i don't see the problem with a double dissolution.
Every vote should be taken n its merits.

the senate has given the thumbs down to rudds ETS because it is ineffective, expensive and pointless.
Unless it changes a LOT, it should get the thumbs down again.

Double dissolution, bring it on.
Aust Libs, show some conviction in your thoughts.
Give the ETS the boot again, give a token appearane at the double dissolution election if that is to be the case.
Puts emporer rudd in for the tough years.

Don't sell us out on a ridiculous ETS.
If you are going to lose, be it on your own terms.

Lets face it this is all a political scam.
"Climate Change" itself is a farce.  It is just a Convenient Excuse for the UN to force more advanced countries to prop up those less advanced whilst  adversely affecting their way of life.  Making the jealous less well off happy at the expense of others.

The Australian bills should be decoupled.
In fact the ETS Bill should be tossed in the bin.
Anyone seriously wanting to cut carbon emission for real reasons, not fanciful alarmist mythical reasons, should back the research and spread of new technologies and reusable resources.  End of story.  

That is the only way a truthful Government will make any effect on what they claim to fear.

SOME of what you say is correct boofee.


Quote:

should back the research and spread of new technologies and reusable resources.  End of story.

I do believe climate change is real and a major threat to our future but I think Rudd should see what happens in Copenhagen first.
I don't like the idea of either major party as far as paying so much compensation to the polluters, it would be fine if those polluters put the money into REAL renewable energy but "clean coal" is a joke.

You talking to me Skippeeeeee?

All of what I said is true.

Quote:

All of what I said is true

NO, its not. Most of it was a confusionalist rant, but I did give you credit for the one line you wrote that was true.

Better than confused rants by yourself then...  the alarmist kind.

Care to prove where I was wrong?
I'll wait.  ;D ;D ;D

Quote:

Lets face it this is all a political scam. "Climate Change" itself is a farce.

WRONG, see easy peasy to prove you wrong.
YOU, think its a farce, thank that fictional god that most Aussies have a brain and realise that your stance is akin to believing the world is flat.

rotflmao  :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

You are a joke.

prove it!!!!!

You can't can you  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Earth has always had "climate change"

Have you read the UN reasons backing the IPCC and it's push?
No?
Idiot.
Of course it's political.

Can you prove what you believe to be true? come on smart ass, prove that your confusionalist belief is true.
I'm happy to believe what the great majority of people believe and what the great majority of experts say, unlike you, caught up in a confusionalist haze of hate for the planet and its children's future. You're a disgrace, why do you hate the kiddies so much?

Maybe you should take on a sheep's name Skippeeeee...  you'd make a good Lemming.

Mantra already posted quotes from the UN...  you must have Skippeeeed them as usual or are just in denial about them.  (AS usual)

You have no proof that man-made CO2 is going to cause or is causing the catclisms you believe.  The burden of proof is with you.  None of your "experts" can prove it either.  It is all just conjecture and opinion.

Oh and stop it with your IDIOTIC LIES...   :D :D :D :D :D wanker.

Grendel wrote on Aug 16^th, 2009 at 11:38am:

Maybe you should take on a sheep's name Skippeeeee...  you'd make a good Lemming. Mantra already posted quotes from the UN...  you must have Skippeeeed them as usual or are just in denial about them.  (AS usual) You have no proof that man-made CO2 is going to cause or is causing the catclisms you believe.  The burden of proof is with you.  None of your "experts" can prove it either.  It is all just conjecture and opinion. Oh and stop it with your IDIOTIC LIES...   :D :D :D :D :D wanker.

Mantra and I don't always agree on everything bofffeeeeeeeee, tho I'm very interested that you use Mantras name to try and gain some credibility, she is much more credible than you'll ever be.

You're the denialist you say that all the mainstream  experts are wrong bofffeeeeee, the onus is on you to prove the great majority of experts wrong.You are failing dismally.

More huff'n puff without a bit of substance eh Skippeeeeee.

The real denialists are the alarmist like yourself.

Not one piece of proof has ever come forward from your camp on this... all we get is name-calling and ridicule.

Your side claims they cant show proof because there is none that is adequate.

Well yes...  they are totally inadequate, just like their lack of proof.  Just like the UN and IPCC whose agenda is political, not environmental.

Grendel wrote on Aug 16^th, 2009 at 6:12pm:

More huff'n puff without a bit of substance eh Skippeeeeee. The real denialists are the alarmist like yourself. Not one piece of proof has ever come forward from your camp on this... all we get is name-calling and ridicule. Your side claims they cant show proof because there is none that is adequate. Well yes...  they are totally inadequate, just like their lack of proof.  Just like the UN and IPCC whose agenda is political, not environmental.

Ho hum, where is your proof that all the mainstream experts are wrong? You cant can you? .The mainstream experts on climate change say that you are WRONG. I'll stick to the experts, unlike you I'm not into fairy tales.

