Renewable Power Australia – South Australia Pretending To Save The Planet, But Actually Just Killing JobsPosted: November 12, 2015
The profound and visible danger of embracing feel-good ‘unreliables’ (wind/solar) is that the fallout from rejecting them is far greater than the ultimate fallout and damage to the economy, jobs and the environment.
In this delluded age of save-the-planet green sanctimony, it is far better to seem good, than provide energy solutions that actually work.
By Andrew Bolt ~
South Australia has ridiculously high power prices, in part because it relies so heavily on expensive green power (which in turn demands extra subsidies).
High power prices kills heavy industry in particular and South Australia is fast becoming a basket case, with unemployment at 7.7 per cent.
So it is obscene that Premier Jay Weatherill not just promises to get even more green power, but claims this will actually be good for jobs rather than bad:
South Australia’s Premier Jay Weatherill has announced plans for the State Government to become 100 per cent powered by “low carbon electricity”, as he prepares to depart for an international climate change conference in Paris next month…
Today, the State Government will release a call for expressions of interest to come up with “innovative proposals” to ensure all electricity it uses comes from green sources.
Weatherill’s solution to…
View original post 386 more words
So despite the fact that 35% of ALL human CO2 emissions, since 1750, have been emitted in the 18 years since Clinton made his doomsday forecast, there has been NO corresponding atmospheric ‘Global Warming’, at all !
With that in my mind, it makes perfect sense that 40,000 climate activists are convening in Paris to turn the world economy on its head, gulling literally TRILLIONS of dollars of other people’s money away, to try to stop ‘global warming’ that actually stopped 20 years ago. /sarc
We are living in an age of collective madness.
In October 1997, Bill Clinton declared the evidence for catastrophic global warming to be compelling.
Since he made that forecast 18 years ago, there has been no warming.
When a progressive declares evidence to be compelling (as Obama does all the time) – it means they are telling an even bigger lie than they usually do. If that is possible.
“In reality, evidence for human influence has not grown – far from it. The studies are all contradictory, showing that we do not understand anything about the phenomena in question. The IPCC is implying that we have scientific certainties and that these certainties point to a single culprit: humankind. That is just being dishonest.”
Excerpt from Société de Calcul Mathématique (SCM) climate white paper. SCM are a French Govt. body who probably now run the risk of being defunded after releasing their scathing report of the UN IPCC, in the lead up to the Paris climate gabfest.
Strip away the pseudoscience and you’ll find one thing: politics. People attempting, via international treaties, to constrain human lives. For the sake of Mother Gaia.
In a few weeks, world leaders will gather in Paris to boast about their bold stance on climate change. But strip away the considerable nonsense surrounding this topic, and a few stark facts remain. Back in 1992 – well before science had anything conclusive to say about humanity’s impact on the climate – the United Nations persuaded countries to sign an international treaty aimed at saving the planet from ‘dangerous’ human-emitted greenhouse gases.
Let me repeat that. The treaty came first.
Now let’s meet a UN entity called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). We’re told it’s a ‘scientific body.’ But that’s a cynical ploy. The IPCC’s job is to provide scientific cover for the political convictions that spawned the treaty. As…
View original post 815 more words