This thread is for discussion of Australian aspects of global warming.

269 Thoughts on “Australia

  1. Check out this great blog post from a young student pushing back on Global Warming propaganda.

    It is inspirational.

    (h/t Bishop Hill for linking to it)

  2. Richard C (NZ) on March 12, 2011 at 4:01 pm said:

    This article in The Australian goes against the grain:

    Carbon tax wonder tonic proves tough sell


    For example, I’m expecting the debate over anthropogenic global warming will collapse within the course of the next decade under the weight of its own internal contradictions, to borrow a phrase that so-called scientific Marxism once used in reference to capitalism. It’s probable that quite soon the recent mild warming trend will come to be seen as par for the course and in no way a threat to the planet or mankind. The manufacture of statistical artefacts such as the hockey stick, with which a couple of ingenious climatologists hoped to erase from popular and scientific consciousness the whole medieval warm period, will come to be seen for the astonishing confidence tricks they are

    I’ve offered an appropriate comment to both writer and editor.

  3. Richard C (NZ) on March 15, 2011 at 9:04 am said:

    Carbon dioxide not the bad guy, says Abbott

    March 15, 2011 – smh

    THE Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, has again questioned the scientific evidence for climate change, saying he does not accept that carbon dioxide is a proven ”environmental villain” or that cutting greenhouse gas emissions is the most important environmental challenge.

    The Minister for Climate Change, Greg Combet, seized on the comments by Mr Abbott yesterday as ”proof” the Liberal Party’s climate policy is based on ”the extreme view that climate change doesn’t exist”.

    Speaking at a community forum in Perth, Mr Abbott said: ”I don’t think we can say that the science is settled here.

    ”There is no doubt that we should do our best to rest lightly on the planet and there is no doubt that we should do our best to emit as few waste products as possible, but, having said that, whether carbon dioxide is quite the environmental villain that some people make it out to be is not yet proven.

    ”We should take precautions against risks and threats, potential ones as well as actual ones, but I don’t think we should assume that the highest environmental challenge, let alone the great moral social and political challenge of our time, is to reduce our emissions,” Mr Abbott said in response to a question.

    Despite once famously saying the settled science of climate change was ”absolute crap”, Mr Abbott has more recently repeatedly stated that he accepts the science and has told his MPs their debate with the government should be about the Prime Minister’s broken promise, the impact of the carbon price and the relative merit of the Coalition’s ”direct action” climate policy, and not about climate science.

    Mr Combet said the comments showed ”Mr Abbott is a climate change denier, which explains why his climate policy is nonsense”.

  4. On a related note –

    VOTER hostility to tackling climate change with a carbon price has jumped sharply since the federal government announced the plan, with a poll showing most people oppose putting a price on carbon emissions.

    The Herald/Nielsen telephone poll, which surveyed 1400 voters last week, found 56 per cent opposed introduction of a carbon price while just 35 per cent supported such a measure.

  5. Pielke Jr on Gillard:

    In the face of opinion polls showing a lack of support for her proposed carbon tax, Julia Gillard today has delivered a speech that indicates that she is willing to wager her future on this issue (The speech is here in PDF). In the speech the word “carbon” appears 36 times, also appearing 36 times are the words “jobs” and “economy.”

    She makes clear that there is no going back:

  6. Green Peasants of the Pacific
    Saturday, 12 March 2011, 7:01 pm
    Press Release: Carbon Sense Coalition

    “In the period from the base year of 1990 to 2010, New Zealand emissions have grown by 22%. This 22% growth will need to be eliminated before the Kiwis get to start the process of achieving 50% cuts from 1990 levels.

    “However, New Zealand’s population has also grown since 1990, and is expected to rise from 3.5 million in 1990 to 6.2 million by 2050.

    “The maths shows that the 50% cut to 1990 levels by 2050 will require Kiwis to reduce emissions per capita by 73% from 1990 levels. Will their grandkids learn to happily live on just 27% of the resources that they use now?


  7. Engineer bores a hole in dam untruths

    O’Brien had suspected the unthinkable when the Brisbane River was peaking at 4.46m in the pre-dawn on Thursday, January 13. Having closely followed the dam’s operation, he suspected then that the dam had almost certainly not done its job and its releases of huge volumes of water in fact caused the major flood.

  8. Operator of dam ‘invented’ rain data

    EXTREME rainfall so rare it happens on average once every 2000 years has been “invented” by the government operator of a major Queensland dam as part of its explanation for releasing huge volumes of water that caused most of Brisbane’s January flood.

  9. Richard C (NZ) on March 29, 2011 at 4:15 pm said:

    A new medical term coined under the DRUM Lewandowsky article


    JM 29 Mar 2011 1:19:18pm

    Credit to gippslander who kicked off with: Climate Hypochondria is a condition in which a person believes that the world is ill when no objective signs of illness can be observed. It has an obsessive as well as a delusional component. Sufferers from climate hypochondria, or, to use the clinical term, climate hypochondriasis, remain convinced that the world is ill despite reassurances, and often present the world to others over a long period of time as suffering from a series of different symptoms and diseases. The onset of climate hypochondria is frequently in the 30s in men and 40s in women who have only a superficial understanding of the sciences. Those in sedentary occupations are notoriously liable to it, and, whilst some scientists usually suffer only a transient bout of climate hypochondria, some remain climate hypochondriacal throughout their career. Depression and alcoholism exacerbate the condition.

    Mutual group support for sufferers can be obtained at Hot Topic.

  10. An essay on the current state of the climate change debate

    by Don Aitkin

    JC note: this essay was prepared for a recent address at given at the Manning House, in Australia.

    The debate tonight is about ‘anthropogenic global warming’, and it is a debate, not a one-sided exposition. The debate exists because many people say the matter is important, and it is plainly also most contentious. To understand why our government is going down the path that it has chosen, a carbon tax, while the USA is not doing so, we need to know more than simply the local and American political contexts. What is ‘climate change’ all about? Why is there any debate at all? Why are people so divided about it?

  11. Richard C (NZ) on April 4, 2011 at 8:58 pm said:

    Climate change to mean fewer cyclones and smaller waves, says CSIRO research

    * EXCLUSIVE Ben Packham
    * From: The Australian

    CSIRO research commissioned by the federal government suggests climate change could dramatically reduce the number of tropical cyclones in the Australian region and decrease wave heights on the nation’s east coast.

    The surprise findings, which appear to contradict some common predictions about the impact of climate change, are contained in scientific papers on “Projecting Future Climate and its Extremes”, obtained under Freedom of Information laws by The Australian Online.
    Check out the comments under this one

  12. Andy on April 5, 2011 at 8:06 am said:

    I had to do a double check that this wasn’t an April 1st joke

  13. Richard C (NZ) on April 6, 2011 at 7:57 pm said:

    Desal plant debacle for builder

    April 6, 2011

    AUSTRALIA’s biggest desalination plant, at Wonthaggi, is six to 12 months behind schedule, with cost over-runs and big financial penalties now threatening to deny the builder a return on the multibillion-dollar project.

    The Baillieu government is expected to face pressure for an extension of project deadlines as companies involved seek to minimise financial damage from delays. The contract stipulates that the plant must be able to produce desalinated water by December this year.

    The centrepiece of the former Labor government’s plan to drought-proof Melbourne, the massive project has been dogged by rain and wind………

    The controversial desal project is valued at $5.7 billion in today’s dollars but is expected to cost Victorians $24 billion over 28 years in nominal terms.

    Premier Ted Baillieu recently described the plant as a ”white elephant”, but said his government would not mothball it……….

  14. A party of ignorant extremists

    THE depth and longstanding nature of the Greens’ visceral hostility to Israel reveals something very unpleasant about the nature of the Greens themselves.

    They are essentially a party of extremists. Like most extremists operating in a democratic space, they try to garner support on broadly populist issues while still servicing their extremist activist base with extremist positions and campaigns.

    The language of a number of the Greens senators about Israel – rogue state, apartheid, should be boycotted – is the language of political sectarianism and prejudice.

    Read more

  15. Australian Labor government crisis deepens over carbon tax

    The Labor government of Prime Minister Julia Gillard confronts an escalating crisis over its proposed carbon tax. Hostility among working people is increasing, as the regressive impact of the tax becomes more widely understood. At the same time, the government’s key constituency—finance capital and big business—has expressed growing reservations, while powerful sectional corporate interests, such as the mining giants, are campaigning for billions more in “compensation”.

    Gillard’s carbon tax, like the emissions trading scheme advanced by her predecessor Kevin Rudd, has been promoted as a measure aimed at preventing climate change, but it will have no positive impact on the environment. ….

    Read more on the World Socialist Web Site

  16. Andy on May 7, 2011 at 6:44 pm said:

    In desperation, wheel out the celebs

    The carbon tax is sinking faster than a Pacific island, so as a last ditched attempt to resurrect it, the Gillard government is wheeling out Cate Blanchett, talented actress and crazy environmental moonbat that she is.
    The Weekend Australian understands the planned print, radio and television campaign is being supported by groups including Get Up!, Greenpeace, the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Southern Cross Climate Coalition, a conglomerate including the ACF, the Climate Institute and the Australian Council of Trade Unions

    What a truly hideous motely crew that lot is. The brainless lemmings of GetUp!, the eco-Nazis of Greenpeace and ACF, the pointless Climate Institute and a bunch of union thugs. Charming. Should put even more people off with a bit of luck

  17. Andy on May 7, 2011 at 10:01 pm said:

    IS Cory Bernardi the most conservative man in South Australia?

    Or perhaps Bernardi just likes a fight. Since becoming a Senator in 2006 he has made a name for himself nationally with his strident views on climate change, banning burqas, Islam in general and foul-mouthed Scottish chefs on television. He has been branded an extremist. A racist. A religious bigot. A climate-change denier. He has received death threats. He is hated by some within his own party. He has carved out a niche as South Australia’s “Mr Right” even if he shies away from the label.

