A new idea: helping the environment while not clobbering the economy

lake superior ice bergs

It’s across the front page of The Age and presumably The SMH but it is also posted at Drudge under the heading, Aussie Prime Minister seeks alliance to ‘dismantle’ Obama’s climate policy…. On Drudge it comes with an accompanying story about icebergs on Lake Superior in June! (see the picture above). This is from the SMH, editorially assisted by myself to balance the editorial charaterisation posted by Mark Kenny as part of his story:

Tony Abbott is seeking a conservative alliance among “like-minded” countries, aiming to dismantle global moves to introduce carbon pricing, and undermine a push by [far-left] US President Barack Obama to push the case for action through forums such as the G20.

It’s not as if ruining your economies through actions to contain global warming is necessarily a left-right thing, it just turned out that way. Helping the poor by creating so many more of them is not my idea of policy genius. This is more my sort of thing:

[Mr Abbott] said it was important that policies to address output did not “clobber the economy” while not helping the environment.

The comments were immediately backed up by Canada with Mr Harper declaring there was no chance of any country acting for the planet if it involved costs to its economy.

“It’s not that we don’t seek to deal with climate change,” he said.

“We seek to deal with it in a way that enhances our ability to create jobs and growth, this is their position.

“No country is going to take actions that are going to deliberately harm jobs and growth in their country, we are just a bit more frank about that than other countries.”

The uncompromising attitude of both leaders suggests neither is inclined to yield to pressure from the US to revive the issue of climate change ahead of next years’ climate summit, nor back any international coordination such as additional regulations or a trading scheme.

Politics is politics. Icebergs in June at the start of summer but half the world is worried about global warming so you gotta say what you gotta say. But you must also do what you must also do. One more reason why bringing Labor back would be a step into the dark ages, in more ways than one.

This entry was posted in Global warming and climate change policy. Bookmark the permalink.

24 Responses to A new idea: helping the environment while not clobbering the economy

  1. Tom

    For journalism afionadoes, that piece by Mark Kenny is a teaching aid that can be used to illustrate how not to report the news: it is a dishonest fact-free leftist political narrative that attempts to indoctrinate the reading audience about how to think about the political doctrine of climate catastrophism. You want to do propaganda, well do propaganda. Just don’t call it “journalism”. Not even The Guardian stoops to this level of disinformation.

  2. cohenite

    One more reason why bringing Labor back would be a step into the dark ages, in more ways than one.

    If Labore are the dark ages what are the green filth?

  3. stackja

    cohenite
    #1341943, posted on June 10, 2014 at 5:48 pm
    One more reason why bringing Labor back would be a step into the dark ages, in more ways than one.

    If Labore are the dark ages what are the green filth?

    Greens are primordial!

  4. fry

    I don’t understand the left, do they seriously want to bring back the foolishness and self obsessed Greenlabor?

    Are they that hateful of stodgy but reliable and competent conservatives, they would put themselves through that just for spite .. sorry, answered my own question didn’t I.

    It’s funny, they bark on about how we should halt climate change for “the children’s sake”, but have no problem leaving the same children masssive debt.

  5. Poor Old Rafe

    Good stuff on The Pause! Marginal downward trend over a decade.

  6. Ant

    The left generally don’t give two stuffs about the environment.

    If they did care, and if they did believe in the Global Warming Racket, they’d each be living the life of a hermit, rather than ignoring their own massive ‘carbon footprint’ while insisting everybody else shrink theirs.

    They’re Utopians seeking the deindustrialisation of western society and radical egalitarianism – for everyone except themselves, of course.

  7. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    It’s not exactly warm here on a June morning here in Dublin either.
    I am just about to go and turn the heating back on again.

  8. Elizabeth (Lizzie) B.

    Greens are primordial!

    Yep. To be exact, Greenslime.

  9. MemoryVault

    Are they that hateful of stodgy but reliable and competent conservatives,

    Got anybody in mind?
    Certainly doesn’t ring any bells with me, as far as our current crop of politicians go.

