"Relentless population growth is bad no matter what the climate might do."

Thanks Dr Ridd

If this guy is such a right winger and front for evil types, he sure hasn't followed the supposed protocol. Maybe he's just a guy putting forward some ideas.

Great Article,
Thank you for addressing the real issue of population growth.
This issue that I, the greens and most Australians are concerned about.

Unfortunately, global warming, and various options for power sources are all off-topic.

Our current governments population target is infinity.
You can't provide power for infinity people, you can't provide water for infinity people and you can't provide land for infinity people.
You can recycle plastic bags and build nuclear power stations 'till the cows come home, but until you have a stable population, you have an economy of the nineteen fifties, a bygone era, an economy for idiots.

Nice of you to refer to ye olde solar and wind power as "unproven", and imply that 10 year old nuclear power stations are rock solid technology, more advanced and reliable than a space shuttle or an aeroplane.
The Chernobyl waste will be actively causing DNA damage in everything from Mushrooms to Mice for another thousand years I'm sorry to inform you that you're a little ignorant in that respect.

This is a classic example of the well-known fact that a tiny risk of apocalyptic disaster generates far more media attention and public hysteria than a serious risk of financial and personal inconvenience. If the global warming hypothesis is nonsense, then the probability of doom from it is precisely zero and we should spend our time and money on things that will provide genuine benefits instead -- Indigenous health and public education, for instance.

One does not evaluate the likelihood of a scientific prediction by counting the number of people who vote for it, but by an independent and objective assessment of the evidence. If the evidence is flawed then any actions based on that evidence will be harmful and probably futile.

From the comments it's great to see Australians aren't buying the rubbish about nuclear power, which has no place in any plan with sustainability as a goal. Might avoiding nuclear make it more difficult to reduce CO2 emissions? Perhaps. But we do know it will have major negative impacts in terms of use of water, concrete (CO2 intensive) and sustainability of the fuel source and waste disposal. Fortunately those who really get it understand we have to work on the two multipliers in the equation for human impact on our planet: population and resource intensity. And that means we must get unhooked from growth addiction. Anything else is a distraction.

Dave Gardner
Producer/Director
Hooked on Growth: Our Misguided Quest for Prosperity
<A HREF="http://www.growthbusters.com">www.growthbusters.com</A>

i don't have much respect for greenies. they observe the system failing to provide a sustainable society, year after year, but the penny never drops: it never crosses their mind that if you want a different outcome, you need a different system.

now the end-state of parliamentary rule is coming in view, and they're getting anxious. still the penny doesn't drop. still they imagine the socio-political system that brought us to the brink of ecological disaster will suddenly turn 180% and lead them back.

being really dim is not survival-oriented.

Basic economics and climate science suggest global warming needs tackling on a global plan, ie each country needs contribute as best suited to it's environmental and economic circumstances. Australia's contribution should be negotiated and argued with other countries and fit into a jigsaw puzzle where, although the pieces each differ, the whole is the least disruptive solution.

As we are well-endowed with alternative energy options, hot rock, etc it seems short-sighted and economically irrational for us to argue that we should arrogate to ourselves the use of nuclear power. If we can't make alternative energy work with all of our advantages then how can we argue that less well off and less endowed countries should even try?

For Australia to go nuclear is both economically irrational and a signal of despair. By all means sell uranium to less well-endowed countries but surely Economics 101 suggests that they will pay a higher price for our uranium than we are willing to consider.