    “I consider myself a conservative rather than right wing,” he says in his city office. It’s a claim that would be easier to swallow if the largest picture on his desk wasn’t one of former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher, a woman who defined a particularly fierce brand of right-wing political theory. Bernardi loves Thatcher. He has written to her, read her books and the highest compliment Bernardi pays his wife Sinead or mother Jo is to compare them to the Iron Lady. He is happy to describe himself as an “ideological warrior” but denies he is an extremist, a racist or a bigot. He is pleased, however, to celebrate his climate-change scepticism.

    I’ve been reading Cory Bernardi’s posts on facebook for a while now, and he seems pretty dialed-in to me. Maybe I am a “right-wing fanatic”, or perhaps just an average Joe in the street. You choose…

  18. Richard C (NZ) on May 14, 2011 at 1:00 am said:

    Cold blast has country shivering

    May 13, 2011 – 4:24PM

    The recent blast of cold air is having a wide-reaching effect, with unseasonable cold from Tasmania to the northern tropics.

    It has been at least 30 years since a series of cold fronts has had such an impact this early in the year, affecting almost every state and territory, Brett Dutschke, senior meteorologist at said.

    It’s been more than 50 years since Sydney, Canberra and even Mount Isa have been as cold this early in the year.

    About sunrise yesterday, Sydney was 7.9 degrees, Canberra was minus 5.3 degrees and Mount Isa was 4.7 degrees, Mr Dutschke said.

    It has been at least 40 years since Tennant Creek was as cold as 9.4 degrees this early in the year.

    One front, which moved through south-eastern Australia on Monday was followed very swiftly by a much stronger cold front less than two days later.

    Together they dried and chilled the atmosphere so much that the drier, colder air penetrated well into the tropics with far-reaching southerly winds.

    On Wednesday, Melbourne had its coldest day this early in the year since 1970, struggling to 12.2 degrees.

    It took until winds eased on Wednesday night and yesterday for the rest of eastern Australia to feel the effects of the extraordinary cold.

    While days will gradually warm up into next week, nights will remain chilly.

  19. A hard-hitting editorial exposing the shambles caused by the “climate change cargo cult”.

    HT Andrew Bolt, who points out that the media and Paul Kelly himself were cheerleaders:

  20. Andy on May 23, 2011 at 10:12 pm said:

    Time running out for climate action: report

    The Federal Government’s Climate Commission has warned the window for limiting future and costly climate change is rapidly closing.

    In its first report, titled The Critical Decade, the commission says the evidence that the planet is warming is now even stronger.

    It warns global warming could cause global sea levels to rise up to one metre by the end of the century, higher than previously thought.

    Chief commissioner Tim Flannery says humanity is almost surely the primary cause of global warming.

    “There’s agreement that there’s a temperature increase, there’s an agreement that it’s human-caused,” he said.

    “We have exactly eight years and seven months to meet our target of minus 5 per cent, which is a very ambitious target.”

    To minimise the risk, the commission says Australia must decarbonise its economy and move to clean energy sources by 2050.

    That means carbon emissions must peak in the next few years and then strongly decline.

    And while the report acknowledges the science is advancing strongly, it notes there are still questions in the public arena.

    “The public still seems to be confused about a few of those issues and I think that’s partly due to uninformed opinion,” Professor Flannery said.

    “You get all sorts of people posing as having some expertise in climate science, whether they be taxi drivers speaking to me or people in the media who don’t have the expertise.

    “That is clouding the waters a little bit and slowing things down.”

    Climate scientist and commissioner Professor Will Steffen is concerned the science is being muddied in the media by many with no credentials.

    “I don’t think we have the luxury anymore of climate denialism. We need to get beyond this fruitless phoney debate in the media,” he said.

    Professor Steffen says the decisions made between now and 2020 will determine the level of severity of global warming.

    “We’ve got to make some very important policy decisions,” he said.

    “We have to make some very important investment decisions this decade if we’re to take advantage of this fleeting last opportunity to get this situation under control.”

    The national director of the Youth Climate Coalition, Ellen Sandell, says the report shows the critical need for action now.

    “We really need to trust [people] who have decades of experience who are saying that it is caused by humans and we actually need to do something about it now,” she said.

    “Otherwise younger generations like my generation are not going to be able to have the same quality of life that our parents and grandparents have.”

    etc etc

  21. Andy on May 29, 2011 at 8:44 pm said:

    John Cook of “Skeptical Science” fame (and frequenter on Gareth R’s “The Climate Show” gets a good workover/skewering a WattsupWiththat

  22. Andy on May 30, 2011 at 3:26 pm said:

    Australian pro-Carbon tax propaganda

    Apparently, this is “Say Yes” week..

  23. val majkus on May 30, 2011 at 3:51 pm said:

    new take on that ad
    we want an election
    if that link doesn’t work try this one
    I prefer this version to the other one

  24. Andy on June 9, 2011 at 6:50 pm said:

    FARTING DEATH CAMELS MUST DIE to save the world!
    Carbon plan to unleash kill-choppers against dromedaries

    An Adelaide-based entrepreneur has hit upon a novel method of fighting global warming: he intends to exterminate Australia’s vast population of feral camels by means of gunfire from helicopters and jeeps, so preventing the beasts from unleashing a deadly planet-wrecking miasma of greenhouse gas from their rumbling guts.

    The idea is that the War On Dromedaries would be paid for – and indeed, turn a profit – by selling government carbon credits issued on the basis that a dead camel cannot be emitting methane by means of belch or trouser cough. Methane is a vastly more powerful greenhouse gas than CO2, so the elimination of even quite small sources of it can equate to a substantial carbon-emissions reduction.

    In fact, according to the calculations of Tim Moore – managing director of Oz firm Northwest Carbon – the campaign against the camels would yield substantial results indeed. He calculates that each of the feral dromedaries roaming Australia’s mostly desolate interior belches or farts out no less than 45kg of methane each year, equating to a thumping tonne of CO2. On average, each camel assassination will prevent the equivalent of 15 tonnes of carbon emissions.

  25. Mike Jowsey on June 28, 2011 at 10:36 am said:

    An open report to the PM of Aus from The Fair Farming Group in response to the Garnaut report.

    In preparing this analysis The Fair Farming Group brings extensive agricultural,
    commercial and scientific experience to the issues covered by the Review of the Science
    of Climate Change Update 2011 submitted by Professor Ross Garnaut.

  26. Mike Jowsey on June 28, 2011 at 10:50 am said:

    From the above-linked report, something new to me which may well apply to NZ temperature record:

    Temperatures rose in Australia during the last century by 0.8° centigrade, however 0.5° of this increase was caused by the Great Pacific Climate Shift of 1976-77, an event identified by oceanographers as a part of the Pacific Decadal Oscillation that is recognised by the IPCC as not related to increasing atmospheric CO2. After allowing for the Great Pacific Climate Shift, the temperature increase attributed by climate modellers to rising CO2 as the primary cause, is then 0.3° centigrade for the century, not the full measured 0.8° centigrade increase.

  27. Andy on June 28, 2011 at 6:22 pm said:

    I am not sure that the IPCC would recognise that only 0.3 deg can be attributed to GHG forcing, as it would contradict their position that “most of the warming of the 20th Century is likely of an anthropogenic origin”

  28. Andy on July 4, 2011 at 5:45 pm said:

    Greens’ plan to shut down coal industry to cost Australia 200,000 jobs, $36b a year in GDP

    THE Greens’ push to shut down the coal industry could severely undermine the nation’s economy and sacrifice 200,000 jobs, new economic modelling warns.

    As the party takes to Federal Parliament today with unprecedented numbers and wielding the balance of power in the Senate, fresh research finds that leader Bob Brown’s policy to phase out coal mining would slash GDP by up to $36 billion a year.

    This equates to a $6 billion dent in the national Budget.

    The damning report by economists from the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, commissioned by the Minerals Council, said Greens economic policies had “generally” managed to avoid close scrutiny.

    Senator Brown yesterday declared the eve of the Greens’ record presence in Parliament a “green-letter day”, with the party to wield unprecedented power over the Government.

  29. Andy on July 7, 2011 at 9:19 pm said:

    The ABC on how geothermal will save the world

    Unfortunately,, what they miss is that geothermal emits CO2, and their dear cousins NZ tax it under the ETS

  30. Jim McK on July 7, 2011 at 10:05 pm said:

    Interesting piece Andy.

    The focus of their geothermal industry is a bit different from ours which is volcanic based and in the right circumstances seems to be quite profitable despite the fact that it belches a modest amount of CO2.

    Theirs is in fact a hot rock technology were water is pumped deep over subterranean hot (warm actually) granite. It is probably pretty clean but also has the problem of producing low grade heat – 96C – which is notoriouly hard to make money from. The only thing that makes it viable – as with most alternate energies is subsidies – in this case carbon credits.

    The fact that warm rock technology shares are now 10% of what they where in 2007 is I suspect a legitimate concern over whether the carbon credit saviour will come to pass.

  31. Richard C (NZ) on July 9, 2011 at 9:44 am said:

    Australian children are being terrified by climate change lessons

    * By Bruce McDougall and Jenny Dillon
    * From: The Daily Telegraph
    * July 09, 2011

    “(Children) feel incredibly despondent and helpless in the face of all this negative information,” she said. “To put all of this before our children … is one of the most appalling things we can do to (them).

    Child psychologist Kimberley O’Brien also said the language of climate change should be “toned down”.

    “(Educators) should stick to the facts,” she said.

    “They should be aware that kids do have nightmares.”

    Psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg called on educators to be “more circumspect and present both sides (of the climate-change debate)”.

    “When you repeat things over and over to young people who don’t have the cognitive maturity and emotional maturity to process this stuff, you end up creating unnecessary anxiety,” he said.

    Read more:

  32. Andy on July 9, 2011 at 7:23 pm said:

    If anyone needs to be done for “high crimes against humanity”, it is those who indoctrinate children for political gain.

