“In other words, to meet the level that Garnaut sees as necessary, Australia would be emitting less than quarter of its present level of CO2. That degree of self discipline is possible only by accepting returning living standards to similar as those currently experienced in the developing world.”

It would be interesting to watch the Volvo socialists and eco-nuts coping with that!

It’s good to see a realistic contribution to a ‘debate’ in opposition to the loudmouthed windbags who’ve never been involved in the production of wealth for society – people who want to get their hands on our money to fiddle with childish, unrealistic experiments which will have no effect on climate change

Laugh or cry as you please but fossil fuels are going to run out soon enough anyway. Subtract tar sands and ethanol from world liquid fuels production and we are in a steady decline. The price of coal ex Newcastle rose 70% in 2007 and now China is facing tight supplies. Perth may not have enough gas because of export LNG commitment. Australia may appear to have adequate coal and gas but we will be under pressure to supply the rest of the world so we'll run out early too. Since we will soon become a net oil importer it looks tempting to make liquid fuel from coal; shame about the double CO2 emissions unless we were never really fair dinkum about cutting back.

I think the mission impossible is not cutting carbon 60% or 90% by 2050, but finding enough energy period. Oh yes, solar energy will save us...which shows the dreamers are on both sides of the debate.

The argument predicates that global warming (GW) is an incontrovertible fact. That GW is the consequence of anthropogenic CO2 emission from industrial activity. The consequence of GW will be catastrophic for mankind. How catastrophic is the threat of GW? This is the subject of science fiction.

There are several hundred of signatures some from very eminent scientists have subscribed to documents questioning the GW hypothesis. A list of these signatures can be found in the Lavoisier Group submission to Ross Garnault.

It is fashionable in some quarters to dismiss the GW sceptics with semi derogatory terns such as “deniers or contrarians.” Name calling does not add to understanding.

A rigorous review of GW should be undertaken outside of the IPCC network. I understand that a joint Australian and New Zealand royal commission has been suggested.

It is my view that no action should be taken in respect to GW until sufficient time has elapsed; so as to determine if the predictions from climate models are accurate in regard to actual climatic events

In response to Anti-Green
If you were facing a raging bush fire approaching your house do you:-
(a) Assume that the weather forecasters are wrong and wait for an amended forecast.
(b) Take the recommended actions to save your property or vacate (not an option in the GW debate)
(c) If option (a) proved to be right would you feel indignant and self righteous knowing you had spent time and effort to potentially save your property?
(d) Have you ever heard of insurance?

Hi Alan,

Good to see an article recognising the economic consequences of reducing CO2 production. The "good" news is that nature will be forcing this on us anyway. E.g. see Aleklett's article on online opinion: http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5933

So the Australia of 2020 will be a far different place from today - but the goverment will not admit to that - no votes in reality so lets stick to fantasy and dream about a wealthy Australia at the 2020 summit. Someone I know recently sent a letter to Senator Wong regarding cycling and peak oil and climate change etc. and her reply came back and seemed to pointedly avoid talking about peak oil. Yet they all know about it since McNamarra in Qld has been informing his party. (Kate Ellis told me as much last year.)

Solar may not be able to help the nation as a whole cope with electricity price rises, but, in the meantime, I'm glad I have ordered my PV panels (cost to me with installation for a 1kW system is under $5000 and the goverment is chipping in $8000 - thanks gov!) and since we are frugal with electricity in any case, this should mean no more electricity bills. Nice!

Hay thylacine, in just a few years we will all be able to see that you have been chasing chicken little around the chook shed.

Is this due to your gullibility, or do you have an ulterior motive?

If the forma, don't forget this rubbish comes from the UN, the most disfunctional, & corrupt organisation yet devised by man.