Climate Change

I'm glad you added that Vic, it's a crucial point.

If enough people voted for parties other than Labor or Liberal, there would be a radical reordering of our political landscape, which is clearly what is needed.

This thought of Labor being the only alternative is self defeating.

Well they helped get a carbon tax in.

Whoops they actually voted against one.

You mean the Greens who have one Member of Parliament (out of 151) and nine senators (out of 76)?
Of course their impact on legislation is limited to voting as a block in the Senate.

But I really don't think you're making sense - you supposedly want more progressive legislation but you continue to entrench the system that works against this.

We never had a carbon tax though Indo. We had a carbon price, but no tax.

But if you want a list of Greens' bills proposed in the Senate, this is the best I could find.

https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parlia...

By nightmares I assume you mean Pauline, Clive etc.

I think it's pretty clear though, the nightmare is already here, regardless of clowns like the above.

The power you talk about has been usurped and there'll be no moving on without a major shakeup.

Thank god you people don't get your crazy revolution and to fly your communist/socialist/marxist red flag, cause the real nightmare would be if the Greens got into power it would be like giving a 16 year old kid the keys of your brand new car while you go away for the weekend and expecting all to be fine when you return.

LNP or Labor at least both are pretty sensible and not some crazy far left fringe party.

You guys should have done it with the music, it's a far more direct emotional trigger than getting people to comprehend complex interaction of an intangible gas. Anyway, the tunes are still awesome, enjoy:

Uhh, complex interwhaa???

Indo, the LNP are a far right party, you could argue they weren't under Turnbull, but they are now.

"Try and persuade me I'm wrong, list the legislative achievements of the Greens over the last decade for me."
blowfly, down our way the Greens were polling very strongly in the early 2000s and logging in the Otways was a major issue. The state and fed seats are very marginal and ALP candidates were desperate for Greens' preferences. The ALP changed their policies and announced an end to Otway logging and the formation of the Great Otway NP. Huge win for the environment and tourism industry. Wouldn't have happened if the ALP didn't fear the Greens.
Caspar Dreaming. Ignoring science, rampant corruption, racism, and attacking press freedom is straight out of the far right playbook. The LNP's climate policies are crazy town territory. And let's not forget the LNP is filled with evangelical nutters who think God rewards them with financial wealth.

With respect blowfly, the most effective way of pushing the ALP towards a more progressive policy agenda is by using the preference voting system wisely. Queensland is the perfect example. The ALP are more scared of regional blue collar workers who have this delusion that the coal sector is the ticket to high employment and strong wages than greenish voters in the SE. Hence their shit energy policies.

"Indo, the LNP are a far right party, you could argue they weren't under Turnbull, but they are now."

Argh yeah sure, i guess if you are sitting that far left even centre right appears far right, in reality even one nation aren't far right.

But really it could be argued with the huge community type spending by the government of late, like job keeper and increase in Job seeker etc that has been needed during this Covid thing that they have moved more towards the left of late.

I guess there is a time and place for everything, off course these types of policies and spending are fine in the short term but disastrous if went on long term.

Has there even been a time in Australia's history where we have had so much socialist type policy/spending for so long?

Caspar Dreaming: During times of crisis, everyone is a communist. It's where Scumo and co are positioning the country post covid that is far right. The university system has been crushed, so too the ABC. Unelected mates are making huge decisions behind closed doors, and wow, what a surprise, these fossil fuel types see a fossil fuel lead recovery.
LNP carpet bagger mates are getting un-tendered contracts like there's no tomorrow, and the public sector is getting stacked with partisan hacks. Guess who gets to pay for all this?
For someone who bangs on about politics as much as you do, you've got to be wilfully ignorant not to see Scumo is setting up a kleptocracy with massively weakened institutions essential for a functioning democracy.
But keep telling yourself the LNP is a centrist party if that makes you feel better.

First principles climate ought not be about politics it ought to about science and is in other parts of the world, the immediate notable exceptions being the US and AU.

Any discussion about the ALP's and the LNP's climate credentials needs to consider where these two parties are on the political spectrum. The mistake many make is saying the ALP are a centre left party and the LNP are centre right political parties (ie where they both reasonably stood before neoliberalism and in AU before Howard.

In my mind there is no doubt the Howard decade moved both political parties to the right of centre* and plus/minus that drift to the right has continued for both parties to the point that now the ALP more closely resembles a centre right party reminiscent of say a Fraser government.

So now we have the ALP as an old fashion LNP party and the LNP or very large sections of it are far right on the political spectrum.

Any keen observer of climate and energy policy in AU will know the LNP have done everything in their power to water down, subvert, corrupt? environmental standards and protection law over the last decade. They aren't passive about it, their ideological beliefs are all that matter.