  33. Australian children are being terrified by climate change lessons

    PRIMARY school children are being terrified by lessons claiming climate change will bring “death, injury and destruction” to the world unless they take action.

    On the eve of Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s carbon tax package announcement, psychologists and scientists said the lessons were alarmist, created unneeded anxiety among school children and endangered their mental health.

    Climate change as a “Doomsday scenario” is being taught in classrooms across Australia.

    Resource material produced by the Gillard government for primary school teachers and students states climate change will cause “devastating disasters”.

    Australian National University’s Centre for the Public Awareness of Science director Dr Sue Stocklmayer said climate change had been portrayed as “Doomsday scenarios with no way out”.

    Read more:

  34. Mike Jowsey on July 21, 2011 at 2:15 pm said:

    Lubos Motl announces the Czech president’s upcoming Australian tour:

  35. Andy on July 22, 2011 at 1:32 pm said:

    Peer-reviewed paper from Australia shows that sea-level rise is decelerating in Australasia

  36. Australis on July 22, 2011 at 4:58 pm said:

    And that paper is by the principal scientist for the NSW Government, and covers all of Australasia.

    So, if local sea levels will rise by only 0.15cm by 2100, why are planning authorities re-writing all the rules for coastal development?

    And why is a ‘carbon tax’ needed?

  37. Andy on July 22, 2011 at 7:19 pm said:

    “Why is a Carbon Tax needed?”
    Good question Australis
    Pielke Jr has calculated that it is mathematically impossible to deliver the emissions reductions in Australia by energy policy, hence purchase of overseas credits will be required.

    This graph from the ABC confirms this:-

    i.e a massive wealth transfer out of Australia, the “unlucky country”.

  38. Richard C (NZ) on July 22, 2011 at 7:25 pm said:

    125 comments when I looked and worth a scan, big issue in Port Albert.

    Donna of Port Albert Posted at 10:10 AM Today

    Whilst the debate rages about who is talking, what motives are abreast or is the science valid or not? I would like to say to all whom have commented so far on this story, where is your consideration of the human impact element? We in this town (Port Albert) have had our life savings sapped, asset values for homes and land have plummeted by close to 50% and people are watching their livelihoods disintegrate before their very eyes pushing them into despair. Wake up and give a toss about fellow Aussies caught up in this charade, the science can catch up later!!!

    The NZ paper “Auckland: A Case Study in the Regional Assessment of Long-Term Sea Level Change”, Hannah, Bell and Paulik 2011, cites Watson 2010 so that must be the paper in the article.

    The most recent analysis of the Auckland data (Watson, 2010, Cole, 2010) reveals no acceleration in the rate of sea level rise. Indeed, their analyses suggest a slight positive acceleration in the early-mid 20th Century followed by a slight negative acceleration in recent years.


    It is particularly relevant to note that the New Zealand and United Kingdom tide gauge data show no evidence of a recent acceleration in sea level rise. Indeed, the emerging picture in these regions is one of acceleration in sea level rise in the early part of the 20th century, followed, if anything, by a deceleration in the latter part of the century (Watson, 2010; Woodworth et al., 2009).


    …..the slight deceleration in sea level rise perhaps present in the latter part of the 20th century in the Auckland data is consistent with results obtained both in the UK (Woodworth, 2009) and from the Freemantle tide gauge (Watson, 2010).

    The citation is:-

    Watson, P. J. (2010). Is there any evidence yet of acceleration in mean sea level rise around
    mainland Australia? In preparation, Journal of Coastal Research.

    The article says:-

    “Mr Watson’s findings, published in the Journal of Coastal Research this year”

    The Ministry for the Environment referred me to HBP11 in support of their case for man-made climate change but I don’t think they realized how often the word “deceleration” was used in conjunction with sea level rise. I pointed that out to them but haven’t heard from them since.

  39. Richard C (NZ) on July 24, 2011 at 1:03 am said:

    See “Sea level rise is normal, my friends” for Tamino’s post on Watson 2011 “How Not to Analyze Tide Gauge Data”:-

    This might develop into a refutation of Watson 2011 and Hannah, Bell, Paulik 2011 in regard to Australasian sea level deceleration in recent years for Fremantle at least and maybe Auckland.

  40. Richard C (NZ) on July 26, 2011 at 6:50 pm said:

    Climate refugees in Australia.

    Farmers claim wind turbines made them sick

    Noel Dean and his family left their farm in Waubra, about 30 kilometres north of Ballarat, after experiencing constant headaches when turbines went up two kilometres away from their home.

    “We’re refugees in our own country, we’re leaving here because of danger,” he told ABC TV’s Four Corners program on Monday.

    Read more:

  41. Mike Jowsey on July 28, 2011 at 4:47 pm said:

    “in australia this week, we have had visits from CAGW sceptic, Czech President Vaclav Klaus, and former British PM and CAGW believer,Tony Blair. our Prime Minister refused to meet the former, but chose to meet the latter.”

  42. Mike Jowsey on July 30, 2011 at 6:11 pm said:

    An absolutely brilliant article by Jo Nova, published in the Weekend Australian.

    Climate change suspect must be given a fair trial
    GOVERNMENTS across the world have paid billions to find links between carbon dioxide and the climate, but very little to find the opposite, and that’s a problem.
    Teams of professionals have searched high and low for any possible hint that CO2 poses a threat, and that is all very well, but no one has been paid to find otherwise. CO2 has been convicted without a defence lawyer.

  43. Eureka moment for leading climate change communicator
    University of Queensland alumnus Mr John Cook, the creator of and a new appointment to UQ’s Global Change Institute (GCI), has been named as a finalist in the 2011 Australian Museum Eureka Prizes.

    Mr Cook, a finalist for the NSW Government Eureka Prize for Advancement of Climate Change Knowledge is Research Fellow in Climate Change Communication at the GCI.

    The prize is awarded to an Australian individual, group or organisation for work that motivates action to reduce the impacts of climate change. Winners in all categories will be announced on Tuesday, September 6.

    In his new position Mr Cook will focus on the effective communication of the science around climate change and, working with the GCI team, enhance the delivery and use of evidence-based information by business, government and the wider community.

    blah blah

    Now here’s Simon@ACM’s take:

    and the uncompromising Lobos Motl:

    This guy has no clue about the climate science or atmospheric physics but he has gained some notoriety for his mass production of talking points meant to spread the climate panic and produce doubts about well-established scientific insights that show that there is no reason to be worried about climate change.

    His newest list of the talking points claims that 166 independent quantities describing the climate have the uniformly right sign that suggest that the catastrophe is coming and worse than previously thought. The probability that 166 independent signs agree is 1/2^165 but Cook still claims that this coincidence does hold in the real world. 😉

    Everyone who fails to see that Cook is full of **it must be a complete idiot.

    (Don’t you just love Lubos? No BS Czech at its best)

  44. For those that follow the antics of John Cook and his Skeptical Science website (recent winner of the Eureka prize), this doesn’t sound very good:

  45. Richard C (NZ) on September 24, 2011 at 10:59 am said:

    Labor censors Dr Dennis Jensen — denies peer reviewed science

    Dr JENSEN (Tangney) (12:33): Speech to Parliament

    Madam Deputy Speaker Burke, I seek leave to table these peer reviewed science reports.

    Leave not granted.

    Jensen is the only PhD scientist in the Australian Parliament and the papers are directly relevant to the policy under discussion.

    Dennis Jensen has been warning us about climate science for years, his earlier warnings have turned out to be prescient, and ahead of his time — speaking out when few dared too. He deserves credit for his honesty and insight. Parliament could use more people like him.


    John Boscawen, Don Brash et al, let’s see if NZ National denies the science.

  46. The corks are popping in Canberra tonight. Julia’s the toast of the town. But soon she’ll be toast of a different kind. Kevin’s Judas-kiss following today’s vote didn’t fool anyone. And arrogantly, Julia says the Carbon Tax is permanent, but we won’t be fooled by that rhetoric. She’s just lying again – surprise, surprise.

    Some people are saying democracy is dead in Australia. It’s not dead. It’s been kicked, mugged, abused, violated, and it may be in a coma and on life support. But as long as there are elections, it’s not dead. So go have your drink or a lie down or both. Then let’s get busy…

    Because we have a country to save.

