Thread: Climate Change and our Land of Fire, Flood and Drought.

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Electricity emissions reduced each year for three years when we had a carbon tax, but then resumed rising after it was foolishly abolished.

I actively tried to reduce the consumption during that time, it was like a personal challenge. Afterwards I couldn't care less.

Originally Posted by Slunnie

I actively tried to reduce the consumption during that time, it was like a personal challenge. Afterwards I couldn't care less.

I actively reduced consumption - we had installed panels and every kWh saved equaled money in my pocket.

Other than that, there wasn’t any commitment to environmental protection on my part.

Originally Posted by Tombie

I actively reduced consumption - we had installed panels and every kWh saved equaled money in my pocket.

Other than that, there wasn’t any commitment to environmental protection on my part.

You've done a great job in reducing consumption!

I have to admit, with the solar panels on now, I'm producing sooo much more energy that I use that I don't worry too much about consumption again. Yesterday the panels sold $15.73 (74.9kwh) and I bought $2.73 (4.34kwh). Mind you, every dollar of energy I use still doesn't go into my bank account, but at least I feel that from my perspective I've powered my house and probably 7 others. I prioritised putting the panels on for environmental reasons, but the $ it makes is such a winner!

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

....
The average in Ethiopia in summer is also 35 degrees.
....

That may be Ethiopa as a whole nation .. but have a look at the specs for a place called Dallol!

Eye watering numbers.

The had a period of 6 straight years(1960-1966) where the daily averages were 34.6°.. not summer .. the entire 6 year period averaged out to this number.
Make of that whatever you like.
But summer in Dallol is another level of hell. Due to it's low altitude mainly.

Summer daily means were 36.4, 38.6, 38.7 and 37.6, respectively from May-Aug(ie. their summer).
So that's 6 years of those temps, overall daily mean, not highs .. these are the averaged out values and over the 6 year period amounted to 34.6C daily average.
And they also worked mines of one type or another ... something like 80K folks seemed to survive that kind of climate.

So lets assume that this wild prediction of 4-5 degrees by 2100 ... which is so far off the mark it's better labelled as comedy, rather than science! anyhow .. but we'll allow this hype through to the keeper just for arguments sake.
Where exactly is this 4-5 degree average going to happen? which part of the globe? everywhere, or in specific isolated areas?
And this then follows on, where are these places that they're expecting to see 42°C average temps?
And why haven't they already happened .. such as in the eg. I gave of Dallol?
It HAD, 50 years ago, when climate change wasn't a glint in anyone's eyes yet .. this HAPPENED. This is a far cry from something that is happening.

Hopefully you read my comments as carefully as you do your preaching prophets .. coz the fact is this climate HAPPENED in Dallol .. some 50+ years ago .. and hasn't happened again.
So if the globe is warming up as you think it is, and has been .. why hasn't an already hellish climate like Dallol surpassed the record heat it experienced 50+ years ago.
Therefore, in a period where the average global temps have risen about 1°C in the 50 odd year period from 1966 to now, why hasn't this already hot place got any hotter?

Just like the fact that the hottest places on every continent all recorded their highest ever temperatures up to 1974.
1974 was the last record temperature recording in Europe (48°C in Athens), all other contintents recorded maxima were pre 1974.

What this (in effect) shows us is twofold.
1/. this warming is not what you seem to think it is,
2/. the global temperatures are not getting more extreme, they're getting less extreme ... much less extreme.

What you seem to think is an average 4-5 degree global temp increase doesn't mean that suddenly places where a normally high max of say 45, is suddenly going to see 49-50.

So we're not going to have 42°C average temps anywhere(except as mentioned in the middle of some lava field!) .. what is happening is that colder months are warming up, and cooler low minima are on the rise.

Originally Posted by AK83

That may be Ethiopa as a whole nation .. but have a look at the specs for a place called Dallol!

Eye watering numbers.

The had a period of 6 straight years(1960-1966) where the daily averages were 34.6°.. not summer .. the entire 6 year period averaged out to this number.
Make of that whatever you like.
But summer in Dallol is another level of hell. Due to it's low altitude mainly.

Summer daily means were 36.4, 38.6, 38.7 and 37.6, respectively from May-Aug(ie. their summer).
So that's 6 years of those temps, overall daily mean, not highs .. these are the averaged out values and over the 6 year period amounted to 34.6C daily average.
And they also worked mines of one type or another ... something like 80K folks seemed to survive that kind of climate.

So lets assume that this wild prediction of 4-5 degrees by 2100 ... which is so far off the mark it's better labelled as comedy, rather than science! anyhow .. but we'll allow this hype through to the keeper just for arguments sake.
Where exactly is this 4-5 degree average going to happen? which part of the globe? everywhere, or in specific isolated areas?
And this then follows on, where are these places that they're expecting to see 42°C average temps?
And why haven't they already happened .. such as in the eg. I gave of Dallol?
It HAD, 50 years ago, when climate change wasn't a glint in anyone's eyes yet .. this HAPPENED. This is a far cry from something that is happening.

Hopefully you read my comments as carefully as you do your preaching prophets .. coz the fact is this climate HAPPENED in Dallol .. some 50+ years ago .. and hasn't happened again.
So if the globe is warming up as you think it is, and has been .. why hasn't an already hellish climate like Dallol surpassed the record heat it experienced 50+ years ago.
Therefore, in a period where the average global temps have risen about 1°C in the 50 odd year period from 1966 to now, why hasn't this already hot place got any hotter?

Just like the fact that the hottest places on every continent all recorded their highest ever temperatures up to 1974.
1974 was the last record temperature recording in Europe (48°C in Athens), all other contintents recorded maxima were pre 1974.

