Government sticking to $23 carbon price

Posted to Perth Now (8/11/2011) on 8/11/2011 at 7:48 PM
Commenting on "Government sticking to $23 carbon price"
http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/business-old/government-sticking-to-23-carbon-price/story-e6frg2qu-1226188502875

Posted to Perth Now (8/11/2011) on 9/11/2011 at 12:57 AM, 11:35 AM
Commenting on " OPINION: Is the carbon tax good policy?"
http://www.perthnow.com.au/business/opinion/opinion-is-the-carbon-tax-good-policy/story-fn8t4my5-1226189224709

Can anyone explain to me why there were Ice Ages before Man walked on this planet Earth? Why were early Man nomadic, moving from one place to another when climatic or environmental conditions became unfavourable? What caused the heavy downpour and big flood that resulted in Noah building the Ark and transporting pairs of animals to safety? Why were there frequent floods along the banks of the River Nile which left evidence of markings on the huge columns in ancient Egyptian temples? What brought about all the droughts, forest fires, cyclones and tsunamis in various parts of the World in pre-industrialisation history?

I stress the word pre-industrialisation because those were days when coal power generation plants were not around and the mode of transport was definitely not by cars run on petrol. So, what really caused the climatic changes even though there was minimal carbon (dioxide) emission? Going back further to prehistoric time, what really caused the climatic changes even though Man were not around to cause any air pollution?

Using carbon tax to curb carbon emission is no difference from ghost busting, or trying to find the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. It's a myth!

Using carbon tax to curb carbon emission is no difference from ghost busting, or trying to find the pot of gold at the end of a rainbow. It's a myth!

Carbon tax adds additional cost

Posted to Liberal Party on 5/11/2011 at 12:45 PM
Commenting on "Direct action on water and the environment"
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Environment/Ideas/2010/Direct-action-on-water-and-the-environment.aspx#129649311311246000

Superior but expensive products do not bring home the bacon in this competitive and fast moving world. Carbon tax adds additional cost but not value to the end product or service.

Things could get bloody if Abbott abandoned carbon oath

Posted to The Age (14/10/2011) on 14/10/2011 at 2:33 PM
Commenting on “Things could get bloody if Abbott abandoned carbon oath”
http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/things-could-get-bloody-if-abbott-abandoned-carbon-oath-20111013-1lmzx.html

If there is no carbon tax, there won't be any extra work for rebates or financial assistance, which means no additional bungle, new departments and fat cats, less government spending on stationary, furniture, ombudsman, just plain boring.

With carbon tax, there will be more discussions and complaints on radio, ABC 7.30 Report or QandA, newspapers, letters to newspaper editors; cost more to produce goods and services, less competitive, less export income, less jobs, less disposal income, less overall tax revenue, less funds for services, less affordable to live in Australia, but we may lead the next global financial crisis!

This is not a good way to show the world that we are the leading twits!

Carbon tax $25 million promotion is a waste of taxpayer's money

Posted to Herald Sun (17/7/2011) on 17/7/2011 at 1:57 PM (Not published by Newspaper)
Commenting on "Former prime minister John Howard warns of lonely emissions trading path for Australia"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/prime-minister-julia-gillard-defends-carbon-tax-ad-spend/story-fn7x8me2-1226096117237

Posted to Adelaide Now (17/7/2011) on 17/7/2011 at 3:00 PM (Not published by Newspaper)
Commenting on "Prime Minister Julia Gillard defends carbon tax ad spend on visit to Adelaide today"
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/in-depth/prime-minister-julia-gillard-defends-carbon-tax-ad-spend/story-fn9ar0ql-1226096180708

If Julia Gillard can't convince the majority of Australians the idea of carbon tax for the last few weeks on television, radio, print media, YouTube, etc., probably worth more than $25 million of virtual promotion without costing the public a cent, how can $25 million of real money change the public opinion? This is another example of Labor / Gillard's Government in mismanaging taxpayers' money. $25 million can be used to feed many hungry stomaches and fund another public housing project! The world economy is getting from bad to worse, and Australia good time cannot last indefinitely. It does not need Nostradamus to tell us that weakness in property market, car sales, retail business, and low consumer confidence are not sure signs of economic collapse. The way Labor / Gillard's Government pouring money down the drain is despicable; Gillard and her team MUST go; if the Liberal is not going to do anything more positive to bring about the political scenario change, Australians MUST rise to get rid of this incompetent government before the death of this lucky country!