  47. Welcome to Australia’s Kafka-esque new world (h/t Bob Carter)

    Senator JOYCE (Queensland—Leader of The Nationals in the Senate) (16:37): I have had the joy—and that is a cynical way of putting it—of seeing some of this garbage that has been presented to our nation and that, apparently, we are to look at in globo. I would be fascinated to go through some of the details of some of these things because, apparently, we do not need to see them in seriatim—we are right across it. It is all a piece of cake.
    This is interesting:
    (1) A person who is or was required to provide a report under section 22E for an eligible financial year must keep records of the person’s activities that:
    (a) allow the person to report accurately under section 22E; and
    (b) enable the Regulator to ascertain whether the person has complied with the person’s obligations under section 22E; and
    (c) comply with the requirements of subsection (2) and the regulations made for the purposes of subsection (3).
    The civil penalty is 1,000 penalty units. It further states: ‘The person must retain the records for five years from the end of the financial year’ and on and on it goes. Look at it: it is like Kafka’s Castle. The place we have arrived at is amazing.
    What about the EMEP test day? It is defined under section 63B(3) as follows:
    In the income year of claim, this day is the day on which the claimant makes the claim for the payment. In subsequent income years, the EMEP test day is the anniversary of the day on which the claimant made the claim in a previous year, provided that, since the claimant made the claim, the Repatriation Commission has not determined that the claimant has ceased to be eligible for the payment. If the Repatriation Commission has determined that the claimant is no longer …
    And on and on it goes. Apparently, the government are all across it. They are the absolute full bottle on this. It is all right—straight through. I would love to ask the Prime Minister about some of these details and I would love to ask Minister Combet. They would not have the foggiest idea, apart from what has been sent to them on their BlackBerries. They have the BlackBerry message all worked out, but they would not know about the legislation. You can bet your life that this will be an absolute and utter debacle. But this is what they are doing to our nation.
    These are the redesigned plans for the nation of Australia, for our economy. Here they are, set up by the people who could not get fluffy stuff into the ceiling, without setting fire to 194 houses and, tragically, killing four people. This redesign of our nation’s economy is being undertaken by the same people who gave us the Building the Education Revolution. This redesign of our economy is being undertaken by the same people who conducted a war against obesity. Remember that? We are still wondering: did we achieve detente, did we win, did we lose? Or are we going to have a second war on obesity? This is what the Australian Labor Party has delivered to us via the Australian Greens, because the Greens are now running the show.
    Some sections of this legislation could be terminal for them, because they have become so soulless and, once you start being guided by the Greens, you completely isolate yourself from your conservative working-class voters, who will just leave you. Look at all this! It is just absolutely amazing. Now come the nasty bits. I am just opening it up. Under the heading ‘Scheme to avoid future liability to pay administrative penalty—Intention’, it states:
    (1) A person commits an offence if—
    and we are seeing a lot of the word ‘offence’ in this—
    a. a penalty is due and payable by a body corporate or trust under section 212; and
    b. before the penalty became due and payable, the person entered into a scheme; and
    c. the person entered into the scheme with the intention of securing or achieving the result, either … the body corporate or trust:
    i. will be unable; or
    ii. will be likely to be unable; or
    iii. will continue to be unable; or
    iv. will be likely to continue to be unable;
    And on and on it goes. Then comes imprisonment for 10 years. This is a nasty little document you have got yourself here, which bangs you up in the can for 10 years, and we are just supposed to look at it in globo because, apparently, you are so over it.
    Minister Wong looks totally competent. I would bet you London to a brick that the government have not read the legislation. I bet you London to a brick they have not a clue what is in the legislation. We might want to ask the government questions about who they are going to bang up for 10 years. I think a lot of Australian people would like to know the answer to the question: ‘Are the Labor Party about to bring in a piece of legislation which, if I get wrong, I could be in the slammer for 10 years?’ Also, ‘ I want you to more fully disclose to me what is on page 324 of the Clean Energy Bill 2011.’
    And the Greens are part of this. They do not believe in transparency. They are sitting there with that stupid smirk on their faces. Their leader ‘Dr Brown’ thinks this is all fun and games and that this is what you do—you just let these things run through.
    Here is another quote with respect to retaining records:
    (2) The person must retain the records for 5 years from the end of the financial year …
    (3) The regulations may specify requirements relating to:
    (a) the kinds of records; and
    (b) the form of records—
    and how the records must be kept. The penalty is two years imprisonment. This is what we are getting! It is here, Australia; it has arrived. Aren’t the Labor Party wonderful people? In a brief perusal of this Kafka’s nightmare, I see you get 10 years in prison for one offence, two years in prison for another offence. This is the world the Labor Party live in. This is where we are off to, as they redesign our nation’s economy on a colourless, odourless gas. You better not lose any. Do not steal any. What is the price of breathing these days? It must become more expensive. Are we going to keep records on that? I thought this was 2011. It is starting to sound awfully like 1984, with this almost Orwellian type of Big Brother approach to every facet of our lives. The government can increase this tax, without it ever having to go back to this parliament. It does not have to go back to this parliament. They have got around that.
    We cannot have the nation of Australia and its parliament having oversight of the tax! If they have to launch their attack against the climate, making the world colder from a room in Canberra, they can jack up the tax to rise to the challenge, and in rising to the challenge they make every person in Australia with a power point poorer. Every corner of their house will become a collection mechanism for the Australian Taxation Office. And of course they have to collect some friends along the way, so down the track they will have an emissions trading scheme. That is great, isn’t it? The banks will love that: moving paper here, moving paper there. The banks are doing it tough; it is good to see the Greens looking after the big banks and giving them a multibillion dollar revenue stream from trading the permits.
    The friends of big banks are the Australian Greens, because they are doing it tough and they need all the help they can get. You are about to do it. You have moralised and got it through your head that it is right to tax someone in a weatherboard and iron house out in the suburbs, that it is right to collect money from them and to funnel it to someone who is probably doing very well thank you very much, and God bless them and good luck to them, and probably does not need that person’s money. You are going to funnel that money to Martin Place. We do not need it in Mount Druitt when it can be in Martin Place. We do not need it in Cunnamulla when it can be in Martin Place. We do not need that money up in Bundaberg when it can be in George Street. This is a bonanza. I cannot wait to see who the geniuses are, the luminaries on the other side who will be able to answer some of these questions.
    The way they are getting around it is that they are not allowing us to ask any questions. We had the first example of that today with the guillotine: they shall not ask questions on behalf of the Australian people. The job of the opposition in most instances is, naturally enough, to oppose, to see if you are prudent and across the facts. Because you are not, how are you dealing with that? You are launching yourselves into this guillotine. What is so nauseating is that we had to listen to the Leader of the Greens, Dr Bob Brown. He supported the guillotine with that stupid smirk on his face. Here is a quote from that same person:
    Let there be no doubt about this: the government can—
    Senator Milne: Madam Acting Deputy President, I raise a point of order. I draw your attention to standing order 193, ‘Rules of debate’:
    A senator shall not use offensive words … all imputations of improper motives and all personal reflections on … members or officers shall be considered highly disorderly.
    In the light of that, I would ask Senator Joyce to desist from making remarks of a personal nature about Senator Bob Brown and withdraw what he already has said.
    Senator JOYCE: If he did not smirk, I am happy to. If there is anything that is offensive there I certainly—

    Read more….

  48. There is an interesting post up on Bishop Hill about Australian temperatures and new statistical analysis of it:

  49. Richard C (NZ) on November 17, 2011 at 4:11 pm said:

    Smoke and mirrors hide the ugly truth

    * by: Miranda Devine
    * From: Herald Sun
    * November 17, 2011 12:00AM

    THE whitewash begins. Now that the carbon tax has passed through Parliament, the Government’s clean-up brigade is getting into the swing, trying to erase any dissent against the jobs-destroying legislation.

    On cue, comes the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, which this week issued warnings to businesses that they will face whopping fines of up to $1.1 million if they blame the carbon tax for price rises.

    The watchdog says it has been “directed by the Australian Government to undertake a compliance and enforcement role in relation to claims made about the impact of a carbon price”.

    Businesses are not even allowed to throw special carbon tax sales promotions before the tax arrives on July 1.

    “Beat the Carbon Tax – Buy Now”, or “Our prices will be hit hard when the carbon price comes in”, or “Buy now before the carbon tax bites” are all examples of sales pitches that are verboten.

    Or at least, as the ACCC puts it: “You should be very cautious about making these types of claims”.

    There will be 23 “Carbon Cops” roaming the streets doing snap audits of businesses that “choose to link your price increases to a carbon price”. Instead, the ACCC helpfully suggests you can just tell your customers you’ve raised prices because “the overall cost of running (your) business has increased”.

    It’s all very Orwellian. The tax whose name cannot be spoken.


    t doesn’t matter how many fairy stories the Greens tell about how the carbon tax will “save” the Great Barrier Reef and Kakadu. Or how many gullible people believe hurricanes, floods, earthquakes are due to man-made global warming.

    Eventually the truth will out.

    Even the International Panel on Climate Change, whose bureaucrat-written summaries cherry-pick the most alarming scientific forecasts, is holding back in the face of runaway alarmist rhetoric from politicians.

    In fact, leaked draft copies of the IPCC’s latest special report into “Extreme Events and Disasters” reveal declining scientific certainty about the threat of human-produced greenhouse gases.


  50. Richard C (NZ) on December 13, 2011 at 8:51 am said:

    Howard lends support to anti-climate change book

    Former prime minister John Howard has lent his support to a book aimed at school children which argues the theory of human-induced global warming is a scam.

    Last night, the former prime minister launched the publication, the latest from controversial geologist Professor Ian Plimer.

    The book, called How to Get Expelled From School, rejects the predominant scientific opinion on climate change.

    The book is billed as “an anti-global warmist manual for the younger reader”.

    Professor Plimer launched the book, a follow up to his book Heaven and Earth, at the Sydney Mining Club.

    The new work includes 101 questions which it says students can use to challenge their teachers on climate science.

    Professor Plimer says worried parents prompted him to write the book.

    “After Heaven and Earth came out I had many parents write to me and say, ‘Look, what do we do, our kids are being fed activism. I want my children to have the basics of scientists, I don’t want to be fed activism’,” he said.


  51. Richard C (NZ) on December 26, 2011 at 8:36 am said:

    2008 Shock News : Rain Is A Thing Of The Past In Australia

    Posted on December 25, 2011 by Steven Goddard

    This drought may never break

    Richard Macey
    January 4, 2008

    IT MAY be time to stop describing south-eastern Australia as gripped by drought and instead accept the extreme dry as permanent, one of the nation’s most senior weather experts warned yesterday.

    “Perhaps we should call it our new climate,” said the Bureau of Meteorology’s head of climate analysis, David Jones.

  52. Richard C (NZ) on January 25, 2012 at 6:35 pm said:

    Queensland flooding being topical, now might be a good time to revisit this report from the Queensland Government, Office of Climate Change:-

    ClimateQ: toward a greener Queensland

    Suggest, ‘Download ClimateQ by Chapter’

    And select ‘Chapter 4: Observed and projected climate change’

    Rainfall projections

    There is significant uncertainty associated with rainfall projections for Queensland under future climate change scenarios. For example by 2050, the projected annual rainfall changes range from close to zero in the far north, to as much as a 10 per cent decline in the south (Figure 4.13). By 2070, the projected changes range from a 1 per cent decrease in the far north to as much as a 25 per cent decrease in the south in the spring (Figure 4.14).

    In addition to projected changes to the average rainfall over time, the frequency of wet days will decrease and the frequency of dry days will increase (CSIRO & BoM, 2007).


