Dragged kicking and screaming, but still doing his worst to distract.
1 Like
More on protecting ourselves from the consequences:
2 Likes
A good overview of how we are at risk.
Perhaps not covered in more detail is the cumulative effects of the air contaminants on our lungs.
The particles that do get past any preventive measures we may take will enter our lungs. Some will come back out as we exhale. Those that donât come back out are in our lungs forever. Our lungs donât really have a self cleaning or healing process.
Just like a filter on the air conditioner or in the vacuum cleaner, once they are clogged up they are clogged up. We can take the filter out of the air con and clean or replace it. The same process for the vacuum cleaner.
There is currently no Dyson V8, V10, or V11 feature for our lungs with a convenient push and empty the dust button. It is all downhill once your lungs get to a certain point. Worse if the type of dust is known to induce other health issues.
I think the conversation were just being polite in their assessment. Longer term exposure to contaminants from bush fire smoke may be just as bad for health as coal dust or silica dust.
All the more reason for some to burst the Canberra bubble and let the smoke into the chambers of the house in the hill.
3 Likes
Ken Henry on the politics of climate change. If we want action, it seems, the best way to get it would be to convince Morrison that itâs in his short-term interests.
https://johnmenadue.com/ken-henry-the-political-economy-of-climate-change/
1 Like
A once in 100 year weather event in SEQ.
And rainforests now subject to bushfires.
Move along folks. Nothing to see here. Donât you worry about that.
Apparently, half a degree makes a lot of difference:
https://marchforscience.org/ipcc-and-cop-un-climate-negotiations/
Obstructionism continues.
2 Likes
It appears the writing is already on the table with some major players holding the gear change hard in reverse?
A key question for the current Australian Govt may be if they intend to turn back the boats of South Pacific Islanders whose homes will all too soon be under water. Gold Coast canal estate investors excepted, although they may already have a boat!
4 Likes
Getting a bit off-topic (or maybe not). Itâs interesting how this all hangs together with the dominant ideology of our age.
Business profits by externalising costs, which precipitates catastrophes from which business also profits (Disaster Capitalism). Business then leverages the upheavals to lobby for policies that favour them (Shock Doctrine).
None of which would be possible in Australia. No, never. Heaven forfend! 
3 Likes
An extremely interesting article regarding climate change in Australia.
2 Likes
Yeah, read this earlier. Makes for fascinating reading.
1 Like
An interesting slide show regarding various methods for storage of energy.
This is not the worst things will get. How many Australians will be able to avoid becoming climate refugees? From observation, we really are stupid enough to let this happen to larger towns and even cities.
âInternally displacedâ sounds dashed uncomfortable to me.
2 Likes
As I mentioned in the context of unusual flooding, refugees only matter when they are from the next suburb not across the world. Itâs a way to get some (belated) action I suppose.
1 Like
Actually, I was thinking more of displaced internals than internal displacements. 
Meanwhile, something that could profoundly affect consumers (one way or another):
http://www.lofotendeclaration.org/
[edit 1]
[edit 2]
Donât these people know the meaning of âexternalised costâ?
2 Likes
Now even big business wants climate change action in Australia.
It looks like the only party not wanting to do anything is the Federal Government.
3 Likes
Perhaps, but would those funds be better spent on carbon reduction strategies or restructuring of industry sectors (EG Agriculture) to be more suited to our environment as well as lower carbon? A pyrrhic victory that perpetuates the status quo
Taxing the big carbon producers just one dollar for the sake of compensation would seem unlikely to cause any to restructure or shut down?
A positive. Is it driven by a corporate expectation that a some time in the next 30 years Australia or globally there will be governments that will act more decisively? The longer more determined policy to remedy climate change is put off the greater the business shock/impact. Remedy will be hard hitting due to the need at the time to catch up.
Historically when in the public eye leadership has failed totally the solutions have rarely come about through democratic process. Oliver Cromwell, the US War of Independence, The French Revolution, which western democracies hold up as beacons, not crimes. Or with less clear democratic outcomes the fall of Czarist Russia and Nationalist China.
Perhaps the big think tanks within the larger global enterprises can see other risks in failure to address climate change decisively to the detriment of all.
2 Likes
If some panic over âboat peopleâ now, what will happen when hundreds of millions begin running out of water?
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/2019/12/water-towers-high-mountains-are-in-trouble-perpetual/
1 Like
Canberra has recorded its highest December temperature of 39.3
I wonder if any hard working pollies were affected or they just cranked up the aircon at Parliament House?
I guess everyone else can just cool off in Lake Burley Griffin.
2 Likes
Itâs worth asking why so many properties on the far south coast of NSW, a short drive from Canberra are expensive and favoured weekend locations for residents of the ACT.
Not that the local FNQ Federal members will be any where else for the current parliamentary break than their local offices in Cairns or � What does the local gossip suggest @Fred123?
1 Like
Donât you mean General Revenue 
I doubt even if the Fed Govt collected it for the fund that the fund would actually see the levy go inâŠor as fast as it went in the Govt would siphon it for other projects just like they stripped funds from NDIS etc to bring in the surplus, which may not appear anyway or maybe it will be reduced yet again.
I think just put a price on carbon emissions that actually deals with the underlying Global Warming problems, I know it is a levy but it needs to be substantial enough to really make a difference. I include the fugitive emissions in this levy. Forget about scope 3 emissions not being counted here so that we will have every tonne that leaves already accounted and paid for. Then as suggested above put that money into research to help adapt to and reduce the level of global warming, carbon and other GHG emission reductions (eg tree planting, renewable energy generation & storage, smarter fossil free industries), Global Warming responsive housing/building designs, proper water management, saving our flora and fauna from the issues of a too rapid environmental change and so on.
2 Likes