Voters want election on carbon tax - Part 2

Posted to Adelaide Now (6/6/2011) on 6/6/2011 at 11:50 PM
Commenting on "Voters want election on carbon tax as poll finds a majority expect to be worse off"
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/voters-wants-election-on-carbon-tax-as-poll-finds-a-majority-expect-to-be-worse-off/story-e6frea6u-1226069714958

The carbon (dioxide) emission per capita of Australia is and will always be much greater than China and India because of our small pollution. To explain this, let us look at a household of 1 and another of 5. Both need only a refrigerator to keep food fresh or a washing machine to wash clothing. The household of 5 uses the same amount of electricity for the appliances and therefore "polluting" the planet with the same amount of greenhouse gas. Now, a hall with 1 occupant or 100 occupants requires the same number of lights to be turned on for a performance; and an electrified train carrying 1 passenger or 500 passengers consumes about the same amount electricity to commute between Melbourne and Sydney.

There are times when no consumers are involved and yet the waste has to be shared by the population. A lot of power is lost in transmitting electricity from the power stations to hundreds of kilometres of nothingness before populated towns or cities. A lot of energy is required to get rid of the sewer travelling great length of pipes to filtration plant. When we talk about power and energy, we really mean electricity which operates the equipment to make these things happen.

These examples explain the concept of economy of scale and illustrate the principle of fixed and variable costs. So long if we continue to live in a cocoon and not to increase our population, Australia will always be more expensive to live in and the greenhouse gas emission will be a lot higher than more populated countries. Population of USA is about 13.7 times of Australia's, and China is 59 times of Australia's.

I hope those people argue about our excessive greenhouse emission per capita will have a better understanding and hopefully conduct more meaning debate in the future.

Voters want election on carbon tax

Posted to Adelaide Now (6/6/2011) on 6/6/2011 at 10:23 AM
Commenting on "Voters want election on carbon tax as poll finds a majority expect to be worse off"
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/voters-wants-election-on-carbon-tax-as-poll-finds-a-majority-expect-to-be-worse-off/story-e6frea6u-1226069714958

With or without carbon tax, just give us an election to get rid of the incompetent government. John Hewson, Bob Hawke and other "yesterday heroes" should back off the carbon tax debate.

Many economic rationalists and politicians are no more than armchair generals, and are out of touch with the hands-to-mouth real world.

Even if carbon tax does not affect significantly employment in the mining sector, the flow on effect IS damaging to other industries. An increase in cost in the mining sector will pass on to downstream and related industries, and the chain reaction is similar to an atomic explosion. Worse still, it turns into a feedback loop, increasing wages and other production costs in the industry which started the reaction.

The recent floods in various parts of Australia cost me more than 15% jump in my last month's house insurance premium renewal, making me an indirect victim of the floods. Similar situation will happen to innocent victims if the damaging carbon tax is introduced.

Sea levels to rise 1.1m

Posted to Herald Sun (5/6/2011) on 5/6/2011 at 2:20 AM
Commenting on "Sea levels to rise 1.1m"
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/more-news/sea-levels-to-rise-11m/story-fn7x8me2-1226069302495

Posted to Liberal Party on 5/6/2011 at 2:38 AM
Commenting on "Sustainable Population Growth"
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Environment/Ideas/2010/Direct-action-on-water-and-the-environment.aspx#129516791041348000

If the sea water is getting more saline, then melting ice will dilute it, marine lives will not be facing extinction.

If the land is getting arid, the rising water will irrigate it, deserts will become productive land.

If the underground water table is sinking, the excess water flowing inland will fill it, many high rise buildings will not face destruction.

Everything happens for a reason, and that's the beauty of nature! Climate change gives us hope and new lease of life!

