Climate change and the consumer - news

Ideas
902

Inspirational or aspirational?

I found lots of useful but mixed messaging in this and a previous similar linked ABC news item.

The positives there are steps home owners can take. The upfront cost in making improvements. $12,000 in one example on changes to the home. The $34,000 for a second hand EV is also part of the costs, although it replaced an older ICE vehicle. It’s a worthwhile start for those who can afford it, given there are savings into the future. The ABC did point out that many including renters are excluded from these benefits.

Also in the report is a look at the prospects of new housing being built to higher energy star ratings. The impact this might have on the value of existing housing is also mentioned.

It’s a very mixed bag, not fully reflected in the ABC title or lead in. Perhaps the ABC would be better served by looking carefully at the content and making 3 or 4 more focused articles instead of the one?

Anyone wondering about ‘net zero’ in the context of the ABC articles? Net-zero in the home is one small part of the overall need for change. It’s not the same Net zero per capita as the national target for 2050. The one keeping some politicians from observing Sunday as a day for rest and worship.

1 Like
903

Perhaps now just one politician?

Old King Coal?

904

It’s easy to turn off a topic when there is so much being written about it, and in essence so little changes.

I’ve a feeling the fable of ‘The King’s New Clothes’ has just been rewritten with a different ending. In the new version the Taylor had convinced the King to supply a new set of clothes to everyone in the Kingdom. Not only are the clothes magical as per the original, the King has negotiated a special deal with Mr Taylor. It’s not going to cost the tax payer anything.

I’m hopeful we can all see through this one! :wink:

905

What a difference a day, and a COP 26 conference, makes.

But back in Australia, the Federal Governmnet’s plans are looking like coal smoke and mirrors.

3 Likes
906

I found The Guardian is also providing very relevant analysis and updates. What ever the questions might be on how Australia is going to deliver on a low carbon economy, it’s likely to be recent content and commentary.

As an owner of a few acres I might be encouraged by the Government optimism.

Another side of the same coin.

Must have been a shilling? :joy:

2 Likes
907

More dire warnings.

But help is coming.

908

Huw Parkinson reimagines Barnaby Joyce as 1960s Batman.

The sub-text is ‘Not’ quite correct!

Barnaby is reincarnated as the “boy wonder”.
ScoMo makes a cameo as ‘The Mayor’ or is it as PM of Gotham City?
No ‘Biff’ or ‘Kapow’. There is little real action, but plenty of dialogue. Just like the real world? :wink::rofl:

909

Another day aboard the SS Ship Of Fools.

As it speeds towards the iceberg.

Without a care in the world.

But fortunately, not all Aussies are idiots.

910

An article regarding makig homes more energy efficient.

It appears that whoever wrote this article was not the top of their class in maths.

'In 2016, the couple also installed solar panels for $13,500. That means they can power their house during the day with renewable technology.

“That’s paid us back about five grand [until] now, and it’ll pay us back [entirely] in another five years,” Rowan says.’

A saving of around $5,000 in last 7 years and a future saving of around $8,500 in the next 5 years?

‘From all these measure, the couple’s power bills have dropped from $896 annually in 2014 to $571 this year.’

A saving of just $2,275 in 7 years?

As I posted in another topic, our solar & battery system has slashed our electricity bill by more than $1,500 per year.

And what a shame they did not advise the name of the used EV importer.

'Aside from ‘Rowie’s solar jam’, their renewable energy connection is also helping to power a new toy: A second-hand electric car bought this year for $26,600.

“It’s done 30,000 kilometres in Japan and I imported it through a company in Tasmania that’s doing that in bulk,” he says.’

image

911

An interesting article.

1 Like
912

Most of the content appears more aspirational. The more factual content needs a second read. It’s value might might depend on ones outlook or understanding of the topic.

It’s worth reading the ABC reporter’s referenced Corelogic report. I’ve linked as follows. The ABC has quoted word for word. IMO neither the source report or ABC use are presented in context. It’s open to misinterpretation.

‘2022 PowerHousing Australia CoreLogic Standard House Report | PowerHousing Australia

The ABC quoted.
The report by PowerHousing — an organisation which helps Community Housing Providers (CHPs) develop and manage affordable housing across Australia — says those 8 million homes contribute between 18 and 20 per cent of Australia’s carbon emissions.

It needs a serious ‘fact check’, IMO.
To be clarified by the 2021 census, there are approx 9.3 million free standing homes in Australia. There is no mention in the Corelogic PowerHousing report of the proportion of carbon the other approx 1.3 million contribute. Approx 2.7 million Aussie households have rooftop solar. Considering the carbon offsets they deliver the majority of these will be close to carbon neutral.

While there may be 8 million homes in Australia that are not as energy efficient as they could be, simple maths suggests only 6.6 million can contribute more than most. (Discount for those with solar PV.) The actual number could be even lower once differences in construction, climate, insulation and heating/cooling are considered. Some of the 6.6 million will be low emitters, some average and some high. It’s the higher emitters in this 6.6 million that should be identified.

