"Those emission estimates are not very accurate compared to high-calibration devices," says Michael Woelk, CEO of Picarro, a California-based manufacturer of such a device for measuring CO2 emissions. "No country today is using scientific instruments to monitor and calibrate the effect of policy," not even the European Union, which has an emissions trading scheme for greenhouse gases.”Yet here we are, in Australia, about to pass legislation taxing CO2 output because the gutless and cowardly Opposition is split about whether The Warming is just a load of codswallop, or does spell the end of days. Just in case my emphasis in the previous quote didn't quite hit home, WE CAN'T ACTUALLY MEASURE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF ANY TYPE OF LEGISLATION OF CO2.
From The Australian:
“After an all-day debate over climate change, the Opposition Leader unilaterally declared the Coalition would back Kevin Rudd's carbon emissions trading scheme.”In a one brilliant move, Mr Turnbull has split the Coalition (the Nats are not going to vote for the ETS), split the Liberal party (skeptics ahoy!) because the fear of a double-dissolution and an election called too soon which would inevitably lead to another 4 years in the wilderness,
Turnbull is making a stand on what he believes the Australian electorate wants.
In some ways he is in a damned if you do-damned if you don’t moment. But the timing of the ETS, the manner of the debate on the legislation (ie. minimal due to KRudd wanting to pass this before the Copenhagen Summit), and the revelations of gross scientific malpractice are not stopping this relentless push for higher taxes that people don’t want, won’t be effective, and will hamstring our economy.
Support the ETS, and split the party and coalition = unlikely to win next election and probably lose the position of leader of the party.
Don't support the ETS, keep the coalition and party together = electorate believe that the Liberals wan't to kill Gaia, unlikely to win next election.
No comments:
Post a Comment