Australia entering 'decades of boom' or 'decades of doom'?

Posted to Liberal Party on 3/6/2011 at 2:38 PM
Commenting on "Sustainable Population Growth"
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/Environment/Ideas/2010/Direct-action-on-water-and-the-environment.aspx#129515495102220000

The predictive economic models are questionable for modern day use. The yesteryear world was "larger" and separated by barriers, and things moved more slowly. Debt borrowing was not as prevalent then.

It is evident that when US sneezes, the world catches a cold, and Australia stock market becomes infected with pneumonia – it was hit hard by the loss of $33 billion in a day on 2 June 2011.

The head of Treasury, Dr Martin Parkinson, told the senate hearing that, "Mining is 8 per cent of gross domestic product," and continued to say "It's a very important 8 per cent, but there's a very important 92 per cent of GDP which is out there which for some reason we have stopped talking about." I would argue that this 8 per cent is far more important than the rest of 92 per cent, because without this 8 per cent, the rest of domestic consumption will stall.

Mining industry is a primary industry, and so far the boom is centred in Western Australia and Queensland. Mother Nature has not been kind to Queensland, but not too cruel to spare Western Australia. If Mother Nature can do that to Australia, the supplier of natural resources, it can also do the same to our buyers. We have witnessed Mother Nature’s did not spare Japan from the destructive force of tsunami. Australian iron ore export to Japan has dropped so drastically because the Japanese car manufacturing plants are closed. Sorry if I am sinful to sound like cursing China; what if China experiences something catastrophic that Australian exports to this biggest buyer has to come to a halt?

I am a true believer that Australia’s economy is fundamentally depending on the land as a primary producer. However, we have not made full use of our gift of large land mass. We keep digging for iron ore and coal, and the rest of Australia, or those working in the service / tertiary industries, benefited from the activities.

With the carbon (dioxide) tax on large carbon emitters, which unfortunately means the coal-fired power stations, the future of coal use in Australia will be decreased. What is Australia going to do with the coal? Will it stay in the ground or sell it to countries like China or India? Coal mining billionaire tycoons have so much of their money buried underground, and so many coal miners’ mouths to feed; they cannot afford not to sell the coal overseas even at low prices. What guarantees that these countries do not pollute the world more than Australia?

Australia, with the bleeding hearts politicians and former politicians like Julia Gillard, Kevin Rudd, Bob Hawke, Malcolm Turnbull, Malcolm Fraser, John Hewson, is naïve to the nth degree. Australia loses export income for low coal prices, becomes an accessory to the murder of planet Earth, causes unnecessary financial stress, pain and suffering to Australian families and deprives them quiet enjoying of this lucky country.

Before mining boom, sheep and wheat kept Australia prosperous, and what a lucky country! What has Australia done to the land and water supply? Virtually nothing, and as a result, Mother Nature punished Australia and brought forth drought. Australia was unprepared, and suffered from losses of production and income.

Money from government assistance or funding does not really come from the government; it comes from taxpayers. The money just rides on the merry-go-round. Real money to fill the kitty should derive from exporting things for money to overseas.

With millions and millions of hectares of land, Australia should be the food bowl of the world, and yet, the people are too complacent, contented and relaxed, and import foods from overseas; and most disgustingly, selling off the rural land particularly the productive ones to foreigners. What this means, Australia will buy foods from overseas companies, foods that are grown in Australian soil by Australian labour, at the price controlled by foreigners. What a joke?

Out of the blue the most prosperous European country, Germany, is hit with E-coli problem, which appears to be food-borne. Only if Australia is able to supply fresh foods cheaply by utilising the farmland more productively and intuitively, this could be a golden opportunity.

Have I missed out secondary industry? No, I have not; because there are not many around to create real employment. One after another, factories are closed or sold off. The so-called Australian icons that Australians are proud of have become history. The lack of foresight and poor planning are due to the arrogance and blindness of Australians and the Australian politicians. They do not take heed from what have been happening in United States of America and United Kingdom.

