Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print
Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem (Read 8985 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35538
I like fish
Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Apr 2nd, 2011 at 2:22pm
 
Does it matter if the opposition climate change spokesman can't get the basic maths right, given that they hope tree planting will contribute 60% of their emissions reduction policy? When Greg says 100 square kilometers, he actually means 10 000 square kilometers, whereas CSIRO means 750 000 square kilometers.

video:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2011/04/01/3179338.htm

transcript:

http://www.abc.net.au/lateline/content/2011/s3179336.htm

Quote:
TONY JONES, PRESENTER: The Federal Coalition's Climate Change spokesman is under attack from scientists and researchers who claim he's made a major error in his policy on emissions reductions.

Last week Greg Hunt told Lateline that 150 million tonnes of carbon dioxide per year could be abated through soil carbon sequestration over a land area of just 100 square kilometres.

Mr Hunt now claims he was misunderstood and that he was talking about a much larger area of land, but critics say the Coalition's policy still doesn't add up.

...

The Coalition does count soil carbon. They're banking on it to deliver 60 per cent of their targets, up to 85 million tonnes in the year 2020.

...

In a recent interview on Lateline, Greg Hunt said an even greater figure could be achieved on a relatively small area of land.

GREG HUNT, OPPOSITION SPOKESMAN ON CLIMATE ACTION & ENVIRONMENT: We are talking about a land mass, if you are achieving the 150 million tonnes, of an area of roughly 100 square kilometres. Not tens of thousands, but 100 square kilometres of intensive agriculture would make an extraordinary achievement on many of the estimates.

STEVE CANNANE: But Lateline has spoken to experts in the field who dispute the claim.

...

STEVE CANNANE: But when I went back to Greg Hunt today, he said he defines 100 square kilometres as a hundred by a hundred, not 10 by 10.

GREG HUNT: When I talk about the 100 squared, that's all about a hundred by a hundred square kilometres or a hundred kilometres by a hundred kilometres, 10,000 square kilometres, a million hectares. You can play a game, respectfully, or we can be serious about what's the calculation here. A million hectares at a 150 tonnes of C02 equivalent per hectare is the figure that we're talking about, but that's the intensive number.

STEVE CANNANE: Greg Hunt has altered the transcript of the original Lateline interview and posted it on his website to reflect what he says was his intended definition of 100 square kilometres.

Based on this altered figure, Greg Hunt believes 150 million tonnes of carbon dioxide can be abated in one year over one million hectares.

But using the CSIRO's best estimate, you'd need a land mass of at least 75 million hectares to do this. And if you take the CSIRO's figures at the lower end of the scale, then you'd need 500 million hectares, or 65 per cent of the land mass of Australia.

But Greg Hunt questions the CSIRO figures.
Back to top
 

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man - George Bernard Shaw
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Please delete
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #1 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 4:21pm
 
The thing that really matters is that, once again, the more creditable body - CSIRO - is dissed in favour of an outsider.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
qikvtec
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #2 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:07pm
 
77% of the population live on the east coast of Australia.  We have roughly 7 million square kilometres of land available, even if it were 750000 square K's we could still do it.  Whether that's a practical solution is obviously open for debate but either way we can afford the land.

Certainly an embarrassing mistake none the less.
Back to top
 

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM
 
IP Logged
 
Please delete
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #3 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:25pm
 
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:07pm:
77% of the population live on the east coast of Australia.  We have roughly 7 million square kilometres of land available, even if it were 750000 square K's we could still do it.  Whether that's a practical solution is obviously open for debate but either way we can afford the land.

Certainly an embarrassing mistake none the less.


That's one tenth of Australia's land mass. And it would have to be part of our arable land area.

Another embarassing exagerration?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Dsmithy70
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13041
Newy
Gender: male
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #4 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm
 
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy
Back to top
 

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento
 
IP Logged
 
qikvtec
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #5 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm
 
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggesting it should be done on that scale.  

Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:49pm by qikvtec »  

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM
 
IP Logged
 
Dsmithy70
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13041
Newy
Gender: male
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #6 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:50pm
 
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggestion it should be done on that scale.  


Damn I was hoping we could turn the rivers inland Grin Grin Grin

Sorry qiv couldn't resist, more to the topic as you say it would be VERY expensive........more than a $30 p/tonne tax on Carbon do you think.
If it was Government doing it where's the money coming from, a new tax perhaps?

Back to top
 

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento
 
IP Logged
 
Please delete
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Please delete this smacking
PROFILE

Posts: 2936
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #7 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:54pm
 
Adding water to sand doesn't make arable land.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
qikvtec
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #8 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:00pm
 
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:50pm:
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggestion it should be done on that scale.  


Damn I was hoping we could turn the rivers inland Grin Grin Grin

Sorry qiv couldn't resist, more to the topic as you say it would be VERY expensive........more than a $30 p/tonne tax on Carbon do you think.
If it was Government doing it where's the money coming from, a new tax perhaps?