Calls for the ALP to run a progressive policy agenda only make sense from the government benches, 3 or 4 terms of government incrementally changing the political and policy landscape like Hawke/ Keating and Howard did all the while not making voters uneasy (Shorten's mistake brilliantly manipulated by the Prime Marketer).

Keating said you change a government you change a country. Its government that matters not being so fucking policy pure you remain on the opposition benches forever.

So what sort of country do you want? A continuation of the lies, corruption and neoliberal tripe or one that might save itself despite it aspirational self?

* it could also be reasonably argued the ALP were partly open to this shift given how the Hawke/ Keating years opened up the economy to reform that saw the country prosper during the Howard years

Some interesting and thoughtful observations (cultivated over many years of experience and close engagement, no doubt)...and obviously some less so.

What about casting your minds back to the Gillard minority government? The make-up; how it worked; how it didn't; the corporate media reaction and thus the public perception?

Senate. Vote below the line.

Check the preference flows.

Same goes in the HoR.

Liberals go last always.

"what a surprise, these fossil fuel types see a fossil fuel lead recovery"

Did you miss the 1.9 billion dollar announcement this week?...and only hear about gas announcements?

"A $1.9 billion investment in next-generation energy technologies will target Australia's emissions-intensive manufacturing, transport and agriculture sectors to meet the federal government's aim to reach net-zero emissions in the second half of the century.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison will on Thursday commit an extra $1.62 billion for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, as well as promise to expand the focus of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to invest in new and emerging energy sources, including carbon-neutral and negative emissions technologies."

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/unlocking-new-tech-1-9-billion-f...

Yeah I'm sure its not exactly what your guys want, but IMHO and many others view it's a balanced approach.

Anyway these days when i vote, i vote below the line and i ensure Greens are dead last and Labor way down the list, I've never actually ever voted LNP but i do ensure who ever i vote for preferences flow onto them

Hah! I posted this the other day:

"Read this and then compare the forthcoming 'commentary' on here from the usual suspects (if it indeed arrives).

https://www.michaelwest.com.au/gas-gush-the-toadies-of-mainstream-media-...

Bingo!

Facto, Yeah, Gillard did achieve a lot, history will judge her well.

On the other “matter” you can set your watch to those type of responses and as they say even a broken watch is right twice a day hehaha

OMG, Indo still falls for Scomo's announcements. You're a bit of a slow learner Dreaming. If you want to know what Scumo plans to do, ignore his announcements and look at the clown's history.
#scottyfrommarketing has sold you a bridge Caspar.

Yeah hey what would the PM know? his announcements aren't important it's not like he leads the party that runs the country and makes these decisions.

I should just listen to VL, he knows better, everything else is just fake news right.

"Liberals go last always."

That's something that most of us here can agree on.

No Indo-Dreaming you should just take the PM's announcements with a grain of salt. He's a marketing bloke without a product. He constantly announces things that just don't happen. Arts grants, reno rebates, bushfire recovery money etc etc etc.
I know this will be hard for you to believe, but Scumo is as a bullshit artist of the highest order. He's kind of like Pauline Hanson in his ability to impress village idiots.

upload images

Did someone mention the Prime Marketer's announcements?

AS YOU WASH (YOUR HANDS)pic.twitter.com/4lx3bS9l8a

— Huw Parkinson (@rabbitandcoffee) September 12, 2020

It all depends on what sort of hose you're holding....and/or who's

@VL

Id love to see a non bias list of government promises made and kept from various governments over the years to see how they rate against each other, all governments say things and don't follow through, but a lot of promises also get completed.

Its easy for you to say its marketing blah blah blah as fits your view, reality is much of it will happen.

Also plenty of great stuff that gets done in this area that gets pretty much ignored or at least by people here unless it's their team.

All the negative stuff gets brought up but positive stuff just ignored.

Just off the top of my head from the last year two things come to mind that Scomo did in this area and really didnt need too and i dont think was promised.

-About this time last year he gave 1 billion extra to the clean energy council (so total of 11 billion)

-Late last year he gave 500 million to Pacific nations to help invest in renewables

Anyway haters will alway hate and focus on the negative stuff and ignore or write off the positive stuff, i guess that's life.