Smart countries, instead of benefitting the workforce from years of precious time, hard work and money spent in R&D, they stupidly transfer the technology to the developing countries and make the population of those countries smarter at minimal costs, leaving behind a pool of technologically knowledge poor and unemployed workforce. Put it simply, how many smart countries have factories producing hi-tech equipment, digital television, computers, solar-cells, computer chips, luxurious cars, etc.?

Economy is about supply and demand, and utilising limited resources in productive matter. If resources are limited, then the only way to survive for long term is diversification. So what should Australia do?

Many policies can be changed with the stroke of a pen, despite what the politicians have been telling us. The many debates in the Parliament are no more than theatrical performances by the Government and the Opposition.

New predictive economic models need to be found. At present, RBA should NOT increase interest rate to curb the so called inflation, because there is NO real inflation but human suffering in the economy. Private consumption with borrowed money is not a true reflection of GDP growth!

Many financial advisers tell their clients not to put their eggs into one basket, and have their assets, namely shares, properties and superannuation, apportioned proportionately. Ideally, I would like to postulate the following regarding GDP contributions:

For every 1 part contribution from primary industry, there are an equal part from secondary industry and 3 parts from tertiary industry.

Wake up Australia, Grow up Australia

Posted to Liberal Party on 28/5/2011 at 7:02 PM
Commenting on "Sustainable Population Growth"
http://www.liberal.org.au/Issues/National-Security/Immigration/Ideas/2010/Sustainable-Population-Growth.aspx#129510469194954000

Australia at present is like a cup cake, and obviously can't feed many people. However, Australia has plenty of ingredients to bake a cake bigger than any recorded in the Guinness Book of Records. With a bigger cake, more people can share our generosity.

On 12 October 1492, Columbus discovered the New World (USA), and in 1606 Willem Janszoon made the first recorded European landing on the Australian continent. The difference is 114 years.

The population of USA and Australia is about 311.6 million and 22.7 million respectively, that is to say USA has a population about 13.7 times of Australia. To reach 311.6 million, Australia population will have to grow by 1% compounding each year for 263.25 years or by 2% compounding each year for 132.27 years.

We are far too inward looking, selfish and unimaginative; we are just as irresponsive and non-adaptive as the dinosaurs which became extinct when climatic conditions became unfavourable.

Wake up Australia, grow up Australia!

Malcolm Turnbull admits that he still wants to lead the Coalition

Posted to Herald Sun (23/5/2011) on 23/5/2011 at 2:34 PM
Commenting on “Malcolm Turnbull admits that he still wants to lead the Coalition”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/labor-leaps-on-malcolm-turnbull-attack-on-coalition-carbon-plan/story-e6frf7jo-1226058861294

This is a political suicide for Malcolm Turnbull for the so-called telling the truth. The truth is in the Australia political system, if the major Party cannot win an election, that Party will not be able to form the Government on its own, or like the Labor, will have to suck up to the Greens in order to get things done.

Voters are looking for and looking up to a strong united and cohesive party, whether as the government or opposition. Turnbull's arrogance will backfire and may cause Liberal's chance to win the next election. Tony Abbott is riding high at the moment, especially on carbon tax issue. If Malcolm Turnbull can keep his trap shut for the time being, despite his different stance, Liberal can win government rather comfortably the next round, probably sooner than 2 years according to my prediction.

If he continues to behave like a spoilt brat, Tony Abbott will have no choice but to dump him from the Shadow Ministry in the name of party sustainability.

Labor carbon policies are impractical and will turn Australia into one of the most expensive and unaffordable countries to live in. It is pointless to have the cleanest planet if no one can enjoy it, or afford to enjoy it!

Malcolm Turnbull's climate policy is a sad case

Posted to Herald Sun (19/5/2011) on 19/5/2011 at 10:49 PM
Commenting on “Malcolm Turnbull admits that he still wants to lead the Coalition”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/labor-leaps-on-malcolm-turnbull-attack-on-coalition-carbon-plan/story-e6frf7jo-1226058861294

Carbon tax does not do anything to cool the Earth. It only makes the temperature of hardworking Australians go up to warm the Earth further.

