Australia will share the adverse economic fallout from Biden’s energy policies

I have just had a piece published in the Spectator on the disaster that is the Biden energy policy and the contagion it will pass onto Australia where the politicians, if they are not part of the problem, are already besieged by the green left.

As well as rejoining the Paris Accord, Biden has killed a major oil pipeline, stopped exploration in Alaska, reimposed fuel emission regulations and set in train a commission to justify further restraints.

Business leaders in the US, as in Australia, have already succumbed to the green energy ideology. But they do not really believe the claims that this is the lowest source of energy and are anxious to keep out competition not saddled with the burden

To this end Biden has also appointed notorious climate doomster, Janet Yellen, as Treasury Sec.  Not only has she endorsed economic irrationality by favouring a doubling of the minimum wage but she spent the past four years torturing into place a system of regulations to make a carbon tax work.  Among these is the proposal – also favoured by the EU – to undermine the world trading system by imposing carbon tariffs on recalcitrant nations that do not fall into line.

Even though Australia (see below) is the world leader in funding the negative investment returns of renewable energy, we will doubtless be found deficient.

Australia and the rest of the world faces a challenging future, at least for the next four years, as the dominance of Political Correctness becomes more deeply embodied in the laws that govern our economic activity.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Australia will share the adverse economic fallout from Biden’s energy policies

  1. Professor Fred Lenin says:

    Are the theiving carpetbagger billionairs who own the US politicians the same ones who own our politicians ? Do they co ordinate their international theft ?
    Do they own the chinese communist politicians too,? Well they own the Australian and American communist globalist polliemuppets dthey?

  2. thefrollickingmole says:

    So how many people did Biden put out of work with his anti fracking/ anti pipeline crap?

    Or were they deplorables?

  3. exsteelworker says:

    This is what they wanted. They being billionaires, wall st bankers that backed Biden. The rich get insanely richer while the poor pay all the bills i.e electricity, and everything else that use electricity , again i.e EVERY FUCKING THING! The west is doomed, while the east laugh at our absolute insane stupidity

  4. Mak Siccar says:

    NEVER call it ‘clean energy’ as that panders to the doublespeak of the Left!

  5. Roger says:

    As well as rejoining the Paris Accord…

    The Paris Accord is a treaty; it therefore requires a two thirds majority in the senate before it is binding in the US. That’s why Trumop could take the US out of it by executive order – Obama never sent it for ratification, knowing it would most likely fail. It’s pure symbolism, thankfully. The other stuff is bad enough though.

  6. Rabbi Putin says:

    Has it dawned on anyone yet that Australias main military protector has decided to start kissing the ass of Australia’s biggest bully? Australia is screwed basically. I don’t like Taiwan’s chances either.

  7. BalancedObservation2 says:

    I think the writing is on the wall. While those figures in the article would help our argument against world environmental taxes and sanctions, carbon output per Australian wouldn’t if our exports of coal were taken into account. We are the world’s largest exporter of coal with 55% of the export market. Next is the US with 15%. Figures that surprised me.

    Nuclear in Australia looks the go for energy and defence – and not just in the very long term, especially considering the current rapidly changing environment in our part of the world. Reducing our carbon footprint could be the excuse we use to go nuclear.

    In the very short term our massive share of coal exports could give us quite a lot of leverage if we wanted to use it, and we could risk the revenue cost if our bluff were called. In the face of threatened sanctions or taxes on our carbon footprint we could say place a temporary embargo on coal exports. That would have a significant impact on international energy prices and energy reliability. But we generally seem to avoid using leverage we have even in the face of quite extreme provocation.

  8. Struth says:

    If the Paris accord is a treaty than the UN must be a foreign power.

  9. BalancedObservation2 says:

    Rabbi Putin

    #3733333

    It’s may be very gloomy but not quite as gloomy as you say.

    Donald Trump’s influence on world and US politics has been too powerful to completely wipe away, even the Biden administration determined to give the impression that it can wipe all Trump’s influences away.

    He’s set a political environment, particularly on China, which the Biden administration can’t simply ignore because it still relies on public support.

    We saw this before the election when the Democrats seemed in competition with the Trump Administration to see who could be strongest on China. This was in marked contrast to the eight years of the Obama administration. Now you could say that was simply pre-election spin. But it’s continued since.

    Some examples.

    Joe the Biden told the New York Times last month that he won’t make any immediate moves on Trump’s tariffs on $350 billion worth of Chinese imports.

