Australia (and the world) needs a sustainability policy.

To that end, it is highly pertinent that we develop alternative energy sources, with the strongest possible focus on renewables.

Even if CO2 is not the great ogre of climate change, we still need to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and develop a sustainable energy regime.

Obama is taking the right approach. Abbott certainly isn’t.

THE WORRYING THING IS DON..that palmer did a deal with aLL GORE
to install a file..labled climate policy/that leaves it in..the hands of a beurocracy..to chose when the blank cheque called zero..cost..gets filled in..withthe hidden costs

i see obamas ordering of THE clean air act..to police co2 as if polution[poisen?]..that is the new sceme/get an authorising legislation;then let a beurocrat..do what beurocrats do[write nest egg legislation funding for their mates/scemes and scams]

ie we done the paper work
by blank cheque[better than any bank cheque

Ludwig,

There is no such thing as sustainable energy systems, as all energy systems require materials and resources.

Most of the so-called sustainable solar power systems only last about 15 years, and then they have to be renewed, which then requires more materials and resources.

Added to that is the growing shortage of rare earth metals such as dysprosium used in magnets for electric motors. Either such metals run out or become very expensive to extract out of the ground.

http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2012/09/19/rare-earth-metals-will-we-have-enough/

So what we need is to wean ourselves from the idea that energy systems can be sustainable.

The only long term prospect for Australia if we continue with plans to greatly increase the population, is to continue to pollute the skies with CO2, sulphur, fly ash etc, or have brown outs.

Oh dear another day on OLO with Don talking about a subject he knows little about...

Don leave the science to complent people working within their field, if you must report please provide links to relevant climate reseach in mainstream science journals.

Whatsup doesn't count nor do articles in the Australian.

Don has discounted the UN and its agencies by simply declaring that they are irrelevant.

Several paragraphs later, he claims that, because there is no united action between nation-states, that there can be none and consequently that Australia should go it alone on a path of denialism.

Don, who is undoubtedly a very smart and man, certainly makes some dumb and uninformed statements when it comes to climate change.

Ho-hum. Should stick to one's knitting.

Cobber the hound
Its always a good idea to actually read the material you are criticising. Don didn't mention science at all and its just not relevant to the discussion. Even if Australia was trying to limit emissions, the problem is that its an international matter.. other countries have to control theirs and, despite all the screaming, their is no real indication that they are going to.. the usual retort to that fact is that Australia should show leadership in this area. But as he points out, we generate zero media interest elsewhere. So much for that argument.