Commonsense tells us that to counteract any warming, we need cooling or heat absorption. Swapping coal-fired power generation plants with solar or wind-driven ones only slows down the warming process negligibly, because the carbon dioxide discharge is so small percentage wise. Every year, bush fires and volcanic eruptions release more greenhouse pollutants than existing power plants.

It is so obvious that the Sun energy poured onto our planet everyday is not used up, and the excess is causing the warming of the atmosphere and the oceans.

Implementing carbon tax is going set up an economic chain reaction, more disastrous than any nuclear explosion. Besides increase in domestic electricity bills, all industries relying on electricity will be affected, and the cost will be passed on to the consumers.

Unfortunately carbon storage is not a feasible solution. A plausible answer is to grow high carbohydrate plants which acts as a carbon sink and helps solve starvation. Anyone supporting Gillard, her goons, and shit stirring Turnbull are wearing blinkers.

Australia can support a MUCH larger population

Posted to ABC 7.30 Report on 16/5/2011 at 4:49 PM
Australia can support a MUCH larger population

Growth for growth sake is definitely pointless. However, Australia is a big country and surrounded by water - one of the biggest island on earth. However, we keep saying that we cannot support a much larger population, and it is not sustainable to have a big population.

Big population has its advantages - economy of scale, in terms of business sales, production, utilisation of assets, etc. Many large cities of the world have population much more than Victoria or New South Wales, and yet these cities prosper and flourish.

Sustainability will be a flop if we don't build more schools, hospitals, houses and infrastructure, or grow more food, capture more rainfall, purified more water, etc. We keep taking from the ground via mining, and not putting back or growing enough to re-nourish the land.

Not all the international students coming to Australia will become citizens of this country. The population growth is not as frightening as 300,000 per year as reported. Statisticians who make such projections are based on incorrect assumption. Properly managed population provides a larger pool of tax revenue. If we are selective to pick just the cream of these students, Australia can only benefit rather than being disadvantaged.

If we are short of food, we grow them from seeds; if we demand more electricity, we build power stations; if we need to travel, we build cars, aeroplanes, boats; if we have to stop swine flu spreading, we develop vaccines.

Why are Australians still sitting on their bums, keep whinging about lack of water? Open the atlas or search on Google and check out what is surrounding Australia? If all the whingers start to use their brains instead of their mouths, water shortage will never be a daily topic!

Many people in the world still do not believe that men landed on the Moon close to 42 years ago; many people in the world can never imagine that the monstrous size computer of the 50’s can be shrunk to the size of a note pad and yet is billions times more powerful; many people still hold the view that Australia vast desert landscape cannot be transformed into productive land one day.

If United States can support 14 times more people than Australia, where is the problem? Australians MUST change their mindset about Australia is going to be overpopulated!

Get real - Australia is not lack of water or lack of rain. Australia lacks “grey matter”, lacks innovation, and worst of all, Australia lacks good leaders!

Read related blogs:
Wake up Australia, Grow up Australia
Australia needs population growth

Carbon tax to hurt more than ETS

Posted to The Australian (16/5/2011) on 16/5/2011 at 6:50 AM
Commenting on “Carbon tax to hurt more than ETS, warns energy sector”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/carbon-tax-to-hurt-more-than-ets-warns-energy-sector/story-fn59niix-1226056396835

It is sad that so much time and effort have been spent in talking about ETS and carbon tax that nothing really constructive has been done in nation building. Since Kevin Rudd came to power, one policy after another failed miserably leading to huge financial losses. So what he rectified the Kyoto Protocol, did other countries pay much attention to it? Let's look at Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs; many countries are experiencing natural disasters, and they really want to keep their people fed, and housed. Australia is facing the same problem, and billions of dollars are needed to restore the many lives to normality.

Many large Tsunamis happened in Japan long before Industrial Revolution. Pompeii was destroyed by fire and Atlantis sunk to the bottom of the ocean. These destructions were inevitable because human beings just cannot tame our planet Earth and Mother Nature. Carbon tax is no panacea, and Julia Gillard is no saviour.

