Jennifer Marohasy

a forum for the discussion of issues concerning the natural environment

Uncategorized

ABC’s “20/20” – Stossel: “Give Me a Break”

By

The ABC host introduced his regular “Give Me a Break” segment: “You’ve heard the reports. The globe is warming. And it’s our fault. And the consequences will be terrible. But you should know there is another side to this story. And scientists who’ve tried to tell it are often threatened. Which makes me say, ‘Give Me a Break.'”

Read the rest of the NewsBusters report:

ABC’s Stossel Takes on Gore Movie, Talks to Dissenting Scientists

Seems a bit like a mini version of TGGWS.

Thanks to Marc Morano for sending the link.

Is Motoring the New Smoking?

By

All advertising for new cars will have to carry cigarette-style “health warnings” about their environmental impact, under a European plan to force manufacturers to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

Companies that produce the most polluting cars will also have to pay penalties of up to £5,000 per vehicle, with the proceeds used to reduce the cost of the most efficient cars.Advertisements in newspapers and magazines, will have to devote at least 20 per cent of the space to details about fuel economy and CO2 emissions. At the moment manufacturers have to include only basic mpg and CO2 figures in the small print. They do not have to explain what the numbers mean or provide any comparison.

Read the rest of The Times article ‘Carbon health warnings for all new cars.’

Thanks to Marc Morano for alerting me to this article.

Singer to Debate Global Warming with Keller: Calls AIT ‘Bunk’ and ‘Sloppy’

By

In the great, never-cooling debate over the causes and consequences of global warming, it’s always clear whose side Fred Singer is on: not Al Gore’s. Singer, who was born in Vienna in 1924, was a pioneer in the development of rocket and satellite technology and holds a Ph.D. in physics from Princeton.

Now president of the Science & Environmental Policy Project research group (sepp.org), his latest book (with Dennis Avery) is “Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years.” I talked with Singer — who will debate global warming issues with climate scientist Charles Keller Thursday at a sold-out event at Duquesne University — by phone from his offices in Arlington, Va.:

Read the rest of the article ‘Unstoppable skeptic.’

Thanks to Marc Morano for alerting me to this article.

Election 07 in Australia and The Environment

By

I can’t work out whether ‘the environment’ is more or less important as an issue in Australia this federal election.

Both the Coalition and ALP have agreed to allow a pulp mill to be built in Tasmania, both are hell bent on buying back water licences in the Murray Darling Basin and both are ignoring the difficult issue of tree clearing in our rangelands. So there is not the polarisation and heated debate, for example on forestry or how much water is needed for the Murray River, that has so characterised previous federal elections.

The focus has changed since the last federal election from almost exclusively rural issues – where most of the Australian environment is – to what happens in our cities.

Climate change is certainly top of the agenda. The Coalition is suggesting we meet the challenge of reducing carbon emissions including through a national emissions trading scheme and developing low emissions technology including solar power, geosequestration, clean coal and even possibly nuclear.

The ALP is dealing with climate change and ‘water’ as one issue and is promising to sign Kyoto, provide rebates for the installation of rainwater tanks, loans to families that invest in solar energy and stop the building of nuclear reactors.

Apart from the issue of Kyoto – which is almost a non-issue given the Coalition plans to endorse an emissions trading scheme – nuclear seems to be the standout defining environmental issue between the major parties.

So what would it mean for Australia to go nuclear as the Coalition more-or-less propose, versus significantly cutting carbon emissions without the development of a nuclear industry as proposed by the ALP?

—————–
Liberal and Coaltion polices can found here: http://www.liberal.org.au/

ALP policies here: http://www.kevin07.com.au/fresh-ideas/climate-change-water/climate-change-water.html

Kansas Rejects Coal-Fired Power Plant due to CO2 Emissions

By

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment yesterday became the first government agency in the United States to cite carbon dioxide emissions as the reason for rejecting an air permit for a proposed coal-fired electricity generating plant, saying that the greenhouse gas threatens public health and the environment.

The decision marks a victory for environmental groups that are fighting proposals for new coal-fired plants around the country. It may be the first of a series of similar state actions inspired by a Supreme Court decision in April that asserted that greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide should be considered pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

Read the rest of the Washington Post article ‘Power Plant Rejected Over Carbon Dioxide For First Time.’

Australia and Kyoto

By

MONDAY’S tax cut announcement by the Coalition means the election campaign is off to a good start. Economic policy has been moved to the top of the political agenda, as it should be.

At the end of the first Kyoto commitment period in 2012, New Zealanders will owe about NZ$4.2 billion – or about NZ$1000 per person. So, in a nutshell, the main effect of Kyoto will be for New Zealand taxpayers to subsidise bad economic policies by politicians in the former Soviet Union. Does Kevin Rudd have similar plans for Australia? History suggests Labor has a strong record of reducing greenhouse emissions. The only prime minister who has managed to do it was Paul Keating in the early 1990s, when he engineered “the recession we had to have” and our emissions levels plummeted. Perhaps this is exactly what Rudd has in mind.

Read the entire article entitled ‘Committing to Kyoto would come at cost’