Thanks to all contributors of posts about my article (I've been away from my computer for 5 days so apologies for no feedback on your posts).
Taswegian - the issue of our coal exports accounting for us being responsible for another 6% of GHG emissions is not the main point. The bottom line is, as has been said elsewhere, that stopping our coal sales will force sales of far dirtier coal from other countries, so Australia acting alone may make GHG emissions higher.
Michael in Adelaide - I'm something of a skeptic about peak oil and the current price of about US$70 suggests that the world market isn't too concerned about an impending world shortage.
Agnostic of Mittagong - geothermal may be the way to go but it's completely unproven technology. It should work but it will take 5 or 10 years to prove it, and I don't think we should sit around waiting this long to come up with solutions.
plerdsus - the water used in the production of geothermal energy is almost totally recycled back down into the ground. Radon escape would be minimal, even over the 40 year life of a geothermal operation like Geodynamic's test site in South Australia
Yabby - as I understand human history, the only thing apart from war, genocide and famine that has caused a significant reduction in global population growth is economic developemnt - as wealth and economic security rise, so a family chooses to have less children. My view is that we have maybe 30 or 40 years of increasing population on the planet so we need to minimise mistakes over this period so that, when the decline starts, we're not much worse off (and hopefully better off) than we are today.

CarlStruth - while nuclear waste is dangerous for 1000 years or more, the volumes involved are tiny compared to the amount of waste produce, say, by just one coal-fired power plant. With the nuclear industry now more than 50 years old, there have been few really serious problems caused by stored nuclear waste in that time and we're slowly getting to the stage where we know what to do with it but the political will to put it into someone's backyard is lacking.

dickie - sorry mate but your view of the world is not just excessively pessimistic but simply extreme and unrealistic. To answer some of your points:
why give polluters free emission permits? Because we the consumers are the only people who will pay for them and industry will simply pass the cost of them on to us. Let's make the permits free but give a definite timeline to the polluting industries and legislate so they can't pass a carbon tax on to their shareholders. They would quickly reduce their emissions.
particulate matter emitters - airborne particulates are contributing to global dimming which is causing a lot of heat to be reflected back into space, so perversely cleaning up industry's particulate emissions will make climate change worse
arsenic and cyanide - really, these aren't serious problems. Mercury from coal-fired power plants is far more of a concern.
major rivers on life support because of industrial waste dumping - really? I thought it was excess nutrients from agriculture and sewage treatment plants combined with reduced water flows that was killing our rivers. Industry certainly isn't a problem here in WA on this issue.
80,000 contaminated industrial sites in Australia - I can't speak about the eastern states but in WA most such sites are former rubbish dumps and cemeteries, with industrial sites a small minority.
South West WA - one of the planet's most threatened ecosystems - actually, it isn't. It's one of the most biodiversity sites on the planet and one of the best protected, according to the author of the biodiversity hotspot concept Norman Myers. Lot's of species are at risk, of course, but the news is on balance good rather than bad - the number of extinct plants in WA has reduced from over 50 to less than 20 as botanists return to the sites where the plants were first collected, to give just one example.

Thanks Bernie, for obviously a considered article, and equally your considered responses.

My view of the fundamental issue is that humanity must develop in a more sustainable way ... biodiversity depends on it.

How (and when) to do this is where the real debate should be directed – you have helped.

Unfortunately, there are those that will delay or deny real progress.

If ignorance is the real human condition, then I am not optimistic – otherwise, it is a distraction that must be overcome.
Best wishes.

Thank you for your response Bernie:

1. Particulate Matter:

I’m most pleased Bernie that you are finally conceding that A/pollution affects the climate but are you suggesting we bombard the troposphere with PMs? That would be as outlandish as the proposal to bombard the stratosphere with SO2. The cooling effect of sulfate aerosols does not neatly cancel out the effects of greenhouse warming, but rather, makes the situation more complex.

Aerosol cooling and the greenhouse effect have characteristics that prevent them from neatly offsetting each other. And remember what goes up must come down. SO2 causes acid rain.

Lethal carcinogenic chemicals bond to Particulate Matter - such as nickel (the atmosphere is a major conduit for nickel as Particulate Matter) dioxins, furans, mercury, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons etc. PMs are responsible for hundreds of thousands of deaths – particularly PM2.5.

While CSIRO have attributed the N/W of Australia’s rain to the Asian Brown Cloud and appear delighted, it is causing havoc around the globe:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/08/070801170329.htm

http://features.csmonitor.com/environment/2008/08/27/cloud-sniffing-drones-soar-over-asia/

2. Arsenic and Cyanide – “really, these aren't serious problems.” Well Bernie – not to you but a 2004 report commissioned by the Western Australia Government into the tailings dams at the Kalgoorlie Gold mine confirmed that the mine had been leaking cyanide into the surrounding groundwater.

Community members had been complaining of impacts for over a decade, not least to Norman Moore, but the company had previously denied the allegations.

And in August this year they were again fined “a pittance” for spilling 4.5 million litres of toxic waste.

It’s the second time this year they’ve been fined for this type of offence, with a similar spill taking place at the Kalgoorlie super pit.

Toxicologist, Professor Peter Dingle from Murdoch University said he was dismayed by the penalty claiming the fine was disproportionate to environmental effects from this type of spill.

"Excuse the language but $25,000 is a piss in the bucket for industry -- people get fined that for offences much less severe" he said.

contd.....

C/Forward

3. Agricultural pollution IS “industrial waste” Bernie. Many pesticides have a hydrocarbon base. Heavy metals – cadmium, lead, chromium etc have been found in the rivers and industry continues to act irresponsibly:

http://www.soe.wa.gov.au/report/inland-waters/contamination-of-inland-waters.html

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2006/12/22/1817480.htm

4. Contaminated Sites – “Rubbish tips and cemeteries?” Please Bernie enough of the baloney! In 2004, the State Government implemented a Contaminated Sites Management committee to address and effect the bioremediation of the hydrocarbon contaminated soils in WA. In addition, community members are also addressing contaminated sites as members of the Contaminated Sites Alliance.

5. South West of WA. “one of the planet's most threatened ecosystems - actually, it isn't.” Actually it is Bernie. Let’s not continue to muddy the waters by misquoting Norman Meyer who said:

“Australia has one designated hot spot in South Western Australia and another one is being planned along the eastern strip of the country.

”A hotspot is an area that features exceptional concentrations of species that are found nowhere else in the world - we call them endemics - and number two, these are, though severely threatened, contain the last remaining habitats of large numbers of species and they've also lost at least 70 or 80 per cent of their original vegetation already.”

Key findings in the State of the Environment Report 2007:

• At a national level, Western Australia has 8 of 12 Australian biodiversity hotspots.

• At a global level, the South West is recognised as one of the world's 34 biodiversity hotspots.

• WA currently has 362 threatened plants, 199 threatened animals and 69 threatened ecological communities.

• Recovery plans have been developed for less than one-third of threatened species and ecological communities.

• There is ongoing loss and degradation of biodiversity in WA.

• Knowledge about many species and ecosystems and some threats to biodiversity remains inadequate.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive," Bernie.

Should we save the seals and club the Liberals?