Hi Christina,

I unfortunately agree that Howard will bury it as you have stated.

But don't you also feel that this time it’s different? My gut feeling (or is it my last drop of weary hope) is that 'ordinary ostrayans' will demand more than just the bandaids you speak of. How to demand a longer term vision?

Suzuki recently said that this needs to be a debate in the community and not confined to what leaders think.

For this debate to happen I feel there needs to be a much tighter and focused coalition of groups than what is offered by the splinters of environmentalist movements that currently exists.

If environmentalism is no longer a fringe issue, its greatest agitators must recognise that its own fragmentation is a part of the problem and contributes to the blind apathy you speak of.

I don’t have the answers to this conundrum; I’m just putting it out here for analysis.

But I also reckon (as I’m sure you would agree) that is our last chance to change the big picture or the big picture will change us.

`•.. ><((((º>`•.¸¸.•´¯`•.¸><((((º>¸¸.•´¯`•.¸.

Reva NXG Electric Car

http://www.tomw.net.au/technology/transport/reva.shtml

There is one in Australia that the Federal Govt. has just ordered to be crushed or the importer will face a $166,000 fine.

The car is legal in all EU countries, but not Australia.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,20661953-2682,00.html

This is ridiculous.

Humans have changed the Earth's eco systems more rapidly and extensively in the past 50 years than in any other period of human history. These changes have degraded almost two thirds of the ecosystems on which humanity depends and have resulted in a largely irreversible loss in the diversity of life on earth. (Millenium Ecosystem Assessment 2005).

The world's population doubled between 1960 and 2000 to 6 billion people and continues to grow with a forecast expectation of 9 billion by 2050. To the denialists (mostly with vested interests) these figures are factual - get it? More population explosions - more pollution!

Scientific fact: Hydrocarbon emissions kill off humans, fauna and the environment and pollutes our drinking water and fresh produce with carcinogenic and immune altering chemicals. The denialists view this reality as collateral damage in their quest for profits.

"Nero" has now allocated hundreds of millions of dollars to the very industry which has knowingly and without constraints, polluted this planet - the coal industry! These wealthy polluters are to receive OUR taxes to lift their game - unbelievable! This industry has failed abysmally to allocate any previous budgets towards effective pollution prevention control and as a result, all coal companies should be collectively meeting the costs for a new technology towards cleaner production.

And I am yet to learn of any worthwhile funding allocations towards solar hydrogen power technology.

So while "Nero" is fiddling we must insist on implementing the Precautionary Principle, a principle which successive state and federal governments have ignored.

But how to do that? Well this little right winger is voting Greens at the next election. At least my vote may contribute to giving the Greens the balance of power in the upper house. And my "wooden leg" tells me that this time,the major parties are going to be caught with their pants down - big time! Abuse of public gullibility by both federal and state politicians no longer works!

It is a pity to see these debates decend into John Howard bashing instead of discussing trends, predictions and possible solutions.
You just make yourselves sound like Kim Beasley.
Not all do that of course but it does divert what could be a good discussion.
It is a pity about the Riva car, I would have bought one of those.
I have been waiting all my life for an electric car.
The later models do use lithium iron batteries.

Those that say we should not put money into co2 sequestration are not
looking into the big gap that will occur in electric power supply
unless we keep the power stations operating at least for the next20 to 30 years. I seriously doubt it.

There is a hue and cry for wind and solar power by those who seem
to know very little about how you get electricity from one place
to another. You cannot have more than about 15% of unreliable supply
connected to the grid, other wise you can end up with the grid
oscillating. You also have to have spinning reserves up and
running to take up the load. What that does is run the power stations
at a lower level of efficiency.
Wind and solar supply has never enabled the shut down of one base load
power station.
The only real hope is the distributed grid, ie where everyone generates their own power and feeds surplus into the grid.
However the catch 22 is (notice how catch 22s always seem to come up)
getting enough batteries, solar and wind systems for everybody.
There is doubt that there is enough material in the world to make
enough batteries and control equipment.
Then are there enough technicians to install repair and maintain such
an enourmous amount of equipment ?

"Why shouldn't China and India and other developing nations be allowed to increase their emissions?"

Well the problem is, that if they do, without some major new
technology happening, then we might be basically stuffed!

As David Suzuki pointed out, Australia's difference that it
can make is largely symbolic, thats about it. It might make
us feel better, to do this or that, but if you look at the
big picture, its meaningless.

If Australia wants to comply with Kyoto, easy, send the
largest energy users, aluminium smelters, to China or India.
We will then comply, keep the greenies happy about how they
feel, but it won't make a scrap of difference to the problem.

World population is still increasing by 80 million a year,
no thanks to the Catholic Church and others. Perhaps we
should start by offering every woman on the planet, decent
family planning. Ever increasing world population is making
things worse, not better.

Good one Baz.