What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

OT: Current Affairs and Politics

hindy111

Post Whore
Messages
59,207
Tbh I am not really a begger. :grin: Genuine average and a Green voter.
What woukd Allan think of me.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,063
Angus raises a good point.

If Angus is trying to argue it should get credit for reducing emissions overseas, it should also take responsibility for fueling the climate crisis as the world’s largest exporter of coal.

His mate Canavan repeated the spin...

“Yes, from a carbon accounting perspective, that increases Australia’s carbon emissions because we are the country where the gas is liquified, however the gas is then used in other countries and they use the gas to replace, often coal, but sometimes dirtier forms of power, and that helps the world’s carbon emissions,” he said.

It was a diversion and spin on the day that they finally released the December emissions figures, just after the election. :thinking:

Angus said about the Paris targets that the government’s climate targets were “ambitious”, despite the fact that its 26%-28% emissions reduction target is not considered to be aligned with the Paris goal of limiting global heating to no more than 2 degrees.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-report-withheld-in-defiance-of-senate-order

Angus is also being cheeky in the way that he claiming that Australia will meet its Paris targets.

The government says it will meet the Paris target by using so-calledcarry-over carbon credits from the Kyoto Protocol period. Those credits total 367 million tonnes, and counting them towards the Paris goals halves Australia's emissions reduction task.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...greenhouse-gas-emissions-20190531-p51t8s.html

Even the NZ Climate minister has called Angus out.

KIERAN GILBERT:Yeah, we will talk to Labor about it. I promise you we will pursue them on this because it is a very worthwhile question of them - but you're the Government, and you're the one who has committed to using the carryover. What do you say to Climate Minister Shaw from New Zealand who says this is not in the spirit of the Paris agreement, to be using this when other nations, the EU, the UK, and others have said that they're not going to use this carryover?

ANGUS TAYLOR:Well, I say we have exceeded our Kyoto targets, those other countries mostly haven't. No wonder they don't want us to use them. Look, there is less carbon in the atmosphere because of what Australia's done. New Zealand is going to use international credits to get there because they don't want to go around and reduce their cattle herd. Look, the question though remains is how is Labor going to get to 45 per cent, Kieran? It is the fundamental question. It remains unanswered by them. Independent modelling tells us $9,000 hit to your average earnings of a worker per year, and 336,000 jobs - and that's if they use the carryover, that's if they use the carryover.

http://155.187.2.69/minister/taylor/speeches/tr20190305.html

Spin
roll
 

Gary Gutful

Post Whore
Messages
51,913
If Angus is trying to argue it should get credit for reducing emissions overseas, it should also take responsibility for fueling the climate crisis as the world’s largest exporter of coal.

His mate Canavan repeated the spin...

“Yes, from a carbon accounting perspective, that increases Australia’s carbon emissions because we are the country where the gas is liquified, however the gas is then used in other countries and they use the gas to replace, often coal, but sometimes dirtier forms of power, and that helps the world’s carbon emissions,” he said.

It was a diversion and spin on the day that they finally released the December emissions figures, just after the election. :thinking:

Angus said about the Paris targets that the government’s climate targets were “ambitious”, despite the fact that its 26%-28% emissions reduction target is not considered to be aligned with the Paris goal of limiting global heating to no more than 2 degrees.

https://www.theguardian.com/environ...s-report-withheld-in-defiance-of-senate-order

Angus is also being cheeky in the way that he claiming that Australia will meet its Paris targets.

The government says it will meet the Paris target by using so-calledcarry-over carbon credits from the Kyoto Protocol period. Those credits total 367 million tonnes, and counting them towards the Paris goals halves Australia's emissions reduction task.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/fed...greenhouse-gas-emissions-20190531-p51t8s.html

Even the NZ Climate minister has called Angus out.

KIERAN GILBERT:Yeah, we will talk to Labor about it. I promise you we will pursue them on this because it is a very worthwhile question of them - but you're the Government, and you're the one who has committed to using the carryover. What do you say to Climate Minister Shaw from New Zealand who says this is not in the spirit of the Paris agreement, to be using this when other nations, the EU, the UK, and others have said that they're not going to use this carryover?

ANGUS TAYLOR:Well, I say we have exceeded our Kyoto targets, those other countries mostly haven't. No wonder they don't want us to use them. Look, there is less carbon in the atmosphere because of what Australia's done. New Zealand is going to use international credits to get there because they don't want to go around and reduce their cattle herd. Look, the question though remains is how is Labor going to get to 45 per cent, Kieran? It is the fundamental question. It remains unanswered by them. Independent modelling tells us $9,000 hit to your average earnings of a worker per year, and 336,000 jobs - and that's if they use the carryover, that's if they use the carryover.

http://155.187.2.69/minister/taylor/speeches/tr20190305.html

Spin
roll
That doesn't make sense. The world needs coal right now.

You can spin it anyway you like but that's true. We will eventually wean ourselves off thermal coal but met coal is still part of our future for some time.

Given that's the reality, it's only a good thing that the best quality coal from Australia is used while we are still trying to phase it out.

He is right to try and protect us from being disproportionately impacted compared to other countries given the important role we play on a global scale.
 

Gronk

Moderator
Staff member
Messages
74,063
That doesn't make sense. The world needs coal right now.

You can spin it anyway you like but that's true. We will eventually wean ourselves off thermal coal but met coal is still part of our future for some time.

Given that's the reality, it's only a good thing that the best quality coal from Australia is used while we are still trying to phase it out.

He is right to try and protect us from being disproportionately impacted compared to other countries given the important role we play on a global scale.

Agreed that realistically we will still be supplying coal whilst the world is transitioning away from it. No brainer.

Just be honest with everyone. We are struggling to meet our Paris Agreement targets because of our energy mix and energy policy.

Provide a clear energy plan to the market.

Be transparent about subsidies to all sectors.

Just be honest. If your government believes that our roll in global co2 reductions is infinitesimal and that they need not be on board (Alan Jones’s recent rice analogy) to the extent that the major polluters are, then just say it.

upload_2019-6-8_8-40-18.png

Really tired of the spin.
 

Chipmunk

Coach
Messages
16,310
Agreed that realistically we will still be supplying coal whilst the world is transitioning away from it. No brainer.

Just be honest with everyone. We are struggling to meet our Paris Agreement targets because of our energy mix and energy policy.

Provide a clear energy plan to the market.

Be transparent about subsidies to all sectors.

Just be honest. If your government believes that our roll in global co2 reductions is infinitesimal and that they need not be on board (Alan Jones’s recent rice analogy) to the extent that the major polluters are, then just say it.

View attachment 30332

Really tired of the spin.

Do the Chinese, Indians and Americans give a shit about any Paris Agreement targets?

What is the point of the Paris Agreement target?

What are the repercussions if you don't meet the targets?
 
Top