What this (in effect) shows us is twofold.
1/. this warming is not what you seem to think it is,
2/. the global temperatures are not getting more extreme, they're getting less extreme ... much less extreme.

What you seem to think is an average 4-5 degree global temp increase doesn't mean that suddenly places where a normally high max of say 45, is suddenly going to see 49-50.

So we're not going to have 42°C average temps anywhere(except as mentioned in the middle of some lava field!) .. what is happening is that colder months are warming up, and cooler low minima are on the rise.

Certainly hot, but nowhere near 42 degrees.
The predictions are global averages, so of course they vary around the planet. Some places could be hotter.
If Australia's average rises to 35 degrees, we will be in deep trouble with droughts and bush fires.
Five degrees is not an extreme prediction at all. Governments are failing to achieve the emissions reductions they promised, which makes higher temperatures more likely. Extreme predictions are 10-11 degrees hotter, which would literally be hell on Earth. To give a reverse example, the last time the planet was an average five degrees colder, much of it was covered in ice. Five degrees is a major change.

Originally Posted by Tombie

You do realise that was by shutting down the Turbines right

I had to reduce costs on my site this quarter... we demobilised 2 contractors. Job done!

And all our wind powered carbon friendly generation - we get that record - because the pollution component manufacturing is reported against the country of manufacture.

One of the key integrations of my position is the Environmental team, you would think they may be “aligned” to our business, well I can assure you they are very aligned to the environment. Can make things interesting at times and they’re a great bunch of people.

We have a team of Climate sciences focused personnel, carbon taxes, emissions you name it. And that early carbon tax would have been massive recession time for Australia if it had stayed. You can’t just bomb a nations economy when the playing field wasn’t even.

Carbon shifting is not a solution. And measuring emissions in isolation is not a solution - Electricity generation emissions were down - certainly... what wasn’t down (and wasn’t measured at many sites) was emissions at the Panel and inverter manufacturing facilities, the installation emissions etc they didn’t count as they were generated overseas.

As a business we actually reduced emissions a moderate amount - there’s limitations in the industry at the moment, although we are heading for Carbon Neutral by 2030.

Interesting times.

It's great that you've reduced emissions - well done.

Don't forget that some manufacturing is powered by renewable energy, such as the REC panels from Norway on my roof.
I read that the EU taxes imports that are not manufactured using renewable energy, so that's a good reason for manufacturers to sign contracts with renewable energy generators, which some have already done. Renewable energy can provide a business advantage.

Anyway, that doesn't change the point that the carbon tax successfully reduced emissions, and emissions have risen since it was abolished. The current government does not have any policy which would be as effective as a carbon tax.
Actually, to be finicky, it wasn't actually a carbon tax, it was an emissions trading scheme with a fixed price for the first three years. Similar schemes work effectively overseas, but Australia has dropped the ball.

Do I have to point out that we already have a carbon tax of about 50 cents per litre on fuel.
so you want more?
Victoria
Also placed a swingeing carbon tax on coal power and look what happened. The wholesale price of power shot up when a coal fired power station shut down as it couldn’t make a profit and there were no alternatives like gas.
regards PhilipA

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

Certainly hot, but nowhere near 42 degrees.
The predictions are global averages, so of course they vary around the planet. Some places could be hotter.
If Australia's average rises to 35 degrees, we will be in deep trouble with droughts and bush fires.
....

So you're worrying about Australia reaching a 35°C average, when I've already directed you to info that places like this have already existed in living memory .. and even worse!
Yet they still inhabit this particular place! Not only have they endured 6 years of such climate, but in their hotter months, they endured even higher average temps .. and still you worry.

Sorry but this makes no sense.
Not only will it not happen, because the looneys that predict these so called 10-11°C rises are so out of kilter with reality, if you have a good read of NASA data ... who predict a possible max of 4° in the next hundred years, more likely 2°C.

Again, the issue isn't really about the warming(or even cooling) .. it's the level of madness surrounding the hype .. and then this gets propagated by people such as yourself.
Doesn't do anyone any good, "armageddon" has been upon us for a good 6000 years or so, and yet still here we are .. colder climate, hotter climate .. gods, wraith, whatever silly notion they can think of .. all that rubbish .. we still live, thrive and survive ... 6000 years later.
But without the associated drama concocted, their power base would have never grown the way it had.

Another parallel to muse over. For the past 50+ years the old fear was that we were going to blast ourselves into a nuclear kingdom come! How did that pan out.
The nuclear activists patted themselves on the back when their protest apparently pressured world powers to agree on nuclear disarmament. The reality was that the only reason for consensus on nuclear disarmament was based purely on a cost basis for those world powers. Wasn't going to benefit them in any way to blow the world up 100 times over vs 10 times over ... so to cut cost they agreed to some limitations. Fact still remains tho that they have the capacity to blow the world up 10x over and again, and yet still here we are!

I'm really hoping that you see the pattern going on.
One thing is certain with human nature .. they seem to live to create drama where it's not warranted. Without this drama, those with ambitious fear missing out on a seat at the world power base.
It's time we stop giving those ambitions any more oxygen

Drama doesn't do any good to the science of whats at stake here .. which in this case = climate.
What will inevitably happen is that a future generation of up and coming climate scientist may grow up expecting this hysterical hyperbole to occur, and their science will be tainted with such an expectation. They will inevitably figure out a method to doctor the science in a way that corresponds to their inherent bias, as opposed to changing their biases accordingly with the data they measure.
This has happened before, and no reason to expect that it won't happen again.

ergo! .. climate science is primarily bogus, there's too much inherent bias built into their psychology.