Australian Politics Forum - Climate Change Discussion and Questions

Jovial Monk Ex Member	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #150 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:17pm The IPCC is only 90% certain...if you have evidence to the contrary you should submit it and make a hero of yourself
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #151 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:22pm

Quote:

The IPCC is only 90% certain...if you have evidence to the contrary you should submit it and make a hero of yourself

That was in 2007. A lot of work has been done since then.

Actually their term “very likely” means 90-99% certain if you read the report correctly. The certainty has increased even more since then. I need to sleep right now, but if you promise to listen, I'll do my best to explain point by point.

http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports//tar/vol4/english/wg1fnspm.htm

Quote:

In this Summary for Policymakers and in the Technical Summary, the following words have been used where appropriate to indicate judgmental estimates of confidence: virtually certain (greater than 99% chance that a result is true); very likely (90-99% chance); likely (66-90% chance); medium likelihood (33-66% chance); unlikely (10-33% chance); very unlikely (1-10% chance); exceptionally unlikely (less than 1% chance). The reader is referred to individual chapters for more details.

As far as developments since 2007, you can also read the Copenhagen Synthesis Report. It's quite easy reading.

http://climatecongress.ku.dk/pdf/synthesisreport/

and this document:

http://eelinks.wordpress.com/2009/07/25/keynewcience/

Back to top

« Last Edit: Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:28pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Ex Member	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #152 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:27pm It was 'very likely' that cold fusion was going to happen in my sink too
Back to top	IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #153 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:29pm No, I think that was next to impossible. Cold Fusion didn't even get one paper past Peer Review. If you're going to deprive me of sleep (I got up very early this morning) then please take it seriously.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #154 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:33pm

The language has changed totally in recent publications:

Quote:

The scientific evidence today overwhelmingly indicates that allowing
the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities to continue
unchecked constitutes a significant threat to the well-being and
continued development of contemporary society. The knowledge
that human activities are influencing the climate gives contemporary
society the responsibility to act.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Jovial Monk Ex Member	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #155 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:38pm Quote: The language has changed totally in recent publications: Which would indicate that the 'certainty' is no longer there. If the data changes, then change the rules for reporting the data...your type will ignore that sort of thing
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #156 - Nov 7^th, 2009 at 11:45pm

Quote:

The language has changed totally in recent publications:

Which would indicate that the 'certainty' is no longer there.

If the data changes, then change the rules for reporting the data...your type will ignore that sort of thing

The conventions applied for the AR4 Public Policy Report in 2007 were simply phrases that were used to indicate the certainty. If you read those two links with an open mind, you'll see that a considerable amount of new work has been done, and that words like 'conclusive' are being used.

Quote:

Recent revisions of projected changes are higher than earlier estimates and the IPCC projections published in 2007 now appear rather conservative in light of more recent observations and improved modeling techniques. Fortunately, strong policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can still avert the worst consequences of climate change.

I'll continue tomorrow if you're still interested.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Senexx

Full Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 101
Australia

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #157 - Dec 7^th, 2009 at 12:54pm

I hope this is the most appropriate place to put this. It is rather difficult amongst a number of similar thread. I've only had a quick look at the first 6 pages of this thread.

muso wrote on Nov 9^th, 2009 at 7:36am:

A Carbon Tax would work better than emissions trading. As I've said before, emissions trading is too prone to abuse.

Malcolm Turnbull has quite a plausible position on this. If he had caucus support, I think the Libs could have come up with a better scheme than the ALP.

I've seen the ALP's Department of Climate Change in action in Canberra, and wasn't too impressed. Enough said.

When you're given 2 working days to review a document that's about 140 pages long, it shows how much they are rushing headlong into this and making mistakes along the way.

What follows is my understanding of the carbon tax vs. emissions trading debate.

We have known the ETS is a cap & trade system for a long time now.
Which of course means small business will do their job, sell their permits and big business will pollute just as much as they do now as they'll have all the permits. It essentially becomes a monopoly or an oligopoly.

Small business could then make a mistake and actually produce more carbon than it should but then get fined (I'm assuming a fine is an option for a breach) because there are no permits left to buy (trade) since big business has them all and isn't willing.

The small business is then forced out of the market place and goes out of business.

This is of no concern to big business. Big business puts the prices up to pay for new costs as they have always done.

The consumer pays more. Making ends meet becomes more difficult.

Sounds like a Tax. Not a tax per se but this is why it is broadly called a tax.

The concept of a carbon tax is actually simple and easy to understand. It is broad based and applies equally to all. The CIS have outlined quite nicely how a carbon tax would work. I think it would be more saleable in the broader electorate which thus far has confessed it does not understand the ETS.

As far as I can tell, the only reason we're introducing an ETS is because most of the rest of the world is and it is easier to trade like with like (ETS & ETS) instead of like with unlike (ETS & Carbon Tax).

Feel free to correct the errors and erroneous assumptions I have made with facts. Some of it may have all ready been discussed.

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #158 - Dec 7^th, 2009 at 1:44pm

I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's very difficult to criticise a Carbon Tax. If the French can do it, so can we.

