Are you larping as an idiot, Bazz, or are you really that uninformed?

CUTTING EMISSIONS DOES NOT REQUIRE A PROPORTIONAL CUT IN ACTIVITY.

Indeed we've altered the composition of the atmosphere so much already, and are so slow to react now, that we're likely to eventually have to cut our net emissions by more than 100% - which would of course be impossible if cutting emissions were proportional to cutting activity.

Despite the rightwing idiots who claim cutting emissions would require a command economy to deal with (and therefore GW isn't real but just a UN conspiracy to destroy capitalism and implement a command economy) it's widely accepted that a market based solution is by far the best way to tackle the problem. At some time in the future farmers may have to participate in an emissions trading scheme. And you'll find they can reduce their emissions without having to destock. For example, adding marc to cows' diet substantially reduces the amount of methane they produce. Plus of course farming has a huge role in taking CO2 out of the air.

And you may not have noticed it, but aircraft are getting more efficient. They're being constructed from lighter materials. The aerodynamics of the wings have improved. And they're being fitted with more efficient engines. So despite the huge growth in passenger numbers, their CO2 emissions have scarcely changed.

Hi there HASBEEN...

Do you think with the election of Scott MORRISON, we simply have another, albeit slightly tougher version, to that of the former incumbent? Actually I haven't made up my mind about him just yet. He was the one, who stopped the boats, dead in there tracks. Yet he seems to've been anointed for leadership, by none other than Malcolm TURNBULL? Why?

I think all of us, including the 'doubters' like me should hang on a bit, and give him a decent chance to see precisely what it is he has in store for us. Including the spectre of this looming 'Paris Agreement' that many of us seem to gaze upon with wonder and awe?

Another insulting response from Aiden.
If we are such idiots here, why are you associating with us ?
Just go away, it will be better for all of us.

Good to see Warren Mundine urging the Government to dump Paris agreement. Shows you that once the Labour party had people who refused to be part of the swamp.

SteeleRedux,

I know that numbers tend to confuse you but I'll throw some in anyway.

The 40% reduction in emissions promised by 2030 was for the whole of the EU not just Germany. It is based on a reduction from 1990 levels. On the other hand Australia's Paris promise is for a reduction from 2005 levels. So the two numbers aren't directly compatible. Even though the EU number looks much more impressive (and was partially done to suck in the innumerate...no names mind you SR) it is roughly the equivalent of Australia's promise.

The reason the EU chose to base their promise on 1990 levels was because of the history of emissions in the region. (History AND numbers in one post - hope you can keep up SR). When the two Germanies reunited there were lots of old decrepit factoies in the East which needed to be closed down for economic reasons. But luckily for Germany it also meant an unearned and rapid emission reduction. Russia bases it promises on 1990 for the same reason and the UK for similar reasons to do with the North Sea fuels.

So about 20% of the total German reduction is based on closing Soviet era factories. And about 23% of the EU reduction since 1990 is based on the closure of all Soviet era factories in the former Warsaw Pact countries.

Germany promised in 2007 that it would cut its own emissions by 40% by 2020 and its this assurance which forms the basis of the EU promise for 2030. But the Germans have now admitted that they will not meet that target and will probably fall quite a bit short. 32% has been touted.

/cont

/cont

The upshot is that, since 1990, Germany has reduced its emissions by 32% of which 20% was due to the takeover of the old decrepit East German economy. Their own efforts have reduced emissions by a paltry 12% by 2020. Yet they still preach to the world.

And the innumerate and ignorant continue to buy it.

So, if the EU target is based on the German target and the German target is no longer achievable (as admitted by Germany itself) then logically, the EU target is unachievable.

But those who don't want that to be true, will wilfully believe whatever they are told, and when the target isn't met, will wilfully believe whatever new target is offered up.

Meanwhile Australia will continue to try to do as they've promised and try very very hard not to notice that they've been played for fools.