    South Eastern Australian Climate Initiative

    SEACI Future Hydroclimate Projections



    The median (best estimate) indicates that future mean annual runoff in the SEACI region in ~2030 relative to ~1990 will be lower, by zero to 20 percent in the north-east and southern half, and by 10 to 30 per cent in Victoria. Averaged across the SEACI region, the median (best estimate) is an eight per cent decrease in mean annual runoff.

    “Greener” yes – but not the way they thought.

  53. Richard C (NZ) on January 27, 2012 at 1:49 pm said:

    And this from 2007 ‘Australian of the year’ Dr Tim Flannery:-

    Andi Hazelwood: Today you would probably say that there is no doubt that drought is very closely related to climate change, is that true?

    Dr. Tim Flannery: Yes, that’s right. The pattern that we’re seeing now in the weather in Australia is very much the pattern was predicted by computer models as much as a decade ago.

    Andi Hazelwood: Should Australia be preparing for permanent drought conditions?

    Dr. Tim Flannery: Well, it’s the new climate. We will have to get by with less water. The CSIRO’s telling us that. We’re seeing it now, in the evidence before our eyes in our rivers and creeks, and of course the computer models in the global models have been predicting just this now for some years. I think all evidence says that this is our new climate and we have to get by with less water than we’ve ever had before.

    Tim Flannery flannelisms

    “…a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, … is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we’re getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that’s translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers… So even the rain that falls isn’t actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that’s a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we’re going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation”

    Interview February 2007 with ABC

  54. Richard C (NZ) on January 29, 2012 at 11:55 am said:

    And this from The Climate Institute, ‘A Climate of Suffering: the real cost of living with inaction on climate change’ 2011 (Professor David Karoly at the University of Melbourne provided physical scientific peer review):-


    The world is warming at a rate unprecedented in history. Global air temperatures, humidity and rainfall patterns show a distinct ‘fingerprint‘ that cannot be explained in the absence of the rise in emissions in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases caused by human activity. Unless trends are reversed, and soon, it is difficult to see how large parts of the country can avoid falling into more or less permanent drought by this century’s end

    At this point it’s worth ingesting a healthy dose of 2011 reality from the BOM’s ‘Annual Australian Climate Statement 2011’:-

    A tale of two La Niñas – Australia’s second-wettest two-year period on record

    Rainfall during 2011 was very much above average across most of Australia, with record high falls over the Kimberley, south-eastern and central Western Australia, and across parts of the north of the Northern Territory. Based on preliminary numbers, 2011 was the third-wettest year on record for Australia as a whole and the Northern Territory, second-wettest for Western Australia, and fourth-wettest for northern Australia (north of 26°S).

    A very heavy tropical monsoon season was associated with exceptional summer rainfall over most of Australia. Victoria recorded its wettest January in 112 years of records and its third-wettest February (highest statewide total since 1973). February was also the second wettest on record for Australia and Western Australia, and the wettest on record for South Australia. March was the wettest on record for Australia as a whole, as well as for the Northern Territory and Queensland, and the third-wettest for South Australia.

    Even as the La Niña decayed from late April, the Kimberley and the north of the Northern Territory continued to see very much above average rainfall. All states recorded below average May rainfall. June was notable for the lack of rainfall in the southeast – the main rainfall deficiencies observed in 2011 occurred during winter and early spring in the southeast of Australia.

    As has occurred several times in the historical record, La Niña conditions redeveloped during spring and continued beyond the end of 2011. Although it was significantly weaker than the 2010-2011 event, it has occurred in conjunction with record warm conditions across the eastern Indian Ocean. October was very wet in the western half of the country, while November rainfall was generally above to very much average in most regions except for coastal Queensland. December rainfall was very much above average for much of southwest Western Australia, with some inland parts recording highest falls on record. Above average December rainfall was also recorded over much of Queensland and adjacent areas of the Northern Territory, South Australia and New South Wales.

    “The real cost of living with inaction on climate change” as I see Australia 2011, would be being caught out not having purchased a raincoat or umbrella, gumboots, and possibly a boat.

  55. What an astonishing mismatch between reality as reported by the BOM and what seem rather stupid prognostications from the Climate Institute!

  56. Richard C (NZ) on January 29, 2012 at 8:04 pm said:

    The other reason, apart from the mismatch, of these bring-up files is the “warmer air holds more water” riposte that is inevitably ventured by layman man-made extreme weather exponents to explain the Queensland floods say..

    That is true but there’s several other factors explaining the rainfall (e.g. SST) and the warm air obviously does not “hold” the water that has precipitated out.

    I came across that argument recently by “renewable guy” at Climate Change Dispatch but what these people conveniently forget (or don’t know in the first place) is that the CSIRO and BOM CO2-based model predictions were for hot and dry – not hot and wet.

    We have on record, Flannery happily going along with a “permanent drought” scenario (citing CSIRO) and Karoly associated with “more or less permanent drought” along with “the frequency of wet days will decrease and the frequency of dry days will increase (CSIRO & BoM, 2007)”. The latter report is:-

    Climate change in Australia: technical report 2007–Atmospheric-Research/Climate-Change-Technical-Report-2007.aspx

    Worth keeping these reports in mind for future altercations.

  57. The Australian” What you can’t hear can’t hurt you

    WHEN American noise expert Robert Rand turned up to work in Maine, in the US northeast, in April to investigate the impact of wind turbines on nearby residents he was literally blown away.

    Not only did Rand’s readings confirm many fears in the community, he claims to have become an unwitting victim himself.

    A member of the Institute of Noise Control Engineering and a technician with 30 years’ experience, Rand was working for a philanthropic donor wanting to investigate why wind turbines were causing so much concern.

    Rand told The Australian yesterday his experience had been unexpected. He had measured the noise from wind turbines on many previous occasions without difficulty but, in testimony to the State of Maine Board of Environmental Protection in July, Rand said the turbines had delivered “a miserable and unnerving experience”.

    When indoors, Rand and long-time colleague Stephen Ambrose, also a Member of INCE, experienced “nausea, loss of appetite, headache, vertigo, dizziness, inability to concentrate, an overwhelming desire to get outside and anxiety, over a two-night period from Sunday, April 17 to Tuesday, April 19”.

  58. Richard C (NZ) on January 30, 2012 at 1:31 pm said:

    More on CSIRO and BOM shortcomings at ‘Meteorology’ here:-

    Inquiry into long-term meteorological forecasting in Australia

    Recommendation 1
    The Committee recommends that CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology provide to the Australian Government a report with detailed explanatory information as to why a particular dynamic forecasting model or system was chosen for use in Australia.

  59. Richard C (NZ) on February 22, 2012 at 11:53 am said:

    Seen at JoNova (‘Gleick Admits’):-

    February 21, 2012 at 10:03 pm · Reply

    On BoltA’s blog, comment posters from the drenched parts of NSW are already replacing ‘inches’ with ‘Flannerys’.

  60. Richard C (NZ) on March 3, 2012 at 8:13 pm said:

    From The Age, August 30, 2009

    SCIENTISTS studying Victoria’s crippling drought have, for the first time, proved the link between rising levels of greenhouse gases and the state’s dramatic decline in rainfall.

    A three-year collaboration between the Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO has confirmed what many scientists long suspected: that the 13-year drought is not just a natural dry stretch but a shift related to climate change.

    Scientists working on the $7 million South Eastern Australian Climate Initiative…………

    But to see what role greenhouse gases played in the recent intensification, the scientists used sophisticated American computer climate models……..

    ”In the minds of a lot of people, the rainfall we had in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s was a benchmark. A lot of our [water and agriculture] planning was done during that time. But we are just not going to have that sort of good rain again as long as the system is warming up.”

    But not all experts agree. Murray-Darling Basin Authority chief Rob Freeman told a water summit in Melbourne last week he believed the extreme climate patterns that have dried out south-east Australia would not prove to be permanent.

    ”Some commentators say this is the new future. I think that is an extreme position and probably a position that’s not helpful to take,” he said, expressing confidence that wetter times would return.

    Read more:

    I’m sure they used “sophisticated” models based on the UK Met Office UKMO but does that really matter?

  61. Richard C (NZ) on March 3, 2012 at 8:32 pm said:

    It’s raining Aussie climate cash

    AUSTRALIA will spend $600 million developing climate change “leaders” in the Pacific, producing DVDs and writing policy briefs for overseas bureaucrats. Caribbean and African countries will receive millions of Australian dollars to help tackle climate change…

    [I could be a climate change “leader”]

    H/t Tom Nelson (who else?)

  62. Richard C (NZ) on March 11, 2012 at 10:48 am said:

    But this desal madness was clear at the time. Where were the experts?

    Andrew Bolt
    Saturday, March 10, 2012 at 08:03am

    It’s all very well to point out the financially-bleeding obvious now, but where were the experts when a few of us were trying to stop this madness before it was too late?

    VICTORIA would need to be in drought for eight years before a drop of water was required from the Wonthaggi desalination plant, scientists say.

    But taxpayers will pay more than $5 billion in that time to have access to the water.

    As floods swamp the northeast, critics have questioned why the plant was built.

    Prof Hector Malano, a water resource management expert at the University of Melbourne, said …”Desalination is the last option that you want to use…”

    There are two things we need to know. First, how did the maniacs in the then Labor Government come to decide on a hideously expensive desalination plant rather than a cheap dam? Second, how was almost all scientific and engineering dissent suppressed or muffled?

    Is the very same process now occurring on an even vaster scale with the carbon dioxide tax?

    “Permanent” El Nino prediction documented in Nat Geo here:-

    2009 Scientific Consensus : El Nino To Become Permanent

    ENSO has been negative continuously since May, 2010 [just gone neutral I think] – and has been negative for 38 out of the last 52 months.

    Nowhere to hide now.