Tony Abbott keeps Liberals ahead of Labor

Posted to The Australian (3/5/2011) on 3/5/2011 at 4:16 AM
Commenting on “Tony Abbott keeps Liberals ahead of Labor: Newspoll”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/abbott-keeps-libs-ahead-labor/story-fn59niix-1226048740618

Well done, Tony for your effort. Carbon tax is NOT a goer, and you are right to campaign against it. Carbon tax does not solve global warming, because the sun energy will continue to heat up our planet with the introduction of carbon tax. However, your approach in burying the carbon dioxide is not a good idea, too. When carbon dioxide is formed, one carbon atom combines with two oxygen atoms. This is analogous to oxygen depletion. Locking up the carbon dioxide also means locking up oxygen.

I have better alternatives. One is grow more carbohydrate (polysaccharides) which can be used as carbon sink as well as food for millions of hungry people in the world when harvested. Large carbon emitters and the greenies will not object such proposal, and in fact the former will be seen as environmental friendly global citizens. It also makes their triple bottom line look good.

The second alternative is to dehumidify moisture in the atmosphere. Water vapour is a bigger greenhouse culprit, worse than carbon dioxide. Atmospheric dehumidification may one day become just as popular as collection of rain water.

Read related articles in SinFongChanNewspapers.blogspot.com

Australia needs population growth

Towns need population to support businesses and hence provide jobs. Larger population, or rather higher population density, results in more efficient use of resources and infrastructure.

Electricity carried through kilometres after kilometres of nothingness wastes enormous of useful energy / power, stretches of highways with barren landscape and not populated cost millions to maintain, country hospitals with 4 or 5 beds but serviced by 30 staff are in no way economical to operate, etc.

Australia needs humans to connect the towns and cities, a lot more than the NBN.

Is Australia lack of water?

Get real - Australia lacks water because we don't get enoough rain? If we are short of food, we grow them from seeds; if we demand more electricity, we build power stations; if we need to travel, we build cars, aeroplanes, boats; if we have to stop swine flu spreading, we develop vaccines.

Why are Australians still sitting on their bums, keep whinging about lack of water? Open the atlas or search on Google and check out what is surrounding Australia? If all the whingers start to use their brains instead of their mouths, water shortage will never be a daily topic!

Balloons kill defencelss animals

Posted to Liberal Idea 'Direct action on water and the environment' on 3/04/11 at 2:22 AM

On Saturday, 2 April 2011, many balloons were released at St Kilda to mark the autism week. This also marks the death of many defenceless animals and marine lives. Why?

These people are no different from many who release hundreds of balloons in "celebrating life" (for the deceased) events at funerals.

It is important to understand that once the helium gas has escaped from the balloons, they will fall into the rivers, streams, paddocks, etc. and pollute the environment and suffocate birds, small animals and marine lives.

Stop releasing balloons, stop pollution NOW!

More blogs are available. Following the link
http://sinfongchanclimatechange.blogspot.com/2011/04/stop-releasing-balloons-stop-killing.html

Carbon tax will not help to cool the Earth

Posted to Liberal Idea 'Direct action on water and the environment' on 29/03/11 at 04:59 PM

Email to MTR1377 Bill Crew on climate change / carbon tax discussion

http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=321&uid=183192705051720#!/topic.php?uid=183192705051720&topic=321

I emailed the following to a radio host Rev Bill Crew at MTR1377 on Sunday 27/3/2011. The content has been slightly edited to remove ambiguity and grammatical mistakes.

Bill, you are very arrogant, but I have to agree that many listeners probably do come from outer space!

Academics like a professor, including your guess, can be very one track mind, and it is important to look at global warming / climate change holistically.

I don't deny climate change and global warming. Climate change happens every day, and global warming is real from day one - just refer to the daily temperature fluctuation!

Each year 4 quintillion Joules (4 x 10 to the power of 18 Joules) of solar energy reaches the Earth, but only 300 trillion Joules (3 x 10 to the power 14 Joules) are consumed by the world's population. There is plenty of energy left to warm the Earth.

