The Pickering Post
Thursday, 18th January 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

Blog

Kill Kyoto Liabilities


The Kyoto Protocol was dreamed up by the Climate Jet-set in Kyoto, Japan in 1997. 

One of the first decisions of born-again-green PM, Kevin Rudd, was to commit Australia to Kyoto Phase 1 in 2007.  This treaty required signatories to reduce production of carbon dioxide to 5% below 1990 levels by 2012.

As a late joiner, Australia got a lower target, involving no actual cuts.  And they achieved that easy target by robbing Australian landowners - they stole carbon credits from landowners by imposing tree clearing bans. That larcenous trick can’t be pulled twice.

Ironically, the death notice for the Kyoto misadventure was posted by Japan, the birthplace of Kyoto, when they announced at Cancun in 2010 that Japan would not agree to any further targets. Japan was shocked at the billions in liabilities they had accumulated by not meeting Kyoto 1 target cuts.

Undeterred by this warning, another ALP/Green government agreed to Kyoto 2 in 2012 – 5% below 2000 levels by 2020.

This target, agreed to without due diligence, is dreamland stuff for Australia. Once the growing population is taken into account, this target would require Australians in 2020 to maintain industries and create new jobs using 30% less hydro-carbon energy per capita than was used in 2000.

Mining and mineral processing, agriculture, manufacturing, transport, tourism, electricity generation, cement, forestry and fishing are the backbone industries of Australia. Not one of these industries could maintain production while also significantly reducing their production of carbon dioxide, unless Australia embarks on a crash program of building new hydro and/or nuclear power stations. The chance that green regulators or politicians will allow either of these options any time soon is zero.

The use of carbon fuels, more than any other indicator, measures the growth and health of modern economies. The only way to kill carbon is to kill the economy – close industries or send them overseas. The Global Financial Crisis probably did more to reduce the use of hydro-carbon fuels than Kyoto will ever do.

Japan’s exit from Kyoto obligations was soon followed by Canada and Russia. USA never signed, nor did China, India, South Africa or Brazil.

Thus the four biggest economies in our region (USA, China, Japan and India) are not burdened by Kyoto. Nor are our big competitors - Brazil (iron and beef), Indonesia (coal), Chile (copper) and Canada (wheat). We only have the Kiwis and the faraway Europeans sharing the sinking Kyoto ship.

The Kyoto Agreement is a failure. Australia repealed the costly carbon dioxide tax. Next we should get rid of Kyoto liabilities.



More

TRUMP CAUGHT TRUTHING AGAIN!


I'm being invaded... see ya in a few days


TAKE MY WIFE!

Comments

Viv. I would love your opinion on this given that it refers to the west Antarctic. To my knowledge, from the South Pole, everywhere is North. So where is the west Antarctic. http://www.news.com.au/technology/science/west-antarctica-ice-meltdown-weakens-earths-gravity/story-fn5fsgyc-1227078080852

To Letters to the editor 26 Sept 2014 – PUBLISHED IN WEEKEND AUSTRALIAN 27 September

Serial alarmists like Messrs Cehak and Roylance (The Australian 26/9) criticise world-acclaimed scientists like Dan Wood and Steven Koonin for their sceptical views, yet continue to peddle the fiction that the ’science is settled’ in the climate debate. Those aboard the Ship of Fools stuck in Antarctic ice in early 2014 believed their own shoddy science that said the poles were melting; currently the Antarctic ice sheet is at an all-time record high, and Arctic ice is now refreezing as normal. The junk models used by the alarmists to frighten the world are in a state of complete disarray as more than 50 excuses are currently circulating trying to explain, unsuccessfully, the current 17-year halt to global warming, even with rising CO2 emissions. Despite its shortcomings, even the IPCC has declared that there is no relationship between emissions and hurricanes, Atlantic storms, drought and wildfires, and any other catastrophe served up as fact by the alarmists, whose arguments are always based on appeals to authority rather than the tenets of true science as embraced by skeptics.

A NEW peer-reviewed paper using observations rather than computer models has found the Earth’s climate was less sensitive to increasing levels of carbon ­dioxide in the atmosphere than predicted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The paper, published in the journal Climate Dynamics, was prepared by US climate scientist Judith Curry and climate ­researcher Nic Lewis.
Dr Curry said the sensitivity of climate to increasing concentrations of CO2 was at the heart of the scientific debate on anthropogenic climate change, and also the public debate on the appropriate policy response to increasing ­carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Their paper said the best estimate for equilibrium climate sensitivity — the change in global mean surface temperature at equilibrium that is caused by a doubling of the ­atmospheric CO2 concentration — was 1.64 degrees.
The temperature range given with a confidence level of 17 to 83 per cent was 1.25 to 2.45.
This range compares with a range of 1.5 to 4.5 given in the IPCC’s fifth assessment report for the same level of confidence.
Their temperature change at the time of CO2 doubling — was 1.33C with a range of 1.05C to 1.8C.
The IPCC range was 1.0C to 2.5C with no best estimate given.
In an essay published this week, President Barack Obama’s former climate advisor Steven Koonin said today’s best estimate of the sensitivity was no different, and no more certain, than it was 30 years ago despite billions of dollars having been spent.

CARBON POLLUTION

“The great masses of the people... will more easily fall victim to a big lie than to a small one.”

—Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

Indeed Mr.Rudd has a lot to answer for.