ROTFLMAO

Well unfortunately we'll have to wait and in 30 years time you lot will just say...  oh well that's due to "climate change"...  no matter what the weather/climate is like.  what a fraud.  you lot are fairies.

Grendel wrote on Aug 17^th, 2009 at 8:44am:

ROTFLMAO Well unfortunately we'll have to wait and in 30 years time you lot will just say...  oh well that's due to "climate change"...  no matter what the weather/climate is like.  what a fraud.  you lot are fairies.

Well if it is proved to be wrong( million to one chance of that) you and the 12% of confusionalists should be very happy.


Quote:

Phillip Coorey, Chief Political Correspondent August 17, 2009 A MAJORITY of voters supports the Government reintroducing the legislation for its emissions trading scheme in three months, an act that could turn the bill into a trigger for an early, double dissolution election. The finding is contained in the latest Herald/Nielsen poll which also shows support for Malcolm Turnbull and the Coalition has failed to recover from the beating it took when the OzCar affair backfired in June. Mr Turnbull is more unpopular than Brendan Nelson was at this time last year, a month before he was dumped. And, despite it being firmly entrenched that Peter Costello is resigning from politics, the former treasurer remains the most preferred Liberal leader by far. Of those polled, 35 per cent back Mr Costello, followed by 19 per cent for Joe Hockey, 17 per cent for Mr Turnbull, 10 per cent for Tony Abbott and 3 per cent for Andrew Robb. Among Coalition voters, Mr Costello has 42 per cent support followed by Mr Turnbull on 23 per cent and Mr Hockey on 19 per cent. The poll of 1400 voters was taken from Thursday evening to Saturday night. On Thursday, the Senate rejected Labor's legislation for an emissions trading scheme. The Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, stressed yesterday the Government was ''not interested'' in an early election. However, if the Government waits until November to reintroduce the bill, and it is blocked again, it will become an election trigger. The poll found 55 per cent thought the Government should reintroduce the bill in three months while 29 per cent backed the Coalition's call to wait until early next year ''to see what the rest of the world does''. Twelve per cent wanted the scheme abandoned altogether.

Boy, some idio, errr delusianists here!

Climate change is real. Arguments like "the climate has always changed" have been comprehensively rebutted on knowledgeable forums like realbraveclimate.org.

They didn't even get the chance of a DD right! Rudd has said he is not interested in a DD, and some reasons for waiting till the normal time for a new election include:

1. A DD would lead to more Greens, Xenophon party and even idiot Fielding might get back due to low quota for full senate election.

2. With the higher quotas for a half senate election Labor stands a better chance of increasing its senate numbers at the expense of Greens, X, FF etc.

3. Waiting until the normal time would mean more of the 65+ age cohort would have died taking their high Coalition vote to the grave

4. The Libs will cave anyway in November, the Greens will still oppose and Labor will be able to make grounds at the expense of the Greens as well as the Libs

5. The ETS, a very good first step in reducing atmospheric CO2, is not a good candidate for a DD because much of it is regulation that the Senate could oppose

As well as needing to rein in CO2 for climate change reasons, the oceans are acidifying making life for shelled marine organisms such as zooplankton much tougher--their carbonate shells will be being eroded or hard to form due to the ocean acidity.

As a species we have pood in our nest. About time we cleaned it up!

Hey darwin found absolute proof that man evolved from apes yet?

No.
Oh how about absolute proof that cataclismic climate change is due to man made co2 emissions...  No?  Oh dear
Not a good batting average eh.

Post the proof.
Someone in the world would like to see it for once and hey you can get a Nobel prize for it.  I mean Gore got one for nothing.

Darwin wrote on Aug 17^th, 2009 at 4:43pm:

Boy, some idio, errr delusianists here!

::)


Quote:

They didn't even get the chance of a DD right! Rudd has said he is not interested in a DD, and some reasons for waiting till the normal time for a new election include: 1. A DD would lead to more Greens, Xenophon party and even idiot Fielding might get back due to low quota for full senate election.

Yes - both major parties stand to lose seats and are fearful - but the Greens and Xenophon are a good option to control the Senate. Rudd will give into Turnbull though and our oil & coal industries will get a lot more funding than Rudd intended. We need to take some of the power away from the major parties. If Rudd had any guts he'd go for a double dissolution.


Quote:

As a species we have pood in our nest. About time we cleaned it up!

The ETS isn't about cleaning up Australia & then the world - it's about collecting taxes to subsidise the debt that our foreign owned energy companies have incurred investing here. We can thank the last government for relaxing the foreign investment laws.

Assuming AGW climate change theories are valid, it still does not make sense for Australia to rein in greenhouse gas emissions.  Australia is too small to make a difference globally on the matter, and should instead increase its greenhouse gas emissions to capture carbon-intensive industries from countries attempting to limit their greenhouse gas emissions.  Now is a great time to compete with Europe's chemicals, cement, steel, and aluminum industries for instance, as their costs have skyrocketed.