"About this time last year he gave 1 billion extra to the clean energy council (so total of 11 billion)"
Got a source for that champ?
"Late last year he gave 500 million to Pacific nations to help invest in renewables"
No Caspar Dreaming, late last year the federal government announced a redirection of aid to the pacific for disaster relief / preparation and renewable energy. Since then they cut back $200+ million in health aid to the same countries.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/feb/18/australia-slashes-pacific-...
Hey Indo Dreaming, do you ever go beyond the headlines or do you just swallow Scumo's drivel as a default position? Half truths and omissions are your specialty.
Australia should be a world leader in renewable energy, but we are not because the renewable industry has very little confidence in our government. When scumo and his mates start heaving our $$$ at their fossil fuel mates, renewable energy companies get very nervous and go elsewhere.

Sorry blowfly, you're a bit wrong there. The money went to Clean Energy Finance Corporation for poles and wires and not the CEC.
But don't worry too much, you're miles ahead of Indo-dreaming who is just woefully confused on this issue.

"Australia should be a world leader in renewable energy, but we are not because the renewable industry has very little confidence in our government."

https://science.anu.edu.au/news-events/news/australia-runaway-global-lea...

https://www.smart-energy.com/renewable-energy/top-ten-countries-with-the...
Like I said, we are not a world leader.

Semantics Vic, your link states ％ of renewable energy currently used, mine is investment and building of renewable energy of which we (according to Australia's top Uni) are the world leaders.

At the current rate, there's nothing stopping Australia being the world leader in renewable energy as a percentage of their energy mix.

edit: btw, top 10 for Oz, not quite the basket case you insinuated. Pretty good imo.

"At the current rate, there's nothing stopping Australia being the world leader in renewable energy as a percentage of their energy mix."
Except of course a federal government heaving money at coal and gas energy. Do you want me to explain economics to you or would you like me to draw you a picture?

A picture would be lovely. With a smily sun and clouds with puffy cheeks turning those wind turbines.

And I did say "energy mix".

You think any country can transition completely to renewables without nuclear?

You think any country can transition completely to renewables without nuclear?
Absolutely. have you not been paying attention to how quickly the cost of renewables is plummeting, advancement in battery technology, pumped hydro, hydrogen power, biomass, tidal, etc etc.
The problem is when Scumo caves in to the nutters in his party, cutting edge energy companies go elsewhere. It's economic madness giving tax dollars to dying fossil fuel industries while scaring off an energy sector that would deliver reliable, clean and cheaper power + all the jobs.

Zen are you calling nuclear a renewable?

I wouldn't say the cost of renewables is plummeting, steadily going down for sure. Transitioning to complete renewable is still phenomenally expensive and since you're going to educate me in economics, in the short term (and that's how all governments of all stripes think) the most bang for your buck at the moment is with filthy filthy coal.

I'm not advocating the continued use of coal, but from an economic standpoint, that's why the government (present and previous) continues to invest in the sector.

Actually per capita Australia is a world leader in rate of renewable uptake as Zen's article clearly points out.

Per capita Australia also leads the world in house hold roof top solar installations.

Things are much better than you guys make out.

In regard to your link VL im actually surprised that we make number 9 that's actually quite good especially as it's including hydro which is Swedens main energy source, Brazil has a decent chunk and a few of those countries above us have 10%+ hydro, you know that thing the Greens opposed in Tasmania. (no not the wind farm Bob brown opposed, Hydro dams)

No Guy. I'm not.

The real problem is what is becoming a cliche wind and solar are great until the sun goes down and the wind stops blowing.

Yeah battery's pumped hydro, but the reality is battery are super expensive, and if you spend 100 billion on batteries now in ten years time you would have outdated batteries that you paid overs for.

Pumped hydro you need certain geography, then you need lots of water, then everyone doesnt want these things in there backyard, you can bet good money the biggest opposition to these projects will be Green groups.

The other issue with storage is its not where the money is (unless you make batteries)

Companies are keen to invest in wind and solar pretty cheap with good returns, but once you include storage the returns are not as good.

Think about it if you were a renewable company would you build a solar farm or wind farm without storage fairly cheap or spend crazy money to add storage?

From a government perspective they need to ensure we have energy 24/7 but also now have pressure to reduce emissions.

Hence Gas.

but from an economic standpoint, that's why the government (present and previous) continues to invest in the sector.
Are you for real Zen?
If coal energy had any future, the energy industry would be building coal fired power stations. They are not, they are closing them down.
Go look at what is happening with the Liddell power station. The government is heaving cash at it, and AGL still don't want to keep it open. The millions being thrown at Shine Energy (just a couple of spivs with zero experience in the energy sector) for a feasibility study into a coal power station is fucking nuts. It's all about keeping a bunch of looney Queensland MPs happy.
The only way a coal fired power plant will get built in Australia is if it's massively subsidised by governments. Do you support that economic insanity Comrade Zen?

That’s good news Zen, for a minute there I thought you had been drinking indo juice and had become a fellow passenger in some parallel universe.