What would it cost to implement carbon capture programs at all Australian Coal Fired plants.
Back to top
 

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM
 
IP Logged
 
qikvtec
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #9 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:06pm
 
Please delete wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:54pm:
Adding water to sand doesn't make arable land.


No, but adding Nutrients does; sand is a very efficient substrate otherwise.  Given sufficient time there would be sufficient humus to remove the added fertilisers.

Again not suggesting it's practical, but is certainly possible.


Back to top
 

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM
 
IP Logged
 
Equitist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 9632
NSW
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #10 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:14pm
 


qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:06pm:
Please delete wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:54pm:
Adding water to sand doesn't make arable land.


No, but adding Nutrients does; sand is a very efficient substrate otherwise.  Given sufficient time there would be sufficient humus to remove the added fertilisers.

Again not suggesting it's practical, but is certainly possible.




That's right - it is possible but ludicrously-impractical...not to mention reckless...

Ironically, it would certainly be a damn sight more expensive than any other proposal to date!

That said, it does give us some idea of just how much wanton combustion of non-renewable fossil fuels Australia's tiny population is responsible for...

Back to top
 

Lamenting the shift in the Australian psyche, away from the egalitarian ideal of the fair-go - and the rise of short-sighted pollies, who worship the 'Growth Fairy' and seek to divide and conquer!
 
IP Logged
 
Dsmithy70
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ire futuis vobismetipsis

Posts: 13041
Newy
Gender: male
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #11 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:15pm
 
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:00pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:50pm:
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggestion it should be done on that scale.  


Damn I was hoping we could turn the rivers inland Grin Grin Grin

Sorry qiv couldn't resist, more to the topic as you say it would be VERY expensive........more than a $30 p/tonne tax on Carbon do you think.
If it was Government doing it where's the money coming from, a new tax perhaps?



What would it cost to implement carbon capture programs at all Australian Coal Fired plants.

Carbon capture is a straw man always was, why not just go for cold fusion? Grin
Back to top
 

REBELLION is not what most people think it is.
REBELLION is when you turn off the TV & start educating & thinking for yourself.
Gavin Nascimento
 
IP Logged
 
qikvtec
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1846
Queensland
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #12 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:34pm
 
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:15pm:
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:00pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:50pm:
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggestion it should be done on that scale.  


Damn I was hoping we could turn the rivers inland Grin Grin Grin

Sorry qiv couldn't resist, more to the topic as you say it would be VERY expensive........more than a $30 p/tonne tax on Carbon do you think.
If it was Government doing it where's the money coming from, a new tax perhaps?



What would it cost to implement carbon capture programs at all Australian Coal Fired plants.

Carbon capture is a straw man always was, why not just go for cold fusion? Grin


Our coal fired plants will be operational for at least the next 50 years perhaps longer.  I was just curious what it would actually cost?
Back to top
 

Politicians and Nappies need to be changed often and for the same reason.

One trouble with political jokes is that they often get elected.

Alan Joyce for PM
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #13 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:42pm
 
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:50pm:
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:33pm:
Dsmithy70 wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:26pm:
Yes I'll be interested how we transform the Simpson/Great sandy deserts into lush forest Cheesy


It's not that hard to be honest, it wouldn't be cheap, but certainly not impossible.  Arguably environmental bastardry of the highest order, but to argue it's not possible is simply ridiculous.  Have you seen the number of 36 hole golf courses in the middle eastern deserts?

You could pump water in from Cubby Station, Down from the Kimberley or desalinate in SA or WA and pump it up or across.  

I'm not for a second suggestion it should be done on that scale.  


Damn I was hoping we could turn the rivers inland Grin Grin Grin

Sorry qiv couldn't resist, more to the topic as you say it would be VERY expensive........more than a $30 p/tonne tax on Carbon do you think.
If it was Government doing it where's the money coming from, a new tax perhaps?


  Wink Mate, there is the m(&%f&(^% rub!  Cheesy Grin
Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
BatteriesNotIncluded
Gold Member
*****
Offline


MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966
Re: Greg Hunt's 100 square km comprehension problem
Reply #14 - Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:47pm
 
qikvtec wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 6:06pm:
Please delete wrote on Apr 2nd, 2011 at 5:54pm:
Adding water to sand doesn't make arable land.


No, but adding Nutrients does; sand is a very efficient substrate otherwise.  Given sufficient time there would be sufficient humus to remove the added fertilisers.

Again not suggesting it's practical, but is certainly possible.



Therefore suggesting Tony Abbott is dead in the water: this is all going in the history books as a leadership problem!!!

TONY ABBOTT IS A DODGY M*&^%F(&%!!!

  Wink Wink Cheesy Grin

Therefore suggesting Tony Abbott is dead in the water: this is all going in the history books as a leadership problem!!!

TONY ABBOTT IS A DODGY M*&^%F(&%!!!

  Wink Wink Cheesy Grin

Back to top
 

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is.  It wouldn't be there without the tax payer.  Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know....  (swaggy) *
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 
Send Topic Print