Carbon tax
#106
If Aus became carbon neutral tomorrow it would make a difference quite close to zilch.
#107
Read what you said:
>>Why not? We are talking about a world problem and possibly the end of the world as we know it. Australia is a very large land mass with few people so it's contribution to world "global warming" is small. Surely the countries that produce the CO2 should be the ones that need to change. Australia emits about 1% of world CO2. This is a gnats piss in the ocean compared to the USA and China. China has a very large population so on a per capita basis their emmisions are small, but based on land mass it is hugh. Everyone is ignoring China but whatever we do is dwarfed by what China does.<<
With that logic Antarctica is a big candidate for cutbacks!
>>Why not? We are talking about a world problem and possibly the end of the world as we know it. Australia is a very large land mass with few people so it's contribution to world "global warming" is small. Surely the countries that produce the CO2 should be the ones that need to change. Australia emits about 1% of world CO2. This is a gnats piss in the ocean compared to the USA and China. China has a very large population so on a per capita basis their emmisions are small, but based on land mass it is hugh. Everyone is ignoring China but whatever we do is dwarfed by what China does.<<
With that logic Antarctica is a big candidate for cutbacks!
#110
Brown coal is a major CO2/pollutant problem. Its basically one step up from peat. The best way to deal with its significant CO2 issues is to leave the damn stuff in the ground.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...1015-gxou.html
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...1015-gxou.html
#111
BE Enthusiast





Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 691











#112
Brown coal is a major CO2/pollutant problem. Its basically one step up from peat. The best way to deal with its significant CO2 issues is to leave the damn stuff in the ground.
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...1015-gxou.html
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politi...1015-gxou.html
What I was asking was why, if Aus went carbon neutral, it wouldn't be if they stopped exporting brown coal? I guess the double negative made the statement ambiguous.
So sidestepping the ambiguity I'll restate my original statement more clearly. IF Australia went carbon neutral in ALL of its activities then it would make near to no difference on the world's carbon output.
China and the US is where the planet will be saved.
#113
While I agree that there are the big polluters that need to stop, part of that is not giving them an excuse by taking action yourself. And frankly, once one of the big polluters gets stopped, the others will fall into line (or get embargoed).
Australia needs to get a clue on efficiency and cutting out waste - anyone currently shivering in one of their "5-star" houses knows that.
#114
BE Enthusiast





Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 691











I know what brown coal is. I'm not that far from the Latrobe Valley.
What I was asking was why, if Aus went carbon neutral, it wouldn't be if they stopped exporting brown coal? I guess the double negative made the statement ambiguous.
So sidestepping the ambiguity I'll restate my original statement more clearly. IF Australia went carbon neutral in ALL of its activities then it would make near to no difference on the world's carbon output.
China and the US is where the planet will be saved.
What I was asking was why, if Aus went carbon neutral, it wouldn't be if they stopped exporting brown coal? I guess the double negative made the statement ambiguous.
So sidestepping the ambiguity I'll restate my original statement more clearly. IF Australia went carbon neutral in ALL of its activities then it would make near to no difference on the world's carbon output.
China and the US is where the planet will be saved.

But China's (no matter what the ALP and the Greens claim) output of carbon dioxide is predicted to ramp up astromically year after year for the forseeable future; so the idea that the carbon tax will "save" the planet and "save" teh Great Barrier Reef is nothing more than pure propaganda (and of course a scare campaign to get support for the scheme)
#115
BE Enthusiast





Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 691











I'm not convinced they count the exports in the CO2 total for Oz. I agree that cutting the total should mean cutting the exports, but...
While I agree that there are the big polluters that need to stop, part of that is not giving them an excuse by taking action yourself. And frankly, once one of the big polluters gets stopped, the others will fall into line (or get embargoed).
Australia needs to get a clue on efficiency and cutting out waste - anyone currently shivering in one of their "5-star" houses knows that.
While I agree that there are the big polluters that need to stop, part of that is not giving them an excuse by taking action yourself. And frankly, once one of the big polluters gets stopped, the others will fall into line (or get embargoed).
Australia needs to get a clue on efficiency and cutting out waste - anyone currently shivering in one of their "5-star" houses knows that.
#116
From the 2008 emissions table the top 5 account for 57% of CO2 but the top 2 alone are 41%.
1 China 23.33%
2 USA 18.11%
3 India 5.78%
4 Russia 5.67%
5 Japan 4.01%
for interest:
9 UK 1.73%
16 Aus 1.32%
1 China 23.33%
2 USA 18.11%
3 India 5.78%
4 Russia 5.67%
5 Japan 4.01%
for interest:
9 UK 1.73%
16 Aus 1.32%
#117
After all that who-har about the Japanese Nuclear plant a couple of months How many people died? Not a lot, and it does not emmit CO2.
Keel