  10. manalive

    Rafe, that down-trend is for the US only.

  11. jupes

    “It’s not that we don’t seek to deal with climate change,” he said.

    Here is the problem.

    17 years and 9 months of precisely ZERO global warming yet even so called conservative politicians keep repeating the mantra about ‘dealing’ with climate change.

    CO2 does NOT cause the global temperature to rise. The science is in. How about conservative politicians tell us the truth and stop pandering to this leftist bullshit.

  12. Tom

    Good stuff on The Pause! Marginal downward trend over a decade.

    Amazing! Uncontaminated data tends to confirm the 60-year cyclicality of climate patterns and not the counterintuitive gibberish of the CAGW political doctrine. Imagine if real scientists without a massive conflict of interest were analysing the data. Imagine if, in order to understand climate, you didn’t have to thrash yourself with a stockwhip and renounce civilisation because of the terrible evil of the human race, which now manages to feed itself through real science, technology and ingenuity in spite of a sevenfold increase in the population in the past 200 years.

  13. Poor Old Rafe

    Rafe, that down-trend is for the US only.

    I think it is a remarkably precise measure that is happens to be consistent with a lot of other global indicators. Do you have equally reliable evidence from other parts of the world that give a different picture? Are you suggesting that it is a serious limitation of the data that it only covers one large continent?

  14. jupes

    Rafe,

    My link above is for Planet Earth.

  15. egg_

    Good stuff on The Pause! Marginal downward trend over a decade.

    Yup, posted on the US CRN prior; instrumental accuracy of International Standard: IEC-751.

    (Thermometrics Platinum Resistance Thermometer type PT1000) has a positive temperature bias in their subzero ranges, increasing to an error of +0.5C at the extreme end of their scale; even at 0C the PT1000 instrument employed by NOAA’s ‘Climate Reference Network’ (USCRN) has an error margin of 0C ±0.15C.

    (YT)

  16. Alfonso

    Tone and the Liberals are committed CAGWarming believers and abaters.
    The Greens had his arse bluffed a decade ago.

  17. Tel

    They’re Utopians seeking the deindustrialisation of western society and radical egalitarianism – for everyone except themselves, of course.

    Never trust a Greenie wearing an ironed shirt.

  18. Michel Lasouris

    Yep; we’ve gotta be careful and plan for climate change!
    Problem is that everything serious that I’ve read recently points to a accelerating DOWNTURN in global temperatures. This is more important and worrisome than global warmin’ as it demand more energy just to keep warm, and a sharp downturn in land available for crops.

  19. Chris M

    Hey Steve, you should check out what they did in Canada to help the Pacific Salmon – a low cost boost to the environment via 120 tonnes of iron suphate – resulted in something like a five-fold increase in numbers. It’s a fascinating read.

    The Greenies are aghast at this fabulously successful venture of course….

  20. Andrew

    LOL Chris – how DARE they!

  21. wadej

    Genuine question here guys,

    The latest Chamber of Commerce report on the EPA regs that Obama has published says they will cost the economy $50Billion. This is out of a $1.5Trillion economy. That doesn’t seem like that high a price to pay to show the US is serious in reducing their carbon emissions. Australia may be harder hit due to the importance of Coal to the economy, but if the right-wing Chamber only comes up with a figure of a $50billion hit for Obama’s regs, how bad can they be.

  22. wreckage

    $ 50 billion isn’t much?

    Are you insane?

    Moreover, what’s the $ per tonne breakdown for CO2 abatement? Because $50 billion for nothing at all is very, very expensive.

  23. Robert O.

    It’s ironic, although the Canadians and the Americans share the N. American continent, one has to do something about climate change, the other doesn’t. Who’s right, they both can’t be? I wonder what the S. Americans think?

  24. Percy

    I wonder what the S. Americans think?

    ‘Football. Football. Football. Yay Socialism! Football. Football. Football. Gaaaard Dammit, those filthy Capitalists in the North have deprived us of toilet paper again. Football….’

Comments are closed.