• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
Jennifer Marohasy

Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

  • Home
  • About
  • Publications
  • Speaker
  • Blog
  • Temperatures
  • Coral Reefs
  • Contact
  • Subscribe

Archives for November 4, 2006

Best Hamburgers, Have Best New Oils

November 4, 2006 By jennifer

In the overall scheme of things, the most significant event for Australian agriculture this week was probably not the newest drought aid installment or the drought-breaking rains in south western Queensland. It was probably the decision by hamburger giant McDonald to change the cooking oil it uses in Australian outlets away from standard Australian canola, to healthier new oil blends with much less trans fat.

One way of creating a low trans fat crop variety is through biotechnology. But our farmers have rejected GM food crops. Indeed while Greenpeace championed the bans on new GM food crops in Australia, the NSW Farmers Association supported the legislation in that state. In Victoria it was the milk processors who came to the support of that state govenment as it gave in to the luddites.

Australian farmers, once trail blazers when it came to innovation and new technologies, are now dealing themselves out of the future. Indeed they still arguing about GM canola, a crop grown in Canada for 10 years now, while farmers in the US look forward to the next generation of GM crop varieties that will not only give superior yields and better weed control but also improved nutrition.

Indeed, and quoting Roger Kalla:

“In USA the labelling of the trans fat content in foods is already mandated by law. The low trans fat oils used in North America are derived from Duponts NUTRIUM™ Low Lin Soybean Oil , Monsantos VISTIVE Soybean oil and Dow Agrosciences Natreon Canola oil. We will see where McDonald’s will be sourcing their low transfat oils from in the future.

The Australian canola crop this year is predicted to be barley enough for domestic use of vegetable oil and the fraction of the crop that is of a suitable quality like Monola , marketed by Nutrihealth, will probably not be enough to meet the new demand. Australian farmers seem to be doubly disadvantaged this year with a major drought affecting yields and not having access to the quality oil seed that large end users of canola oil such as McDonald’s increasingly requires.“

I will be talking about Robert Malthus and banning food crops in my next Counterpoint column. If you live in Australia you will be able to hear it by tunning into ABC Radio National at 4pm on Monday, repeated 9pm on Tuesdays.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Food & Farming

Elephants Arrive Safely in Sydney

November 4, 2006 By jennifer

Four elephants have arrived safely in Sydney after two years of court battles and months in quarantine. They are from Thailand and probably destined to spend the rest of their lives behind bars at Taronga Park Zoo. But judging from these seven photographs, so far they are enjoying it.

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Plants and Animals

Weekend Reading: More on the Stern Report

November 4, 2006 By jennifer

It was my plan to get out into the garden a bit this weekend. We have had beautiful weather lately here in Brisbane – clear skies, warm days and cool nights. This morning it’s raining – just nicely.

But the official forecast is for a climate crisis.

Indeed, the Stern report with its finding that we risk a global recession because of global warming has dominated media headlines in Australia this last week. According to Sir Nicolas Stern ‘the future’ will be worse than the two world wars and the great depression combined.

But, there were a few lone voices of reason out there, and getting published, and suggesting, that the Stern warning will join Paul Ehrlich’s The Population Bomb and the Club of Rome’s Limits to Growth in “the pantheon of big banana scares that proved to be unfounded”.

Following are three published opinion pieces from three friends of mine:

1. Stern Review: The dodgy numbers behind the latest warming scare
By Bjorn Lomborg
Thursday, 2 November 2006

THE report on climate change by Nicholas Stern and the U.K. government has sparked publicity and scary headlines around the world. Much attention has been devoted to Mr. Stern’s core argument that the price of inaction would be extraordinary and the cost of action modest.

Unfortunately, this claim falls apart when one actually reads the 700-page tome. Despite using many good references, the Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change is selective and its conclusion flawed. Its fear-mongering arguments have been sensationalized, which is ultimately only likely to make the world worse off. Read the full article here: http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110009182

2. British report the last hurrah of warmaholics
By Bob Carter
Friday, 3 November 2006

NICHOLAS Stern is a distinguished economist. Climate change is a complex, uncertain and contentious scientific issue. Have you spotted the problem with the Stern review yet?

An accomplished cost-benefit analysis of climate change would require two things: a clear, quantitative understanding of the natural climate system and a dispassionate, accurate consideration of all the costs and benefits of warming as well as cooling.

Unfortunately, the Stern review is not a cost-benefit but a risk analysis, and of warming only. Read the full article here: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20690289-7583,00.html

3. The Alternatives Are Too Costly
By Alan Moran
Thursday, 2 November 2006

THE Stern report and its associated intensified diplomatic push for carbon restraints is already having an effect on policy. In Britain the Opposition Leader has announced that if he wins government he will place a windmill on the roof of Number 10 Downing Street. In anticipation of the report, additional subsidies were announced in Australia for exotic and very expensive renewable energy. Australian total taxes, subsidies and other regulatory measures aimed at combating emissions of carbon dioxide will approach $1 billion a year by 2010 even if no further measures are introduced. Read the full article here: http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/the-alternatives-are-too-costly/2006/11/01/1162339917976.html

But The Age left out the most important part of Alan’s piece, the graph. Here it is:

energy Alan costs with tax.JPG

Filed Under: Uncategorized Tagged With: Climate & Climate Change, Energy & Nuclear

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Ian Thomson on Vax-ed as Sick as Unvax-ed, Amongst My Friends
  • Dave Ross on Vax-ed as Sick as Unvax-ed, Amongst My Friends
  • Dave Ross on Vax-ed as Sick as Unvax-ed, Amongst My Friends
  • Alex on Incarceration Nation: Frightened of Ivermectin, and Dihydrogen monoxide
  • Wilhelm Grimm III on Incarceration Nation: Frightened of Ivermectin, and Dihydrogen monoxide

Subscribe For News Updates

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

November 2006
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  
« Oct   Dec »

Archives

Footer

About Me

Jennifer Marohasy Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation. Read more

Subscribe For News Updates

Subscribe Me

Contact Me

To get in touch with Jennifer call 0418873222 or international call +61418873222.

Email: jennifermarohasy at gmail.com

Connect With Me

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Copyright © 2014 - 2018 Jennifer Marohasy. All rights reserved. | Legal

Website by 46digital