Proponents of the ETS will argue that it's a cap and trade system, and it achieves the objective of reducing carbon emissions by X% by a certain date. However, you can achieve exactly the same with a carbon tax, and it's fairer to everybody. Anyone with a calculator can work out what the tax must be raised to, and when.

Tony Abbott was on the news last night saying that the great Australian Coal industry must stay in business.

The point that everybody is missing is that it has to eventually go out of business. If it doesn't, civilisation is going down the tubes. Kevin Rudd conveniently dodges the obvious by talking about clean coal. Clean Coal will never happen - it's pure fantasy. Cloud Cuckoo land.

He talks about clean coal only because it's politically expedient for him.

By the way, the consumer pays more whichever way you work it, at least in the short run. The price of renewable energy will come down with increased demand, and the whole intention is to subsidise renewables in the short term using the Carbon Tax - otherwise, what''s the point ?

Eventually there will be no carbon tax revenue, because everybody will have switched to renewables.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 7^th, 2009 at 1:49pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #159 - Dec 7^th, 2009 at 8:36pm muso wrote on Dec 7^th, 2009 at 1:44pm: I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's very difficult to criticise a Carbon Tax. If the French can do it, so can we. Vel, 'ello?!? With over 75% of their electricity coming from nuclear power, it's easy for the French to slap a bit of tax on the what's left.
Back to top	IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #160 - Dec 7^th, 2009 at 9:18pm

Oh my God!! Now the Palestinians are against AGW, branding it a lie!
Everything the Palestinians are against is a Zionist plot - AGW is a Zioniast plot!!! Can't you see?!

The Myths of Global Warming, Part 6: Do you think they are lying? Of course they are!
http://www.paltelegraph.com/columnists/peter-eyre/3060-the-myths-of-global-warmi...

The Palestine Telegraph (we change the world).

Back to top

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #161 - Dec 8^th, 2009 at 8:38am

Soren wrote on Dec 7^th, 2009 at 8:36pm:

muso wrote on Dec 7^th, 2009 at 1:44pm:

I think you've hit the nail on the head. It's very difficult to criticise a Carbon Tax. If the French can do it, so can we.

Vel, 'ello?!?

With over 75% of their electricity coming from nuclear power, it's easy for the French to slap a bit of tax on the what's left.

Agreed - we have a much bigger obstacle to overcome. There are a lot of differences between Australia and France in terms of power infrastructure, and they do have three times our population.

With China and India now looking at quite enormous reductions in greenhouse gases, coal might not be as exportable a commodity in years to come, particularly since Australia just provides the coal that China doesn't produce domestically.

They are capable of producing about 4 billion tonnes per year, and they import about the same.

We could get rid of our domestic coal fired power stations and replace them with a combination of geothermal and solar within 30 years. In fact we'll have to. Nuclear might be an option, although globally it's more advantageous to sell it to countries with low potential for large geothermal and solar power generation.

Coal doesn't have much of a future.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #162 - Dec 8^th, 2009 at 8:41am

Soren wrote on Dec 7^th, 2009 at 9:18pm:

Oh my God!! Now the Palestinians are against AGW, branding it a lie!
Everything the Palestinians are against is a Zionist plot - AGW is a Zioniast plot!!! Can't you see?!

The Myths of Global Warming, Part 6: Do you think they are lying? Of course they are!
http://www.paltelegraph.com/columnists/peter-eyre/3060-the-myths-of-global-warmi...

The Palestine Telegraph (we change the world).

Oh God - undersea volcanic activity in the Arctic. Haven't they heard of ΔH°=SMΔT ? We'd need something like 100 times the volcanic heat flux generated by all the volcanoes on earth to have that effect.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions Reply #163 - Dec 8^th, 2009 at 10:43am FROM muso wrote on Dec 8^th, 2009 at 8:38am: If the French can do it, so can we. TO Quote: Agreed - we have a much bigger obstacle to overcome. Why are you reminding me of Tim Flip-Flop Flannery?
Back to top	IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Climate Change Discussion and Questions
Reply #164 - Dec 8^th, 2009 at 11:45am

I was just making an observation. Not everything I say should be construed as a counter argument, and besides, we were discussing two separate issues 1. The Carbon Tax and 2. The provision of carbon neutral power generation.

1. I still think that we can build a power generation network with a low carbon footprint, much as the French have done. It doesn't necessarily have to be nuclear though.

2. I acknowledge that we're starting the race a few hundred metres behind the French in one respect, but I still think that we can (and have to) introduce a carbon tax system. We have more obstacles initially but we can overcome these obstacles.

3. As we progress with building new renewable energy projects, the Carbon tax impact will become less and less.

Just because we are behind the 8 ball in terms of existing coal-fired power stations, doesn't mean that we have to stay behind the 8 ball.

We have advantages that France don't have:

For example, the fact that France imports all of its Uranium. It's very resource deficient. On the other hand, we have the world's biggest reserves of Uranium.

Another point is that while France have geothermal assets in the Massif Centrale, they don't have anything like enough to provide their population with power. Australia has enough proven geothermal reserves to provide approximately 60% of our needs.

We also have a lot more open country that could be used for solar power, and a much higher power ratio per square metre as a result of our increased sunshine and proximity to the equator.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 8^th, 2009 at 12:04pm by muso »

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged