<< Unless a significant causal link between anthropogenic CO2 emissions and global warming is substantiated , there is no scientific or economic justification for governments to impose a carbon tax or ETS, or direct action for that matter. >>

Raycom, I disagree.

We shouldn’t need to substantiate this link before major action is undertaken.

Simply suspecting that the massive release of fossil carbon, along with all the massive changes that man has made to the vegetation cover, transpiration rates, reflectivity water tables and runoff regimes is leading to anthropogenic climate change, then we should act.

Erring on the side of caution would be a damn good idea!

But we can do a whole lot more than just suspect that it is real. You agree that we do indeed have a whole lot of data that points strongly towards there being a strong link between human activities and global climate change.

And besides, even if AGW is a complete furphy, we should be doing basically the same sort of things anyway, in order to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels and onto renewable energy sources.

With the prospect of peak oil just over the horizon… and with a fossil fuel regime that is promulgating rapid population growth and increasing per-capita usage, and thus making us ever less sustainable planet-wide, we need to act NOW. And do it in a most massive global manner.

In fact, as I have said many times on OLO; AGW shouldn’t matter! The whole debate about whether human-induced climate change is real or not is entirely off to the side of what we really should be discussing. And that is how live sustainably, with an energy regime that is progressively based more on renewable sources, a resource base that is progressively comprised more of renewables, a sustainable agricultural sector and a population that can be comfortably supported by all of this.

Raycom,

Catch up will you.

The BBC regularly gives oxygen to "skeptic" views - as does our own ABC.

Ludwig,

I have no problem with anyone expressing and supporting their views. I do have some difficulty with outrageous statements such as << With the prospect of peak oil just over the horizon >>

The USA has enough carbon based fuels for 650 years, they are exporting cheap coal to Europe and Germany is increasing its coal fired electricity production by 17% because the USA has so much oil and consequently cheap coal.

Germany now produces 29% of its electricity from Lignite from the former East Germany and the only “expensive” gas on the planet is from GazProm who charge 60% more than the USA. That’s because the EU has baulked at Fracking.

Fracking has identified enough oil/gas globally to keep the developed world going for hundreds of years and yet you still spout the “peak oil” mantra as if it were true.

New oil/gas explorations and joint ventures are appearing between the most unlikely nations such as Turkey/Russia/Israel and yet you still cling to the peak oil mantra.

It may be just over the horizon however, it is the one just behind you. Your ideology is guided by your rear view mirror. You don’t like what you see so you invent a new reality.

The peak everything brigade are running short of alarms, they can’t find any new ones so they revisit the old discredited ones to try to get some mileage. A dead cat bounce is what you are looking for and it isn’t happening.

GrahamY: I am indeed suggesting that climate change did not cause the recent fires, but there is a link to climate change.

Fires are caused by an appropriate amount of fuel, a flame to set them off and appropriate weather conditions to propagate the fire. All three were present during the recent fires in the Blue Mountains. A contributing factor to why the fires were in September, rather than say January, was the higher than normal spring temperatures experienced in 2013.

Mean temperatures in the Blue Mountains in September were about 3 degrees above the long term average http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/temp/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=meananom&period=month&area=ns (mean maximums were about 4 degrees above the long term average http://www.bom.gov.au/jsp/awap/temp/index.jsp?colour=colour&time=latest&step=0&map=maxanom&period=month&area=ns). The fact that global average temperatures have increased by about 1 degree over the last century http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/Fig.A2.gif has increased the probability that temperatures 3 to 4 degrees above the long term average will be experienced in the Blue Mountains in September.

I stated something similar in the other of these threads and don’t see anything particularly controversial about what I have written above. No doubt Mr Cox will be along shortly with an un-evidenced assertion to the contrary.

cohenite: Mr Cox, I am beginning to despair of the Australian education system that trained you to be a lawyer, because you seem to have minimal ability to comprehend the written word. A skill I would have thought to be essential to lawyering.

I criticised Jennifer Marohasy for linking to an article that did not support the claim she made for it. Had she linked to another article somewhere else where someone had said that climate change caused the fires, I would have had nothing to complain about.

But it did support the claim Agronomist, and no amount of padding to show that you understand factors that contribute to bushfires can hide the fact you impugned her unfairly. I think you should apologise. And I don't think you should cast aspersions on others for not being good at reading.

The global increase in temperature attributable to CO2 is said to be 0.6 degrees. I think you're being a bit generous rounding it up to 1 degree. But that doesn't explain temperatures 3 degrees over the average. The only thing that can explain that is a change in weather patterns bringing in hot air from further north and west where it is heated up by travelling over dry land.

So if you have a greenhouse case it has to relate to weather patterns. Good luck with that as the IPCC acknowledges their models have little to no regional skill.

Typical, 'OLO sceptics' shoot anything that moves.

WG2 won't be out till March next year. Regional impacts and affects will be released then.

Obviously some here can't wait and will say or do anything to confirm their bias.