Amicus,

I pretty much agree with you. I'm actually pro-nuclear too.

We cannot try and oppress human nature, it would only have the opposite effect. Just like with socialism, while it's all idealistic, it counters human nature and therefore has to be enforced and therefore is totally unworkable without taking away what we believe to be basic human rights.

But I disagree that what Australia does is irrelevant. Australia has had a big impact in the world of medicine by leading the way in research over the years.

We can have a similar impact by making progress here which can be used to lead other larger economies forward.

By putting forward a war-chest of options, the ZCA sets out the possibilities. I believe it is our responsibility to take action by doing what we can. At the least we will reduce the rate of depletion of fossil fuel reserves.

And in terms of over-consumption and materialism, this comes down to education. People can learn to be more responsible with their choices.

Spain was not nearly as stupid as this "Zero Carbon" rubbish, but has driven it self to the verge of bankruptcy by driving a bit of the way down that road.

Their whole program is now in collapse. Much of it now lies abandoned & rusting because it just won't work.

It would be such a waste to send Bob over there to studdy this failure, & the others in Denmark, & Germany, as his desire is not to produce a working alternate system, it is merely to destroy what we have.

Anyone who wants to play with alternate energy should go to these countries, that have led the way, & hire some of their experts. They should come cheaply. Most of them are now out of work, as the systems so touted by Bob & company fail, one by one

Hasbeen, you're point would be taken, if it were true.

Spain's program has gone backwards because the government has removed subsidies because of the GFC, which was caused by stupidity in the banking sector, not "by driving a bit of the way down that road" as you falsely assert.

The program didn't fail, the economy that is required to support it did.

It is the case across Europe.

You've either been misinformed or are intent on misinforming others.

YABBY,

True, human over-population is the root cause of many problems we face. So why are our major parties encouraging birth-rates in this country? We can import people to help support the aging population crisis.

This new Aistralian study agrees with a very comprehensive study called CARBON FREE NUCLEAR FREE written by Dr Arjun Makhijani in the US in 2007, which carefully and meliculously calculates that with relatively cheap available renewable technology, the US could be carbon free and nuclear free by 2950.
The data is in and many states in the US are using this roadmap as their textbook as I write.
You can download it on IEER.org for free.
Helen Caldicott

hah .. we're being caldicotted

"US could be carbon free and nuclear free by 2950"

2950!

Sure they will, some more exaggerating there Helen, or just the usual sloppy attention to detail?

Bob,
we had a PM who was deeply committed to doing something about emissions.
You and your party would not work with him and voted down the ETS.

Why, when you had the chance to do something positive, even if you thought it was not enough, did you act so negatively.

The Greens and the Liberal about face cost us a PM that was prepared to do something. JG urged the dropping of the ETS because of the political BS that the greens and Libs carried on with.

I think you missed an opportunity to work with someone who is committed to climate change, Kevin Rudd, and now are prepared to do a deal with a PM who will act on it only if it is ok by the polls and the backroom boys. Of course Tony Abbott thinks the whole lot is crap, so you have really contributed to Australia moving back about 15years on action against climate change.

I lost a lot of confidence in the greens over this. To me this is similar to the actions of Meg Lees of the Democrats, whose support of the GST saw the demise of the party in subsequent elections.