  63. Richard C (NZ) on March 11, 2012 at 4:55 pm said:

    Dam full but desalination plant on line at $500m a year

    Rachel Browne, Heath Aston

    IT WILL be more than four years before the Sydney desalination plant [Kurnell] produces a drop of water again, if the water level at Warragamba Dam declines at the same rate as the last time it topped out in August 1998.

    Even if levels drop at the same rate as the fastest decline it would be two years before the dam falls to 70 per cent – the point at which the desalination plant would be turned on.

    Assuming the former rate, a private owner of the plant – to be announced by the State Government this year – will take more than $500 million from NSW taxpayers without producing a litre of water.

    Based on estimates from the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, a private sector owner would take $591 million in ”availability charges” from Sydney Water – payment for keeping the plant available.

    Taking away fixed costs, including $1.1 million a month to be paid to the plant’s operator, Veolia Water, and financing debt on the expected $1.1 billion price tag – which excludes a possible privatisation of the $600 million pipeline – a little over $50 million a year will go to the owners in profit.

    Read more:

    $50m profit from nil production – nice.

  64. Richard C (NZ) on April 6, 2012 at 11:47 am said:

    Good news: the Department of Climate Change will scrap up to 300 jobs.

    Bad news: there’ll still be 600 of em left.

  65. Bob Brown has resigned as leader of the Australian Greens

  66. Richard C (NZ) on April 19, 2012 at 8:25 am said:

    HERE’S proof the climate really is changing. The Melbourne Theatre Company is putting on a play next month with a global warming sceptic as the hero. Swear to God.

    Andrew Bolt

    As the MTC describes it: “Dr Diane Cassell is a serious scientist lecturing in what has become the cool degree at university; Climate Science…

    “For nearly 20 years, Diane has been measuring sea levels in the Maldives.

    “When her empirical data contradicts the prevailing view on the causes for climate change, she finds herself pressured by her funding-driven boss, Professor Kevin Maloney, not to publish her findings.”

    That plot is straight from reality.

    Dr Nils Axel-Morner, one of the world’s greatest authorities on sea levels, has done just this research at the Maldives.

    And top Australian physicist Prof Brian O’Brien last year warned of the pressure on scientists to conform to the warming faith, telling of a colleague who’d confessed: “Brian, I completely support what you’re saying, but I have 65 researchers in my laboratory and the only funding I can get for them and to get their PhDs is greenhouse funding from Canberra or wherever.”

  67. Mike Jowsey on April 19, 2012 at 12:17 pm said:

    Aha! Exactly what we skeptics have known all along. This is the real reason for corruption of science. These department heads are corrupt gravy-train trough-slurpers who care nothing for the integrity of the scientific method. Grow some and harden up you parasites. Universities should be funded by a generic education-targeted source rather than scholarships, grants and junkets handed out by politically-driven bureaucrats according to the agenda-du-jour.

    RC – that link goes to the headline only, with a login required. Seems the Herald Sun now paywalls its articles. 🙁

  68. Richard C (NZ) on April 19, 2012 at 12:50 pm said:

    Odd. I get the full article when I click on the link via the Google Reader CCG feed (you’ve got to get that Mike) but paywall login when I click on the same link via the the CCG blog comment.

    You can get the full article by copying the headline “Arts warming to climate sceptics” into Google News and searching for it (comes up top of list).

    That works for me (also for WSJ) but I’d be interested to see it if it doesn’t for others.

  69. Mike Jowsey on April 20, 2012 at 12:13 am said:

    What’s Google?

    Anyhoo, thanks for the tip. Using a reputable search engine, I found the article reproduced in full on GWPF here:

    Many thanks.

  70. Mike Jowsey on June 22, 2012 at 11:41 am said:

    Here is one of the best blog posts I have ever read. It is on Jo Nova’s article regarding Paul Bain’s use of “Denier” in a Nature paper. Worth the 10 mins to read. In fact, worth its own article!

  71. Andy on June 22, 2012 at 1:49 pm said:

    There was quite a lot on this topic at Bishop Hill.

    I think it underlines the state of groupthink when the author says it is “accepted practice” to use the term “denier” in his field

  72. Richard C (NZ) on June 22, 2012 at 7:09 pm said:

    Whew! Dead right Mike. E.M. Smith is Cheifio BTW and Joanne has in fact turned the comment into a post article

    Yet ANOTHER outside specialist decrying the shoddy state of climate science; this time a computer programmer/economist and marketer of same (with patents no less) with a sound engineering pragmatism.

    And his smack down of Bain and “denier” is top-shelf.

    Glad you pointed out the comment Mike, I’ve only got a vague handle on that controversy because I’ve had my head in BOM’s ACORN – SAT – what a bizarre series the first location I’ve looked at, Alice Springs Minimum, is. The adjustments make NIWA’s NZT7 handiwork look rather ordinary.

    For example the very first step working back in time from the last open site is +0.8 C. The cumulative step change total by the time you get back to the start of the series is -1.7 C. Have a think what that does to a before and after raw to adjusted linear trend.

    The steps are VERY LARGE e.g. in 1975 there’s a -1.6 C step.

    More starting here and up-thread

    I seem to be left on the thread by myself. I don’t whether the Aussies are struggling with step change methodology (I’ve detailed it), they’ve all got bored and moved on, they resent a Kiwi lecturing them, they’re stunned at what is being turned up, or they’re mulling over it and will rejoin in the weekend. I suspect Ken Stewart has been traveling and hasn’t had time to crunch what I’ve posted.

    Probably a number of those reasons combined.

  73. Andy on June 22, 2012 at 7:23 pm said:

    Mike, sorry I didn’t initially read the E M Smith post you linked to. I had been following the discussion on BH and there wasn’t a lot of interest there.

    I have to agree this is pretty powerful stuff and mirrors my experience too.

    Thanks for sharing.


  74. Mike Jowsey on July 6, 2012 at 12:57 pm said:

    NEWS: New legal approach — consumer protection laws may protect citizens against misleading BOM statements

    Could a similar case be brought in Australia challenging the validity of the Australian temperature record which is prepared by the Bureau of Meteorology [BOM]? There are similarities between BOM and NIWA: both have adjusted their temperature record and both have created a warming trend through the adjustments. The BOM’s has adjusted their temperature trend by approximately 40%. This appears not to be consistent with criteria for adjusting temperature laid down by Torok and Nicholls and Della-Marta et al.

  75. Richard C (NZ) on July 7, 2012 at 4:57 pm said:

    Strange. What happened to those “heat trapping” GHGs?

    As Melbourne residents hid under doonas, in Coldstream, on Melbourne’s eastern fringes, the temperature dropped to minus three.

    Bureau of Meteorology duty forecaster Andrea Peace said Mt Hotham was the coldest place in the state with minus seven degrees while Rutherglen, Strathbogie and Corryong dipped to minus five.

    A large high pressure system centred over Australia’s southeast was the culprit, bringing clear skies and light winds overnight that allowed yesterday’s warmth to dissipate.

    Read more:

    Dissipating heat huh. Does the IPCC know about this?

  76. Mike Jowsey on July 7, 2012 at 5:14 pm said:

    Muahaha! The IPCC only knows about keeping the gravy train a-rollin’. Some real doozey frosts here in the south. My holiday house at Hanmer has no water – underground pipes are frozen. First time in at least ten years. More GHGs please! Oh wait, what was that about dissipation?

  77. Mike Jowsey on July 7, 2012 at 5:53 pm said:

    Actually, Richard, maybe you could help out an aging brain here…. For clouds (water vapour) to be a positive feedback mechanism, my understanding is that that argument depends on cloud cover raising the minimum temperatures. Which is okay by me, I mean when it is cloudy at night we won’t get a frost. Usually.

    But you have underscored a point that seems to me overlooked or minimised by the CAGW climate scientists: Increased cloud cover surely must decrease the daily maximum temperature. Which is a negative feedback.

    So, my question is this: Is the overall effect of increasing night-time temperatures and decreasing day-time temperatures positive or negative?

  78. Richard C (NZ) on July 7, 2012 at 8:37 pm said:

    First thing Mike, clouds are liquid but water vapour is gas so there’s two feedback mechanisms being studied – cloud and water vapour. What complicates things is that these two are interrelated and you have to look at radiation, sensible heat, latent heat of evaporation, wind and whatever.

    In terms of AGW, the posited positive water vapour feedback is tied to a posited increase in evaporation and proponents point to night-time minimums rising faster than day-time maximums [but BOTH rising] as “evidence” of positive water vapour feedback but that in isolation does not prove a positive feedback. What must be shown also is increasing evaporation measured by water vapour levels at the various atm pressure levels. The WV metrics are anything but conclusive on that (long tortuous tale). Generally, at low level WV has risen but fallen at higher levels.

    All climate models assume clouds result in net positive feedback (see below) but models utilizing superparameterized cloud modules (none in AR4) return negative feedback.

    So if you will permit me to rephrase your question: Is the overall [water vapour] effect of increasing night-time temperatures [rising faster than] day-time temperatures [combined with cloud levels] positive or negative?

    AGW says positive, but when you look at all the factors in concert there’s a growing body of papers saying those override AGW evaporative effects so that the net effect is negative. Latest paper being ‘Understanding sudden changes in cloud amount: The Southern Annular Mode and South American weather fluctuations’:-

    A paper published today in the Journal of Geophysical Research finds that a natural atmospheric oscillation, the Southern Annular Mode, is correlated to significant increases in cloud cover resulting in “large scale” local cooling of approximately -2.5C. All climate models falsely assume clouds result in net positive feedback and increased temperatures, however this new paper and several others show clouds instead result in net negative feedback and cooling.

    It’s complex and to be honest I’m struggling to get to grips with it myself. I’ve been in contact with Dr Roy Clark (‘A Null Hypothesis For CO2’, US EPA Submission) and he’s just today sent me a bunch of stuff on this very topic e.g. he says:-

    The clouds ‘close’ the LWIR transmission window, but this does not warm the ocean. The wind driven evaporation is too large and variable for the clouds to have much effect. There may be a slowing of the rate of cooling, but no heating. This gets a little complicated. Clouds cool the Pacific Warm pool by reducing sunlight.


