When deriding those opposed to taking action to cut emissions, last week, Turnbull said “many [do so] because it does not suit their financial interests”. Australians on an average wage aren’t likely to be won over by that argument. But they may be interested to learn Thatcher refused to deride the economic concerns of countries, companies or individuals when she talked about finding solutions to environmental problems. She unashamedly believed economic growth and industry inventiveness were crucial to the equation.

Thatcher’s early views about global warming were intrinsically linked to her rational pursuit of nuclear power to prevent the coalminers unions holding the nation to ransom.

And, as she acknowledges in her memoirs, when the facts about global warming became less certain, so did her own views. But you may not have heard that from Gillard or Turnbull either.

http://ruralsoft.com.au/climatescientific/?p=190

------------------------

One would be tempted to say that old chook Thatcher was going nuts towards the end of her life... and this process had started earlier than we think... By the time she was reviewing her views on global warming she would have been completely with the pixies. Then, too many loopy conservative denialists would have tried to rot her brains with their idotic beliefs about climate non-change... They may have succeeded, unfortunately... So it's fair for Turnbull and Gillard to quote Thatcher earlier views on the subject as she had all her marbles at the time...

Climate change no longer ranks first on the list of what Americans see as the world’s biggest environmental problem, according to a new Washington Post-Stanford University poll.

Just 18 percent of those polled name it as their top environmental concern. That compares with 33 percent who said so in 2007, amid publicity about a major U.N. climate report and Al Gore’s Oscar-winning documentary about global warming. Today, 29 percent identify water and air pollution as the world’s most pressing environmental issue.

Still, Americans continue to see climate change as a threat, caused in part by human activity, and they think government and businesses should do more to address it. Nearly three-quarters say the Earth is warming, and just as many say they believe that temperatures will continue to rise if nothing is done, according to the poll.

The findings, along with follow-up interviews with some respondents, indicate that Washington’s decision to shelve action on climate policy means that the issue has receded — even though many people link recent dramatic weather events to global warming. And they may help explain why elected officials feel little pressure to impose curbs on greenhouse gas emissions.

“I really don’t give it a thought,” said Wendy Stewart, a 46-year-old bookkeeper in New York. Although she thinks warmer winters and summers are signs of climate change, she has noticed that political leaders don’t bring up the subject. “I’ve never heard them speak on global warming,” she said. “I’ve never heard them elaborate on it.”

American corn and wheat prices jump 10% in a single week as hot temperatures blight Midwest

A SUDDEN jump in US crop prices has triggered fears that the global cost of food could be about to soar as America's Midwest continues to suffer from drought.  
 
American corn and wheat prices jumped ten per cent in a single week after prolonged hot weather produced lower than expected yields, reports The Daily Telegraph. Parts of the Midwest, where many of the country's crops are grown, continue to suffer from record-breaking temperatures.
 
The situation has become so serious that last week the US government announced conditions for growing corn were the worst since 1988, when one of the most damaging droughts in history saw the country's corn production cut by 30 per cent.

Falling oil prices make just about everyone happy. For strapped consumers in struggling developed nations, lower oil prices mean a smaller payout at the pump, freeing up room in strained wallets to spend on other things and boosting economic growth. In the developing world, lower oil prices mean reduced inflationary pressures, which will give central bankers more room to stimulate sagging growth. With the global economy still climbing out of the 2008 financial crisis, policymakers around the world can welcome lower oil prices as a rare piece of helpful news.

But Vladimir Putin is not one of them. The economy that the Russian President has built not only runs on oil, but runs on oil priced extremely high. Falling oil prices means rising problems for Russia – both for the strength of its economic performance, and possibly, the strength of Putin himself.

Despite the fact that Russia has been labeled one of the world’s most promising emerging markets, often mentioned in the same breath as China and India, the Russian economy is actually quite different from the others. While India gains growth benefits from an expanding population, Russia, like much of Europe, is aging; while economists fret over China’s excessive dependence on investment, Russia badly needs more of it. Most of all, Russia is little more than an oil state in disguise. The country is the largest producer of oil in the world (yes, bigger even than Saudi Arabia), and Russia’s dependence on crude has been increasing.