It is suprising how Green Councils thrive in areas where no trees exist.

The only sort of justification of 'jihad' in the article appears to be 'constant assault of falsely laid allegation and intellectual derision'. The latest attack being a 'green star' rating scheme....

If only all jihads could be waged like this. I could handle that sort of jihad, as boring as it is.

Good stuff, with which I agree. But an important aspect of energy usage has been omitted, which leads me to suspect it may be counter to the author's thrust - the energy consumed in building McMansions and the necessary infrastructure (roads, utilities, street lighting inter alia) cf that in building apartments.

Logic, without research, indicates that far more is consumed in the McMansions, which would be the opposite situation to the "green jihadists" pushing electric/hybrid cars without considering the extra energy costs of production.

I have lived in English semi-detached houses and wonder why we do not have them here.
They save a lot of waste space down one side, and keep the climate in them more equable.

I'm just waiting for some overly sensitive type to be offended by the term "jihad" in this context.. that is, not in a "kill the unbeliever" context. I note the author wisely disassociates himself from creating the "green jihad" term, since even cartoons can evidently be offensive.

Personally I am deeply suspicious of the new "smart" meter on our abode, and all the things that could be done with it, to us.

This is the portal, for the green mujihadin to see what we all do, and when we do it, and how much, remotely.

I'm thankful the Liberals are in government in Victoria, and the GreenALP out to pasture, if we even get tired of the Liberals, just have a good look at that meter .. and the connotations of big brother really come home to you.

It seems science fiction now, but I'd be amazed if the eco whackos don't start murmuring about energy quotas being put on us, to punish us for our crimes against gaia. Then will come talk of cutting you off, if you overuse.

hey whatever happened to that energy/food study on some island, Norfolk was it? Where people were going to be punished for picking too many energy rich foods or using too much fuel?

What an extraordinary argument, Mr Elliott.

"The latest of these assaults is the form of a proposed 'green star' rating scheme for 'McMansions'"

The "green star" is associated with the building itself, yes?

http://www.gbca.org.au/green-star/green-star-overview/

The nub of your objection is the Australian Conservation Foundation's 2007 publication, the 'Consumption Atlas', correct?

http://acfonline.org.au/articles/news.asp?news_id=1324

Their assessment of the "footprint" not only direct energy consumption - such as household electricity use and car use - but also indirect energy consumption, which includes GHG emissions from manufacturing, processing and otherwise producing consumer products.

So, from comparing apples with... not even oranges, really, more like hub caps, you deduce that "the detached home is under a constant assault of falsely laid allegation and intellectual derision."

While there is no doubt that the more affluent folk in our community consume more, and therefore feature as higher individual indirect "emitters" of GHG, this would still hold true if they were to move into a "McMansion", would it not? The amount of "emissions" associated with their lifestyles would, if anything, increase, as they would have further to travel to find a restaurant with just the right quality of wagyu beef.

The green star treats the actual buildings the same. Delving into the personal habits of the occupants is not the purpose of the categorization. Quite simply, it encourages building greener people-containers.