Michael, this all sounds like urging Australia to do the least it can get away with rather than the most it's capable of or the minimum that is necessary. Certainly you seem to be keen to make this a case of 'if they don't do enough we shouldn't either' - another variation the 'too hard, don't bother' excuse for failure.

A look at The Australian Industry Greenhouse Network seems to reveal an organisation that makes noises about achieving emissions reductions but limits itself to criticising and opposing policy to do so - without presenting any serious alternative. Mostly in the form mentioned above. It fails to recognise export coal as part of Australia's contribution to global emissions and clearly sees no problem with the expansion of the use of Australian fossil fuels, only with policy that might limit this.

I cannot see The Australian Industry Greenhouse Network as being genuinely about solutions; an Industry PR and lobby organisation dedicated to minimum action on climate change looks more accurate. I would have to second Geoff Davies assessment - they want dealing with emissions to sound like economic disaster, whilst downplaying or ignoring the irreversible economic disaster that failure to deal with emissions will be.

There is a country that
1) is the OECD's highest per capita emitter
2) is the world's largest coal exporter
3) lectures other countries on the need for carbon cuts
4) has a huge swathe of countryside under flood water.

If climate change is not that country's problem then whose is it?

Would all commenting warmists please advise what changes they have made in their lifestyles, so as to reduce CO2 emissions.

Raycom - people who seriously embrace and promote energy frugality get accused of wanting to take modern civilisation back to the stone age. (Not what I want or have ever promoted). Or face arguments that their solar panels make no difference to overall emissions from power stations or that the money they save on power bills ends up being spent on stuff that produces more emissions. All the personal efforts of people like myself will not earn a shred of respect or see what they say taken any more seriously; on the contrary those most determined to reduce their own carbon emissions will be seen as fanatics who should be ignored.

The problem of reducing emissions requires a complete makeover of our energy supply sector and much of my personal efforts, under policies to date, have been used by that sector as a way to get around their obligations to introduce renewables. Compromised and flawed policies have been developed by mainstream politics in attempts to sound like it's taking the problem serious whilst not seriously changing anything - that kind of greenwash has been the order of the day. Opponents of serious policy want to use that failure as evidence that all policy is futile or even accuse those who want action of not really wanting policy that really works and having some kind of hidden agenda - complete nonsense of course.