Most superannuation funds hold those shares spitfire13. Better to direct your 20mm cannon at the Greens - the whole 9 yards ...

alpinist wanna identify your share holdings, put it out there for public consumption. Shareholders are rich bars-ards who only give a flying toss about themselves, couldn't give a continental about being Australian or Australia. example 600 jobs went from Telstra to Mumbai and the Phillipines, Shareholders got a bigger dividend and the value of their shares went up. No uproar from aussie shareholders of Telstra. regarding 600 Australians on the dole queue. Every shareholder should be on a public register to prove what two faced hypocrites they are in their views.

We should also get rid of the Greens, as they are nothing more than 5 th element cells undermining our Countries security, defence and economic security. Also cleanse the education system of all the biased mumbo jumbo clap trap that is taught as fact to young impressionable minds! What Gillard, Brown and the Left have done in this regard is criminal!

The very essence of science is skepticism until ALL scientists accept it as proven. They prove by practical demonstration such as accurate predictions or outcomes. An example would be heavier than air flight. the notion was thought to be ridiculous by the worlds most eminent scientists at the time. At present not one IPCC prediction has come even close of being accurate. Past performance is a strong indicator of future performance. We as a human race have learnt to never accept a theory just on someone's say so. Especially when others, just as qualified provide evidence of poor science such as in Watts Up when he found US weather stations had been changed and were now showing increased temperature, yet the government tried to prevent him from publishing his paper. You have to ask why?

A CO2 would be paid regardless of profit, if in profit it would naturaly reduce that profit and so reduce the Company's Company Tax, it would not make up or be above the CO2 tax paid. Company, size has no relevance.

Good morning to you Mr V Forbes. I hope you have a most pleasant Sunday . Smile sent~

http://www.naturalnews.com/045695_global_warming_fabricated_data_scientific_fraud.html


(NaturalNews) When drug companies are caught faking clinical trial data, no one is surprised anymore. When vaccine manufacturers spike their human trial samples with animal antibodies to make sure their vaccines appear to work, we all just figure that's how they do business: lying, cheating, deceiving and violating the law.

Now, in what might be the largest scientific fraud ever uncovered, NASA and the NOAA have been caught red-handed altering historical temperature data to produce a "climate change narrative" that defies reality. This finding, originally documented on the Real Science website, is detailed here.

We now know that historical temperature data for the continental United States were deliberately altered by NASA and NOAA scientists in a politically-motivated attempt to rewrite history and claim global warming is causing U.S. temperatures to trend upward. The data actually show that we are in a cooling trend, not a warming trend (see charts below).

This story is starting to break worldwide right now across the media, with The Telegraph now reporting (1), "NOAA's US Historical Climatology Network (USHCN) has been 'adjusting' its record by replacing real temperatures with data 'fabricated' by computer models."

Because the actual historical temperature record doesn't fit the frenzied, doomsday narrative of global warming being fronted today on the political stage, the data were simply altered using "computer models" and then published as fact.



Here's the proof of the climate change fraud
Here's the chart of U.S. temperatures published by NASA in 1999. It shows the highest temperatures actually occurred in the 1930's, followed by a cooling trend ramping downward to the year 2000:


Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/045695_global_warming_fabricated_data_scientific_fraud.html#ixzz3EXqGYDtY

Ahh yes, climate change scam) Let's see, who to believe? On one side we have all those Oceanographers, Atmospheric Physicists, institutions like NASA, NOAA, and The U.S. military( Chief of the US Navy's Pacific Command, Admiral Samuel Locklear, quoted climate change is our single greatest security threat), with some varying opinion and dissension to be sure but basically all saying it is real, it is a problem whilst on the other side we have the deniers and dissenters (whose only resources seem to be like minded individuals or people whose qualifications are in other fields, Utube , Politically motivated or corporate hand outs) But are unanimous and absolutely convinced that this global warming/climate change stuff is all Bullshit because it was cold yesterday

Carbon tax would be tax deductible so for a big company like BHP , they could claim all costs back and make a profit on more than what they paid .

MR - There are a few things I don't understand - can you let me know what a denialist is? What is climate change? What is carbon pollution? You gullible unquestioning dopes have reverted to talking in loaded clichés because your arguments cannot be furthered by accurate language\

alpinist, you start out saying miners abandoned Australia because of the CO2 tax. NOW you say they make big money from CO2 tax, I can not keep up.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/climate-not-as-sensitive-to-carbon-dioxide/story-e6frg6xf-1227072070917

Interesting new article in today's Oz - the guy will no doubt be branded an evil denier, a sceptic, a heretic - may be sent to Iraq for beheading or crucifixion :-(((

Funny BHP actually wants a CARBON PRICE !! Maybe Ms Blanchett was on the money all along.......http://www.couriermail.com.au/business/bhp-shell-china-steel-among-companies-calling-for-carbon-price/story-fnihsps3-1227068375704?nk=f99a7a073db436d10b8103e6df52c002.....the debate rolls on.

Ducktracy relax the article is about SO2 which is NOT considered a Green House Gas. Also volcanism is an ongoing process and man-made pollutants of course exacerbate the problem.

Iceland’s Volcanic Pollution Dwarfs All of Europe’s Human Emissions
http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/19197-icelands-volcanic-pollution-dwarfs-all-of-europes-human-emissions?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_campaign=34824ec0a5-The_Editors_Top_Picks_3_12_143_12_2014&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8ca494f2d2-34824ec0a5-289805993