Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency

And we now see a department with a split personality.

One part of the department seeking to implement an emissions trading scheme with the aim to reduce carbon emissions

and

a second part of the department seeking to install insulation with the effect on increasing carbon emissions (see article by Hedley Thomas in the Australian of 26 February 2010 Woolly claims on insulation and that of Henry Ergas Energy Efficient, Benefit Deficient).

Only it seems that the insulation part of the department has been more successful in increasing emissions than the other part of the department has been in reducing emissions given the CPRS is dead.

Bizarre.

Canberra is now Constantinople under the Byzantine Empire.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency

  1. This is the second time that Rudd has had to divert talented juniors from other work to prop up the totemic dud. Before long we’ll have the Department of Rivers, Seas and Countryside; the Department of Old Buildings and Nice Statues; the Department of Paintings; the Department of Music; the Department of Kakadu and so and so forth.

    If he keeps up his current rate of incompetence, Garrett’s duties will be occupying the attentions of every Member of Parliament some time between 2018 and 2026.

  2. AJ

    When did the Government become so obsessed with the environment? I am starting to get the feeling we would have heard less over climate change if we elected the Greens.

  3. JC

    I think this puts the entire government’s response to climate change up in the air now.

  4. Michael Fisk

    In other news, under Rudd’s new education curriculum students will now be taught creationism in science classes.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/politics/curriculum-puts-dreamtime-first/story-e6frgczf-1225834964274

    These anti-science ALP hicks make Sarah Palin look like a sophisticated urbanite.

  5. Michael Fisk

    From the link:

    For Year 4 students, the curriculum says they should research “historical examples of different cultures’ knowledge about the national environment and living things (e.g. Aboriginal peoples’ Dreamtime stories that explain significant characteristics of the Earth’s surface and interactions between living things)”.

    The curriculum for Year 7 directs that students research “Aboriginal X-ray art to investigate Aboriginal knowledge of the internal biology and physiological processes of animals” as well as “traditional Chinese knowledge of the structure and function of human body systems”.

    In Year 8, students will discuss “traditional stories of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as a basis for understanding complex ecosystems at local and regional levels” and through “personal interaction or stories” research the “special relationship” of indigenous people with the land and its flora and fauna.

    I have no problem with students learning about Aboriginal dreamtime stories, Greek mythology, Bible studies, you name it. But none of this stuff belongs in science class. Anyone who advocates teaching religion in a science class is properly called a “creationist”. Kevin Rudd, for example.

  6. Rafe

    They need to keep bible studies alive or else people will lose the capacity to understand most of our greatest works of art and literature.

  7. Pingback: I know nothing at Catallaxy Files

Leave a Reply

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