small.

Viv Forbes

Viv has a degree in Applied Science Geology and is a Fellow of the Australasian Institute of Mining and Metallurgy


Carbon Footprints – Good, Bad and Ugly

Australians are supposed to feel guilty because some bureaucrat in the climate industry has calculated that we have a very high per capita “carbon footprint”.

By “carbon footprint”, they mean the amount of carbon dioxide gas produced by whatever we do.  Every human activity contributes to our carbon footprint – even just lying on the beach breathing gently produces carbon dioxide.

Producing carbon dioxide is not bad – it an essential gas in the cycle of life, and beneficial for all life. There is no proof whatsoever that human emissions cause dangerous global warming. 

Moreover, it is not per capita emissions that could affect the climate – it is total emissions, and on that measure Australia’s small contribution is largely irrelevant. This is just another PR weapon in the extreme green alarmist arsenal.

Even if carbon footprints were important, not all footprints are environmentally equal – some are good, some are bad and some are just plain ugly.

“Good” carbon footprints are the result of producing unsubsidised things for the benefit of others. An example is a grazier in outback Australia whose family lives frugally and works hard but has a high carbon footprint producing wool, mutton and beef from sustainable native grasslands and may use quad bikes, diesel pumps, electricity, tractors, trucks, trains, planes and ships to supply distant consumers. Many productive Australians with good carbon footprints produce food and fibres, seafood and timber, minerals and energy for grateful consumers all over the world. Activities like this create a large “per capita carbon footprint” for Australia. That so few people can produce so much is an achievement to be proud of. 

A “bad” carbon footprint is produced when government subsidies, grants, hand-outs, tax breaks or mandates keep unproductive or unsustainable activities alive, leaving their footprint, but producing little useful in return. The prime examples are subsidised green energy and the government climate industry, but there are examples in all nationalised or subsidised industries and activities. (Russia and East Germany easily met their initial Kyoto targets by closing decrepit Soviet-era nationalised industries.)

An “ugly” carbon footprint is produced by green hypocrites who preach barefoot frugalism to us peasants while they live the opulent life style.

Examples are the mansions, yachts and jet-setting of prominent green extremists such as Al Gore and Leonardo DiCaprio.

The ultimate ugly carbon hypocrites are those who organise and attend the regular meetings, conferences and street protests, drawing thousands of globe-trotting alarmists and “environmentalists” from all over the world by plane, yacht, car, bus, train and taxi to eat, drink, chant and dance while they protest about over-population, excessive consumption and heavy carbon footprints of “all those other people”.

Maybe they should lead by example and stop travelling, eating, drinking and breathing.



Richo empties his colostomy bag on Latham 

Climate Lessons from King Canute


Antarctic Sea Ice at Record High, but Global-warming Doomsayers Unimpressed

Hello Mr Forbes... thank you for being you , smile sent~

the year 2014 when all we have left is Hypocrites.Green slime has no footprint and they are not about the environment,they are about the World Order,but if sharia law gets there first that will probably do.....Thank God for Larry's site it a least allows one to bleat.

Ugly carbon footprint, last weeks bribe of $25 million by Liberal Governments for China to take Victorian Brown Coal ~ Very ugly ......

Thanks again Viv. Love your work. Facts, something that alarmists don't seem to understand

I have no time at all for environmentalists who live in urban environments where nature has been totally repressed. The Yarra is a dead river flowing between bleak stone banks but has electric frog sounds at Southbank. The Melbourne City Council is treating the plane trees with hormones so they won't put out pollen to annoy people. City environmentalists should look to their own environment before lecturing others.

NO Breathing OUT...

Especially breathing.

Hear, hear, Viv - and thank you, once again.

Or plant one on a greenie?

Notice how the 'minder' of that twat DiCaprio pushed away a journalist for daring to comment about Dicaps opulent lifestyle and his global warming beliefs.....HYPOCRIT!!!!

Gillard's Book - Target catalogue arrived this morning and Gillard's book, launched only weeks ago, is now on special at $24 as against recommended retail price of $49.99. Another few weeks from know it will be cheaper than a roll of toilet paper but not as useful. Wonder how many copies the ABC bought using taxpayer funds.

If I never again hear the ridiculous term "carbon footprint" it will be too soon.

You know the world's gone mad when they start taxing cow farts.

Why do they Greens expect our government to do what private enterprise will not. If there's money to be made or a benefit to society as a whole should not the Green machine be funding this themselves with donations from the likes of Al and Leo? Those who think it a bunch of horse pucks. Even Bill Gates who throws millions a year at Africa for no good return I would think would be inclined to throw some at the Green movement. If he does it's minimal.

Nail hit on the head. "Over Population" the biggest driving force in power consumption and CO2 is population growth. Even Bindi Irwin got that one right. Imagine agreeing with a 15 years old. Pity Hilary Clinton didn't.

Only slightly OT. -- Dedicated to bringing industrial strength renewable energy directly where it is needed and wanted, and to helping the people of Sydney access the beauty and riches wind farms bring.

Hello there Viv, hope all is well with you :). If we imported less produce and sustained our own peoples foods, that would be better.Shipping involves much activity as does refigeration of produce when importing.Wind turbine factories are utterly contradictory in that regard,by taking up valuable grass(and bush /shrubs) land space and agri soils.They will contribute to valued soils erosion because tree roots , or shrubs are not holding swathes of land together `naturally` it is also complete waste of productive space and a tourism eye sore.Plainly insulting.Your third paragraph is so true and optimistic*. Thank-you for your lucid views Mr Forbes.. it is always a pleasure reading/ digesting your articles.Respectful regard sent ~.

And what about the graziers, farmers, or the forestry industry who burn-off continually all year round - not to mention the so-called sport of motor racing - in all it's configurations Viv?

Our mantra .U T W !