As part of this economic strategy, Australia should hire lobbyists in other industrialized countries to lobby for carbon taxes, permits, and quotas, while at the same time lobbying for open trade which does not involve carbon tariffs.  Tax rules in Australia should be changed to allow faster depreciation schedules on capital investment, to encourage rapid migration of carbon-emitting industries to Australia.  As Australia would also enjoy lower electricity prices, this would further encourage industrial growth.  Think of all the jobs and income Australia could create with this strategy!

That sounds like an even worse scenario Coral Sea. It would just complete the destruction of Australia and turn it into the planet's biggest quarry.

This is the wrong time to introduce an ETS while our economy is so unstable and it's going to get worse. The government should be concentrating on developing renewable industries the way Rudd promised in the 2007 election instead of placating the coal industry to such an extent.

While these multinationals are allowed to dominate the country, there can be no competition from other industries. Penny Wong is now even using Woolworths as a guide in predicting future food prices in the future resulting from an ETS. We can count on 100% imported food as well because this scheme will help our few remaining farmers go broke.

coral seas ideas are much better than kommander krudds populist rants.

aussie makes no difference to the human beings gas emissions, which are insignificant to natures own path she takes.

rudds putting a tax on air, but some big polluting coys don't have to pay.



Quote:

...........At the moment, coal provides around 80 per cent of the nation's electricity supply - 57 per cent from black coal, mainly from NSW and Queensland, and the rest from brown coal in Victoria. That alone makes it an essential provider of Australia's base-load and peak-load energy needs for years to come, no matter the new commitment to 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020 or the increasing importance of gas. But it also ensures that coal-fired power stations are regarded as the country's worst polluters, making them the most visual target of efforts to get that percentage down to help meet even the Rudd government's modest emissions reductions targets. The difference is that while the generators will get $3.9 billion worth of free permits for their additional costs, the coal mining industry itself will get far less. The generators are complaining loudly that the compensation is inadequate and will impede necessary investment for power generation. But the coal industry is, if possible, in an even greater state of outrage. In the domestic market, marginal mines are more likely to close sooner and others less likely to expand. That result is likely to be largely welcomed - except by those who lose their jobs - at least until electricity prices start to go up sharply. Far less appreciated is the importance of black coal exports to Australia's national income as the world's largest exporter of coal. The Australian Coal Association is trying to remind the country that coal is actually the country's biggest export industry, with $46bn worth of exports last year. Exports take more than three quarters of the annual coal production. That will continue to grow simply because of the increasing global demand for coal. But decisions to reduce the country's comparative advantage as an efficient producer and exporter by adding on costs not faced by its global competitors will clearly have an economic impact well beyond the individual mines. The US, for example, is not including coal emissions under its clean energy bill, passed by the House and still up for negotiation in the Senate....... ...

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/business/story/0,28124,25943547-30538,00.html

The best thing Australia can do is concentrate on  renewable energy, if we aimed at a bigger target than twenty % by 2020 it would achieve more than any ETS.
In fact if the whole world concentrated on renewable energy instead of pretending coal can somehow produce a "clean" product it would go a long way towards addressing the problem.

skippy - I agree. clean coal is a furphy.
ETS is just a tax on air, it really does not help any climate condition.

If a manmade condition exists that we can do anything about without resorting to living in caves.

That's right sprint, if the government put all of that money into GREEN POWER instead of compensating coal producers who are conning us all with this clean coal mumbo jumbo the GREEN POWER industry could compete with the black/brown industry for real business.

The end game needs to be that we change the way we produce power, compensating coal companies to change from dirty coal to brown coal will do zip.

Do I get paid carbon credits for planting trees??

"Dirty coal to brown coal..."   ;D ;D ;D

mantra wrote on Aug 18^th, 2009 at 8:21am:

That sounds like an even worse scenario Coral Sea. It would just complete the destruction of Australia and turn it into the planet's biggest quarry.

How would it do that?

Grendel wrote on Aug 18^th, 2009 at 7:53pm:

"Dirty coal to brown coal..."   ;D ;D ;D

TROLL BOOFFEEEE TROLL BOOFFEEEEE TROLL BOOFFFEEEEE

troll...  nah, that's you skippee...
I thought it was a funny statement...  and said so.

Note the difference between a comment on a statement and a comment aimed at an individual for the sole purpose of trolling.   :D ;D ;D

Grendel wrote on Aug 19^th, 2009 at 10:03am:

troll...  nah, that's you skippee... I thought it was a funny statement...  and said so. Note the difference between a comment on a statement and a comment aimed at an individual for the sole purpose of trolling.   :D ;D ;D

::) ::) ::)