    The heat transfer from the surface is by moist convection. The troposphere consists of two independent thermal reservoirs. Almost all of the downward LWIR flux reaching the surface comes from the first 2 km of the atmosphere. This is heated by convection during the day and cools more slowly by radiation at night. This is the ‘dynamic’ greenhouse effect. The radiation to space comes from the water [vapour] bands around 5 km. These just keep on radiating and cooling until they get more convective heat from below. There is a dynamic balance, but no equilibrium.

    Along with a 100 page comment on a US Fish and Wildlife regulation!documentDetail;D=FWS-R8-ES-2010-0070-0127 that I’ll grind through in time he made these references:-

    CA Climate Change is Caused by the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, Not by Carbon Dioxide

    Written by Roy Clark

    The analysis of minimum temperature data using the PDO as a reference baseline has been demonstrated as a powerful technique for climate trend evaluation. This technique may be extended to other regions using the appropriate local ocean surface temperature reference. The analysis found no evidence for CO2 induced warming trends in the California data. This confirms prior ‘Null Hypothesis’ work that it is impossible for a 100 ppm increase in atmospheric CO2 concentration to cause any climate change.


    One thing you might want to try and do for NZ is the weather station trend analysis I described in the SPPI article. The minimum temperature data should track the local ocean temperatures. This also worked for UK stations. I am currently working on a more detailed analysis for California.

    Finally these papers:-

    I want to make sure that you have the papers by Lisan Yu. They are available at the Woods Hole Website:

    Yu, L., X. Jin, and R. A. Weller, 2008: Multidecade Global Flux Datasets from the Objectively Analyzed Air-sea Fluxes (OAFlux) Project: Latent and sensible heat fluxes, ocean evaporation, and related surface meteorological variables. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, OAFlux Project Technical Report. OA-2008-01, 64pp. Woods Hole. Massachusetts. [PDF]

    Yu, L., 2007: Global variations in oceanic evaporation (1958-2005): The role of the changing wind speed. J. Climate, 20(21), 5376–5390. [Abstract] [PDF] [Reprint]

    Yu, L., and R. A. Weller, 2007: Objectively Analyzed air-sea heat Fluxes for the global oce-free oceans (1981–2005). Bull. Ameri. Meteor. Soc., 88, 527–539. [Abstract] [PDF] [Reprint]

    The ‘changing wind speed’ 2007 paper basically says that the change in ocean evaporation due to changes in wind speed is larger than any possible change from CO2.

    I have attached 2 illustrations from Yu that show the global distribution of the average ocean surface temperature and the evaporation. The two do not coincide and the reason is the wind speed.

    I’d like to have given a nice simple answer Mike but ‘fraid not – I’m still stuck on the questions.

  79. Richard C (NZ) on July 8, 2012 at 10:23 am said:

    I might be misunderstanding what you are asking Mike. What I’ve outlined is what is happening over climate-span time. The hydrological cycle (H2O in all its forms – solid, liquid and gas) is the attenuator in the feedback loop that limits amplification and maintains stability in a system similar to an electronics control loop (“B” in this diagram Wikipedia describes this:-

    Electronic engineering

    The use of feedback is widespread in the design of electronic amplifiers, oscillators, and logic circuit elements. Electronic feedback systems are also very commonly used to control mechanical, thermal and other physical processes.

    If the signal is inverted on its way round the control loop, the system is said to have negative feedback; otherwise, the feedback is said to be positive. Negative feedback is often deliberately introduced to increase the stability and accuracy of a system by correcting unwanted changes. This scheme can fail if the input changes faster than the system can respond to it. When this happens, the lag in arrival of the correcting signal can result in over-correction, causing the output to oscillate or “hunt”.[24] While often an unwanted consequence of system behaviour, this effect is used deliberately in electronic oscillators.

    The Melbourne day-by-day experience is more instructive I think to understand just how overwhelming water vapour and clouds are in terms of dissipation or retention of heat as compared to the minor GHGs, CO2 being foremost.

    High pressure, dry air, clear skies and Melbourne got cold in a day with no CO2 effect whatsoever. Andy reported similar at his local Dobson ski field: wind blew the snow away, a high pressure system moved in, dry air, cold but no snow.

    The US heat wave on the other hand is/was accompanied by moisture and a jet-stream/circumpolar vortex system that is/was not allowing heat dissipation at a higher level. That situation is now easing and life will go on. Good news for the overweight who have been deprived of their air-conditioning.

  80. Mike Jowsey on July 8, 2012 at 2:01 pm said:

    Richard – many thanks for taking the time to fill in the blanks for me. This is really interesting stuff. In fact I would like to nominate your post as a guest article here – I think many other Climate Conversation readers would appreciate the insights and links you share.

    Roy Clark’s paper was particularly interesting, concluding that:

    The PDO record provides a baseline that can be used to identify urban heat island effects and anomalous data in the station records. This provides a powerful technique for investigating climate change in California and may be extended to other Western States and other areas of the world where there is an ocean influence on the climate that may be used to provide a local reference. Unexplained ‘adjustments’ made to weather station records for use in climate trend analysis have now become a major concern.[7,8] This technique may also provide an independent reference for the analysis of climate trends in weather station data to detect such ‘adjustments’.

  81. Richard C (NZ) on July 8, 2012 at 2:53 pm said:

    Probably should read:-

    “All [AR4] climate models assume clouds result in net positive feedback”

    Just one of the pitfalls of plagiarism I guess.

  82. Richard C (NZ) on July 8, 2012 at 3:25 pm said:

    I don’t agree with everything that Dr Clark states (for what that’s worth) e.g. :-

    “Unexplained ‘adjustments’”

    The fact is that NZCSC accept the need for adjustments to the NZT7 but they dispute the application of them. Similarly, Blair Trewin covers adjustment explanations for Australia’s ACORN – SAT in ‘CAWCR Technical Report 049’ but replication of them starting from raw data is almost impossible (plus they’ve introduced “weather dependent” (?) adjustments).

    I think we should be careful about innuendo in regard to temperature record adjustments. There’s been plenty of uninformed comment at JoNova wrt BOM’s HQ and ACORN – SAT lately. I think that if more people read NZCSET’s ‘Statistical Audit of the New Zealand Temperature Series’ and the CAWCR TR 049 they would have a better appreciation of what it’s all about.

    I’m sure too they would conclude (as I have) that NZT7 is an easy issue compared to the HQ can of worms, that is an eye opener. Ken Stewart did a 10 Part series on HQ, Part 10 is worth a read at least down to the start of the individual site examinations:-

    The Australian Temperature Record- Part 10: BOM’s “Explanations”

    Apparently, from the 049 report, BOM has “fixed” the HQ problems in ACORN. A bit like the way NIWA “fixed” the 7SS problems perhaps.

  83. Mike Jowsey on July 8, 2012 at 3:50 pm said:

    I agree with your point about uninformed innuendo. However, Dr. Clark’s point was that the PDO should, according to his research, cause ocean temperatures to have good correlation with land temperatures (near Pacific shorelines) and therefore provide an independent yardstick to check that any adjustments to the land temperature record are appropriate. I think this is a very interesting concept which warrants closer study. I also agree with you, that his term “unexplained adjustments” is a little inflammatory – he could have put it better.

  84. Richard C (NZ) on July 8, 2012 at 6:14 pm said:

    ARGO era SST data should be obtainable for NZ but it’s the early to mid 20th century adjustments that are the problem in the NZT7. I don’t know if NIWA (or anyone) has reliable local SST data that far back.

    Only the Pacific seaboard stations would come into Australian consideration as you say.

    Salinger may have already done something like this in one of his papers, he did do some good work prior his recent vicissitudes. It does seem familiar and something he would have done. I’ll have a look sometime when I’m looking though his papers.

  85. Richard C (NZ) on July 14, 2012 at 11:14 am said:

    Libs want ban on teaching climate science

    A body representing nearly 70,000 Australian scientists has criticised a Queensland Liberal National Party resolution calling for mainstream climate science to be cut from the state’s school curriculum.

    LNP delegates at the party’s state conference passed a motion yesterday calling on Education Minister John-Paul Langbroek to stop the teaching of ”environmental propaganda material, in particular post-normal science about climate change”.

    The mover of the motion, Noosa-based LNP member Richard Pearson, attacked ”false prophets who would poison the minds of our children in our schools”.

    ”Few people understand that the so-called science of climate change is really what can be defined as post-normal science,” he said, arguing it went beyond traditional understanding of science based on experimentation and falsifiable theories. The motion was passed with overwhelming support.

    Science & Technology Australia chief executive Anna-Maria Arabia said the resolution was ”extremely harmful” and risked undermining faith in science more broadly.

    The central principles of climate science – including that man-made greenhouse gases trap heat in the lower atmosphere and have warmed the planet – are backed by all the world major’s scientific academies.

    ”The message this sends is ‘we do not treat the science as an issue of testing ideas, we treat it as a belief system’,” Ms Arabia said.

    ‘We shouldn’t be telling students that testing ideas is propaganda.”

    Read more:

    But we are being browbeaten into accepting the “ideas” Ms Arabia, no dissent – and so are those students I’m pickin. That’s why it’s propaganda.

  86. Richard C (NZ) on August 12, 2012 at 12:39 pm said:

    Gillard’s about to go along with the carbon tax going by this:-

    “Our prime minister is a crook” Part I (and “Is our prime minister a crook?” Part II) UPDATE: and now Part III

    Caution: sordid details

  87. Al Gore praises inspirational Australia

    The Gillard government’s carbon price has already ‘‘inspired the world’’ to press ahead with measures to tackle climate change, former US Vice President Al Gore says.

    Labelling Australia one of the ‘‘canaries in the coalmine’’ for the effects of global warming, Mr Gore told a breakfast launch in Canberra of a new Climate Commission report there was much cause for optimism about global efforts to solve the problem.