Do we really expect the planet to get cooled? If so, what cools it and how? Global warming is here to stay, unless human race starts working on a reversal process in cooling the earth, Kyoto Protocol and ETS are just band aid approaches.

Will carbon tax help to cool the Earth? No way, it only makes the temperature of a lot of Australians including myself goes up and get really heated up which leads to further global warming, ha-ha!

Most scientists only concern about carbon dioxide as a green house gas keeping the Earth temperature warm. If carbon dioxide is increasing in the atmosphere, what gases are being replaced? One carbon atom needs two oxygen atoms to form carbon dioxide. Assuming the amount of gases in the atmosphere remain unchanged, oxygen on Earth will diminish. What's the repercussion with reduced amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, and in the meantime, the population is on the increase?

Does increase in carbon dioxide affect the atmospheric pressure? How will increase/decrease in atmospheric pressure affect the weather, living things, including human beings on Earth?

Can you still remember the ozone hole? No one is talking about it now. There was no tax on CFC production, but there was a blanket ban on production and usage of CFC. Are all living life form now safer from cancer causing UV ray?

Look up beyond the upper atmospheres and see how air exchanges can be improved. It’s time, Al Gore, to return your Nobel Prize, and your guess professor read more Chemistry and Physics books rather than just on climate reference material!

After carbon tax, what's next?

Posted to Liberal Idea 'Direct action on water and the environment' on 9/03/11 at 12:22 PM

Originally posted to The Australian (3/3/2011) on 3/3/2011 at 1:21 AM
Commenting on “PM Julia Gillard under attack over carbon copy”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/pm-julia-gillard-under-attack-over-carbon-copy/story-fn59niix-1226014993171

Originally posted to Herald Sun on (3/3/2011) 3/3/2011 at 1:36 AM
Commenting on “Carbon tax slug double whammy”
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/national/tax-slug-double-whammy/comments-e6frf7l6-1226015019744

Labor Government, led by Julia Gillard MUST BE sacked, the soon the better, for its incompetence in governing Australia. The many Labor's political blunders costing Australia billions of dollars could be used to provide more equitable funding to hospital, education and social services.

Julia Gillard came to power by lying about NO carbon tax, and now she plagiarises Rudd's carbon policy and claims it her own. She should resign like the German minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg who did so after admitting that he plagiarised his PhD dissertation.

How many people realise that having Smart meters is not a very smart move for employment? Usages recorded by Smart meters can be read remotely, which means meter readers will be made redundant.

Can we trust her to spend the carbon tax money for the right reason, or just for her indulgence in funding projects to buy votes? If she could so mercilessly back-stab Kevin Rudd, who else can't she back-stab to cement herself to the throne of Prime Ministership?

Target 155 should not have been dumped

Posted to Liberal Idea 'Direct action on water and the environment' on 09/03/11 at 12:14 PM

Originally posted to The Age on 3/3/2011 at 12:01 PMCommenting on “Dumped Target 155 Water Scheme was Working”
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/water-issues/dumped-target-155-water-scheme-was-working-20110302-1bewe.html?comments=62#comments

Liberal Government definitely made the wrong decision in ditching the Target 155 campaign, with so much fanfare and publicity. In business and in life, we set targets and goals not that we will achieve them definitely, but they are something to aim for, to better ourselves in many aspects of performance.

Whether or not it was introduced by the former Labor government or anyone, Target 155 "was" a fantastic idea. Saving water should not be viewed as a policy; it should be a way of life. The best part of Target 155 was that no additional tax was imposed on people using water above the target - in fact, Target 155 was a psychological barrier. As a result, the public made conscious and unconscious decisions to conserve this valuable "resource".

By axing the campaign, or more correctly removing this magical target, many will revert back to bad habit using more water, causing increase in household spending, which can either increase household debt, or cannibalise spending on other services. In the worst case, both evils can take place.

Target 155 should be synonymous to Keep Australia Beautiful, Cleanup Australia, Planet Ark, Greening Australia, Earth Hour, etc. The program should be expanded instead of being axed.