It’s open for all to consider which purpose or interests the following statement from the report best serves.

PowerHousing’s chief executive, Nicholas Proud, says many of these homes should be “knocked down and rebuilt”.

He suggested doing this could see more homes replaced on smaller blocks, which would boost the amount of houses in the market and, potentially, bring down prices for potential buyers.

“We need to be looking to replace those homes,” he says.

"We need to see more affordable options, more environmental options, we need to see greater opportunity for people to get their foot on the property ladder.

P.S.
For those carbon conscious in the community, none of this will be new. The greater portion of Australia’s carbon footprint does not come from the home or personal vehicle use. It is in areas Government has the ability to influence or control.

P.P.S.
The ABC Article now has a new headline. More in keeping with the content?

Eight million Australian homes aren’t energy efficient. This sharehouse is just one battling to change their property

913

An interesting article regarding Charles Darwin’s advice on forests.

Over 50 years ago, King Ranch Australia was clear-felling huge areas of rainforest West of Tully using pairs of bulldozers to drag huge chains with a large ball in the middle.

They left small pockets of trees here and there, presumably as shade for the cattle they would introduce.

On one occassion when we were driving throught on our way to the power station, a young engineer who was with us looked at the remmants and stated that they would not survive as the forest had a symbionic relationship with all its trees.

Within a few years, most of the remaining trees had died.

1 Like
914

What is at the heart of COP26?
A simple question for Australia, China and every one else.

If the current rate of global carbon emissions is not reduced:

every year of high fossil fuel emissions – currently at 35bn tonnes of CO2 equivalent a year – steadily eats away at the remaining carbon budget. At current emission rates our whole 1.5C carbon budget will be gone in about eight years, as the graph shows.

There is slightly longer if global warming of no more than 2.0C is to be achieved.

Both targets require global carbon emissions from 2021 onwards to be significantly reduced compared to the previous year.

If global emissions continue to increase as they have over the prior 5-10 years there is zero hope it will end well. The Guardian article says the rest.

P.S.
Apologies, if I forgot to end on a positive or more optimistic note.
That’s for the nations attending COP 26 to provide.

1 Like
915

Some good news?

And more bad news.

916

Who for?

There are ongoing criticisms of ‘The Australian Way’ internationally as the second article linked noted and in the news at home.

‘The Plan’

https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/November%202021/document/australias-long-term-emissions-reduction-plan-modelling.pdf

The report asserts Net Zero by 2050 keeps warming to 2C. The IPCC is saying the planet is on target for 2.4C, unless greater ambitions are met by 2030. For a rise of more than 1.5C the scientific advice is against the Great Barrier Reef and those off NW WA surviving, plus …. The plan avoids assessing these and other costs.

The rest is best left to the experts to assess.

Missing IMO are the wining lotto numbers for the 2050 draw and a celebrity endorsement, Lara Bingle, where are we going?

917

The talkfest is over.

Should be renamed COPOUT26.

Meanwhile, back in The Amazon.

image

918

With the recent COP it is becoming clear that electrifying everything it is possible to electrify today (and work towards electrifying more in the future) coupled with generating electricity via renewable means is what the people of the earth need to do.

Climate change solution could come from ‘electrifying everything’, Australian inventor Saul Griffith says Climate change solution could come from 'electrifying everything', Australian inventor Saul Griffith says - ABC News

We Can Beat Climate Change If We Do One Thing Fast We Can Beat Climate Change If We Do One Thing Fast | Time

By ‘generate electricity via renewable means’ I mean solar, wind, wave, tide, geothermal,
and where there is sufficient ‘spare’ water (after accounting for water for ecology & town water supply & agriculture & underground water replenishment) also hydro.

3 Likes
919

More bad news.

1 Like
920

So much extra growth that is fuel once it is dried enough. Even greater need to do fuel reduction burns early after a year of water bounty.

1 Like
921

How well are we going, with reducing greenhouse gas emissions?

It’s often repeated ‘there are lies, damed lies and statistics’. The data can be over whelming, and so too how it’s represented.

Fortunately there are independent ‘fact checks’ for those seeking understanding and truth. Has Australia really reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 20%?

There are some alternate truths if one chooses to look at the data more scientifically. RMIT points out that a single policy has contributed nearly all of Australia’s statistical reduction in emissions. The steps taken by Government, (notably NSW and Qld) to reduce and effectively halt land clearing commencing in the late 2000’s.

Without this single action Australia’s emissions would have been 4% greater (2005-2019) and 28.7% greater in 2019 compared with 1995.

Note:
GHG emissions for Australia and globally had a short term reduction in 2020 and 2021 due to Covid. There is a more detailed discussion of this and other factors in the RMIT-ABC article.

1 Like