    Biden’s nominee for secretary of state, Antony Blinken, said recently he believed President Donald Trump was right in taking a tougher approach to China.

    Blinkin also said he agreed with the Trump administration’s designation that China’s crackdown on Uighurs and other minorities in the Xinjiang region is a genocide.

    The China tariffs imposed by Trump and his administration sought to penalize China over intellectual-property theft. Trump also heavily relied on the Treasury Department’s sanctions regime to punish Chinese officials involved in the crackdown on democracy protesters in Hong Kong.

    New Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said that sanctions will broadly remain an important tool for the Treasury.

  10. Rabbi Putin says:

    @BalancedObservations2

    I wish you were right and I was wrong. But clearly China isn’t feeling the heat as much as they did a few months ago: https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2021/01/21/china-applauds-biden-inauguration-kind-angels-can-triumph-over-evil-forces/#disqus_thread

  11. BalancedObservation2 says:

    Rabbi Putin

    #3733395

    Thanks for the link.

    Of course China would prefer Joe Biden. That was never in doubt.

    And it’s predictable they’d suck up to Biden initially at least.

    And of course China would like to create as big a rift as possible between Trump and Biden. And between their respective supporters. Not that much effort was needed by any third party to do that. Both Biden and Trump were doing well on their own.

    However the environment on China that Trump and Pompeo set up world-wide is still a constraining influence. There were even some positive things Blinkin I think it was said about the efforts of Pompeo in galvanizing western support against China.
    Of course China’s own actions made that a lot easier too.

    Because of the environment Trump, Pompeo and China has helped set up itself by its actions, weakness towards China from the Biden administration would cost it a lot of support domestically and internationally.

    There’s reason to not be quite as gloomy as you appear to be on this issue at least.

  12. BalancedObservation2 says:

    BalancedObservation2

    #3733341

    I might add to my earlier comment that Australia simply threatening to put a temporary embargo on coal exports could significant impact international energy pricing and forecasts of energy reliability – given our pre-eminent position as by far the world’s biggest coal exporter.

  13. Chris M says:

    Oil / petrol price in AU already ramping up the past few weeks since the US election cancellation.

  14. Roger says:

    If the Paris accord is a treaty than the UN must be a foreign power.

    Well, that’s arguable, but 196 foreign powers are signatories to it.

    Therefore it requires super majority senate ratification to be binding upon the US.

  15. Ian of Brisbane says:

    Our pollies are stupid enough already without getting help from Joe.

  16. Squirrel says:

    “Among these is the proposal – also favoured by the EU – to undermine the world trading system by imposing carbon tariffs on recalcitrant nations that do not fall into line.”

    That’s what this game has always been about – going back as far as Britain’s embrace of the climate issue under Thatcher.

    It made sense for a physically compact, de-industralising nation, close to its trading partners, as did the ever so clever British concept of “food miles” (trade barriers with a large dollop of virtue-signalling), but it’s a potential disaster for us, and other economies like ours.

    After they’ve squandered a couple of trillion on the green new deal crap, the Yanks will eventually encounter reality and realise they have once again been played by the CCP and others who will promise a lot and do very little.

    Along the way, we might actually get some useful technological breakthroughs with all those billions being sprayed around – the announcement today of $100m. from Musk for a “prize” for carbon capture technology could be a starter.

  17. Nob says:

    BalancedObservation2
    #3733434, posted on January 22, 2021 at 4:32 pm
    BalancedObservation2

    #3733341

    I might add to my earlier comment that Australia simply threatening to put a temporary embargo on coal exports could significant impact international energy pricing and forecasts of energy reliability – given our pre-eminent position as by far the world’s biggest coal exporter.

    Biggest exporter – but not biggest producer. That’s China.

    Which is aware of the sovereign risk in Australia and is steadily building alternative supply chains.

  18. BalancedObservation2 says:

    Nob

    #3734049

    China “Which is aware of the sovereign risk in Australia and is steadily building alternative supply chains”.

    Yes it’s just a snap to replace 55% of the world’s coal exports market.

    It would take a long time to build alternative supply chains for 55% of the world’s coal exports. Meanwhile as I said the price would rise steeply. And supply would be unreliable.

    Just to threaten such a move would make a major impact.

    China’s attitudes of late have actually been quite counter productive to furthering its own objectives. Its moves on coal have been quite irrational. It’s the sort of thing which happens when it’s too dangerous to give dissenting feedback to dictators.

Comments are closed.