    Speaking via video presentation, Mr Gore said that the Queensland floods and Black Saturday bushfires of recent years showed that ‘‘we must act now’’.

    ‘‘The consequences of the climate crisis of course are already visible all round the world, and some of the worst, unfortunately, can be seen in Australia over the last few years,’’ Mr Gore said.

  88. Richard C (NZ) on September 18, 2012 at 6:14 pm said:

    Regulator wants energy target dumped

    The NSW pricing regulator IPART has called on Canberra to abandon its renewable energy target now that a price has been put on carbon.
    The main reason for rising prices in NSW has been a doubling in real terms in transmission costs, which now make up about $654 of a typical household’s annual electricity bill.

    However, the combined cost of the carbon price, the renewable energy scheme, the climate change fund and the energy savings scheme adds a further $316 to the bill.

    Read more:

  89. Allan Taylor’s blog

    He has quite a lot to say about green buzz words and wind farms etc

  90. Richard C (NZ) on December 6, 2012 at 1:57 pm said:

    Most Useless Flagrant Flop of Government (MUFFOG 2012): Finalist — Victorian Desal

    “In 2007 the Victorian Government thought it was a good idea to spend $24 billion to build a humungously big desalination plant. There was a drought on at the time, and a specialist in small dead mammals said the drought would never end

    “With only 150 years of rainfall data to go from, who could possibly have predicted that it would keep raining?”

    # # #

    Would be hilarious if it wasn’t such a massive boondoggle.

  91. In Australia, it is now OK to compare climate sceptics to paedophiles

    In the article. Lubos makes the point that in his Czech homeland, they used to put out this kind of garbage until about 1989, when it became unacceptable

    No doubt the knuckle draggers in the NZ media and blogosphere will be happy about the ABC ruling

  92. and here s the Australian headline

    It’s OK to link climate denial to pedophilia, ABC tells ex-chairman Maurice Newman

    This firmly puts Australia on the map as one of the most intolerant and scientifically illiterate countries in the world.

  93. Ice rinks feeling the heat of the carbon tax

    Aussie ice rinks getting pushed out of business to save the planet.

    Those pesky ice rinks eh?

  94. Richard C (NZ) on February 3, 2013 at 6:16 pm said:

    Climate change signals raining down but proof will take centuries

    ……………it looks a lot like climate change is kicking in – or does it?

    Professor John McAneney, the director of Risk Frontiers, an independent research group funded mostly by the insurance industry, says that based on a database of natural hazard events in Australia, including some dating back to 1803, “there has been no increase in the frequency of natural hazard events since 1950”.

    But what of the spiralling insurance claims in the wake of hailstorms, floods, cyclones (think Yasi at $1.4 billion) and bushfires ($4 billion for Victoria’s Black Saturday firestorms)?

    “What we can see very clearly is that when this dataset … is corrected for the increases in numbers of buildings at risk and their value, no long term trend remains,” Professor McAneney said.

    ”It is indisputable that the rising toll of natural disasters is due to more people and assets at risk.”

    He said US hurricane modelling to identify a signal climate change is contributing to storm strength suggests it could be a while before the data is definitive. Averaging 18 different climate models, “it’s going to take 260 years”, he said.

    “This whole thing about climate change being responsible for an increase in extreme weather, or natural disasters, is just a fiction really.”

    Read more:

  95. The MacArthur windfarm in Australia consists of 140 turbines in grid formation, and is causing a great deal of distress to the locals

  96. Richard C (NZ) on April 17, 2013 at 8:26 pm said:

    Combet’s carbon system scheme rocked: Budget to lose billions

    Andrew Bolt

    Europe’s carbon permits have crashed to record new low prices, leaving the Federal Government facing a budget hole of more than $4 billion a year from 2015.

    The price of Europe’s Emissions Trading System permits dropped overnight to just $3.33. Australia’s price is $23 a tonne – by far the most expensive in the world.

    This doesn’t just mean the Gillard Government is pricing business out of the market with a huge new tax. It also means the Government could be left with a gaping hole in its Budget in two year’s time, when Australian companies can buy cheap European permits instead of our own to offset their emissions.

    The Government is counting on raising more than $9 billion a year with its carbon tax. But that tax take will be slashed by billions if Australian companies can buy European permits for around $4.

    That now looks almost certain, after a plan to drive up the price of carbon dioxide emission credits was rejected overnight by the European Union’s Parliament:


  97. Houses next to Lake Macquarie face demolition in a council plan to adapt to sea level rise

    Good idea, why don’t Christchurch City Coincil follow suit and demolish most of the city?

  98. Mike Jowsey on April 30, 2013 at 9:01 am said:

    The council is completely bonkers Andy. The comments under this article make good reading. Here’s an example:
    What garbage! What foolishness! Do these idiots now know what they have done? They have overnight collapsed the property values in these suburbs. No lenders will lend in these suburbs, no one will want to build, no development will ever occur because these ‘the sky is falling in’ drama queens have just screwed the people. They state ‘risk’! Not certainty! SAck this bloody council and their lunatic sustainability department. Blood idiots playing with matches…the lot of them.!!!

  99. Bob Carter and John Spooner’s new book “Taxing Air” is available for purchase

  100. Richard C (NZ) on June 26, 2013 at 11:34 am said:

    “So much for “higher” education. James Cook University (JCU) has blackballed Professor Bob Carter, not because of any flaw in his scientific reasoning, but because he speaks outside the permitted doctrine” – Jo Nova

    Dr Nickolas Drapela, PhD, was fired from Oregon State University for being an outspoken critic of the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming.

    Still, two datapoints doesn’t make a trend.

  101. I guess all bets are are off now. Rudd has defeated Gillard and will be new Aus PM

    Probably an early election on the cards.

  102. Richard C (NZ) on June 27, 2013 at 10:44 am said:

    I wonder if we’ll hear climate change is “the greatest moral, economic and social challenge of our time” again from Rudd.

  103. Richard C (NZ) on June 27, 2013 at 10:57 am said:

    ‘Generators pass on 115pc of carbon tax: power report’ – Financial Review

    According to the report for the EUAA, which represents many big companies, gas-fired generators were able to profit the most, recovering 44 per cent more than their emissions costs.

    Even brown coal generators have been able to pass through 95 per cent of the carbon tax and they will also receive $5.5 billion in compensation under the scheme, meaning they will be more profitable.

  104. Richard C (NZ) on June 27, 2013 at 11:21 am said:

    Combet has resigned from Climate Change Minister

  105. Ms Gillard nominated health reform, the carbon price, the DisabilityCare insurance scheme, the Gonski school reforms and the royal commission into child sex abuse among her proudest achievements.

    The carbon price one of her proudest achievements?

  106. Just to remind ourselves of this “proud achievement”

    More highlights of Julia’s career

  107. Climate sceptic MP Dennis Jensen wants to be science minister

    Coalition MP Dennis Jensen, who is a vocal climate science sceptic, has called on Prime Minister-elect Tony Abbott to appoint him as science minister.

    “At the moment to be honest I’m feeling under-utilised,” said Dr Jensen, the member for Tangney in Western Australia, who has a master’s degree in physics and a PhD in material science.

  108. Coalition scraps Climate Commission, dispensing with Tim Flannery

    ‘Dismayed’ Flannery says Australians have ‘a right to independent and accurate information on climate change’

    Greens leader Christine Milne went further, calling prime minister Tony Abbott a “climate criminal” for dismantling bodies such as the commission and the Climate Change Authority, which sets targets on Australia’s emissions reductions.

    “Shooting the messenger does not alter the fact that Australia has to do a lot better than 5% in order to contribute fairly to the global challenge of constraining global warming to two degrees,” she said.

    “In the context of global warming this action is a crime against humanity. In one swoop, [Abbott] has demonstrated his contempt for climate science and for the health and wellbeing of future generations.

  109. Richard C (NZ) on October 15, 2013 at 8:04 am said:

    Wynarka grain grower Peter Rose:

    “Up until 2000 I didn’t really know what a frost was.”

    He’s lost about 80 hectares of grain. “We now seem to be getting frosts more regularly.

  110. Some fairly tenuous links between the bush fires and climate change presented by Roger Jones

    This bit caught my attention

    This also relates to the so-called hiatus. This hiatus is normal, and what we’d expect from a climate that evolves in a non-linear manner.

    The models do predict these steps, even if some people claim they don’t. Model data shows periods up to 20 years when there is little or no increase in warming.

    Which models predict 20 years of little or no warming?

  111. Irony alert

    Christine Milne (Australian Greens) tweets

    PM Abbott has no regard for evidence based science and prefers ideology. What is future of science in Australia?

    — Christine Milne (@senatormilne) October 23, 2013


    PM Abbott insulting .@cfigueres is symptomatic of his climate denial and real losers are those who will suffer from extreme fires, floods.

    — Christine Milne (@senatormilne) October 23, 2013

    More here

    I think Tony Abbott is actually doing something about the fires in his role as a volunteer fire fighter, and doesn’t appear to be doing any grandstanding about it either, unlike these Greens

  112. Richard C (NZ) on October 23, 2013 at 3:11 pm said:

    >”Which models predict 20 years of little or no warming?”

    Most of them – randomly i.e. one model run several times will produce hiatus periods at different intervals for each run and same for all the other models.

    None projected a mid-troposphere hiatus period corresponding to the current one and no more than 3 CMIP5 submissions projected the current hiatus at near-surface level (e.g. Russian Academy of Science INM-CM4 was closest).

    Random hiatus projections unrelated to observations don’t make validity however.

  113. Richard C (NZ) on October 23, 2013 at 3:26 pm said:

    [Jones] “The warming component, which is non-linear, is climate change”

    Well yes in anthro forcing terms, dF = 5.35 ln(C/Co). Except that’s the problem, temperature has not been conforming to that formula. And never has except for the brief period 1980 – 2000.

    A miss-attribution and a bogus formula.

    But in terms of natural cyclicity, Jones is perfectly correct.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *