Climate Change Minister Greg Combet has described the Coalition's plan to cut carbon pollution as a "farce", after Liberal frontbencher Joe Hockey was forced to issue a clarifying statement about the policy.

Mr Hockey yesterday suggested the Coalition would provide compensation to businesses that are negatively affected by the scrapping of the carbon tax under a future Coalition government.

"We will consider it on a case-by-case basis, and we have allocated funds under our direct action plan to deal with initiatives that are underway," he told reporters in Launceston.

However, there is no provision in the direct action policy for compensation.

Late yesterday Mr Hockey issued a statement backtracking from his original comments.

"The Coalition will not be paying compensation for repeal of the carbon tax," the statement said.

Mr Combet says Mr Hockey has made a "goose" of himself by contradicting the Coalition's policy.

"The Liberal Party's policy on climate change is a joke, it's a farce, it's a subsidies-for-polluters proposition," he told reporters in Adelaide.

"The fact of the matter is also that many companies are investing [and] are creating jobs as a consequence of the carbon price coming in, because it's supporting investment in renewable energy.

"Make no mistake about it, the carbon price is creating jobs."

Mr Combet warned that if the carbon tax was scrapped by the Coalition, investment in renewable energy would dry up and job opportunities would go.

Asked this morning whether companies which have benefited from the carbon tax would be offered compensation, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott told ABC radio: "There are some businesses that are taking advantage of the carbon tax and there's nothing wrong with that.

"The tax arrangements that particular governments put in place are often made the most of by business.

"But instead of a carbon tax, we're going to have some incentives available for our emissions reduction fund and businesses that are contributing to reducing emissions can certainly apply to the emissions reduction fund to benefit from that."

'Astronomical'

Businesses like Hydro Tasmania have become more profitable under the carbon tax because they generate carbon-free electricity.

Greens leader Christine Milne says any plan to offer compensation to such businesses would leave the Government with an "astronomical" bill.

"For Joe Hockey to suggest the Coalition would compensate companies for lost income and stranded assets resulting from a repeal of carbon pricing is laughable," Senator Milne said in a statement.

"It shows he has little comprehension of the way market-based policies actually work.

"How is it that when in Tasmania, where the Hydro earns $70 million a year thanks to the clean energy package, Joe Hockey is keen on compensation, but once he leaves the state the backflip comes into play?"

Tasmania's Deputy Premier, Bryan Green, says the extra money flowing to Hydro is providing a "significant boost" to the state budget, helping to pay for things like hospitals, schools and police.

Penalties or no penalties?

Speaking to reporters in Rockhampton later today, Mr Abbott said Mr Hockey was clearly referring to plans for an emissions reduction fund that would provide incentives to businesses to cut carbon pollution. 

"We believe in incentives. We don't believe in penalties," he said. 

However, the direct action policy document states: "Businesses that undertake activity with an emissions level above their business-as-usual levels will incur a financial penalty.

"The value of penalties will be on a sliding scale at levels commensurate with the size of the business and the extent to which they exceed their business-as-usual levels."

Mr Combet says the Opposition Leader's comments are further evidence the policy is a "shambles".

The Coalition's policy says the value of penalties will be set in consultation with the industry, but are only expected to be applied in "exceptional circumstances" given that "economic growth projections... have been built into business-as-usual emissions estimates".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-02-26/hockey-backtracks-on-carbon-tax-compensation/4540706

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

Unfortunately, on this subject, the coalition of Liberals ( conservatives) led by an idiotic Abbott, is full of gentlemen imbeciles... Women included. The media is in the same bathtub...

 

Dear Alan, Janet, Andrew, Ray, Miranda, and all the important shockjocks in the media around the world.

It has been brought to my attention that it is possible some people have given you the wrong or incomplete information on the subject of global warming.

For example, I note Lord Monckton of Brenchley uses an atypical example of frozen earth in relation to high concentration of CO2 — about 700 million years ago — to contradict the present science. The data for this period is somewhat incomplete and any firm conclusions on this period are dicey. 
One could have had more oxygen in the atmosphere, less water vapour and more dust particle to induce a cooling — despite the quantity of CO2.

Should one look at the more recent Vostok ice record of the last 500,000 years in which atmospheric conditions and gaseous mix have been more or less similar to those of today, one notes a strong relationship between temperature and  CO2 concentration in the atmosphere.
The analysis of such record are done with high degree of accuracy and few people can dispute the information. Some scientists like Jo Nova (a biologist) interprets the record and believes that higher temperatures come before the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere, but she ignores the other components such as the dust particles influence.
Nonetheless the relationship between concentration of CO2 and higher temperatures is undeniable. As mentioned, significant variations occur when other factors are influencing this outcome, such as dust particles in the atmosphere, as noted in the Vostok ice record. 

Most scientists, though — since Arrhenius quantitatively studied the gas mix (especially that of CO2) of past ice ages, published in 1896 — are of the opinion that CO2 is the present key to the increase of atmospheric temperatures. Recent precise scientific experiments have confirmed this view. 
Gases such as oxygen are considered cooling gases in the Greenhouse effect as defined by Fourier in 1824. But there are weird anomalies. For example the oxygen molecule O2 is a cooling gas, while the oxygen molecule O3 (ozone) is classified as a warming gas. All this has to do with the molecular variability in absorbing the infrared radiation from the sun. CO2 is a “moderate” warming gas but it has a strong influence on the behaviour of water vapour — a bit like "surfactants" (dish washing liquids et al) change the way water behaves — water vapour being the main Greenhouse gas. 

Many scientists thought the present climate of the earth should be going towards an ice age in accordance with the rhythm of the earth cycles. 
Instead, all observations have led to the realisation that the globe is warming: the melting of the Arctic ice cap, the rise of sea levels as precisely measured by NASA, the increase in global temperatures (precisely measured as well) and other events such as increase in number and strength of traumatic weather  events — all going counter-current to the expectation of an ice age... 
Once all other greenhouse factors and earthly cycles are accounted for, the MAJOR influencing factors on these observations are the carbon-based gas, from CO2 to methane. 

As noted on the Vostok ice core sampler, the natural variation of CO2 ranges from 180 to just under 300 ppm (parts per million). One could dismiss these small proportion as insignificant but the record clearly shows that this range is invariably accompanied by a variation of temperature of up to 10 degrees Celsius. Dust particles play a mitigating role in shifting lag times. 
Scientists are thus genuinely worried about present levels of carbon dioxide... And so should all of us. 
When the disappearance of the ozone layer was observed — This gas protects the earth surface from harmful ultra-violet radiation, even in its minute quantity (about 0.05 ppm average concentration of ozone in the atmosphere) — scientists around the world had to urgently discover why ozone was vanishing. 
Soon they found it was related to human-made CFC gases. Such gases have now been banned worldwide. The destruction of the ozone layer has been arrested, though the ozone layer is still not recovering well... 

The latest observation of CO2 in the atmosphere of the Arctic has shown concentration above 400 ppm. This observation really alarms serious scientists. Though there is a lag time between cause and effect, this points to an increase of up to 15 degrees Celsius average, according to the Vostok record. 
The natural CO2 cycle (300 ppm maximum as noted in the Vostok ice record) has been undeniably ADDED TO by human burning fossil fuels. Fossil fuels are carbon products that have been sequestered for millions of years. 

These EXTRA carbon-based gases (CO2, methane et al) from fossil fuel burning have not been part of the atmospheric mix for millions of years. 

In short, the science is correct in teling us that we, humans — quantitatively are adding between 3 ppm of CO2 average per year into the atmosphere — and are contributing to the warming of the atmosphere... 

I am sure that you, intelligent men and women, are able to understand this situation when explained clearly and that you can see the importance of reducing our CO2 emissions urgently. The Carbon "pricing" is a small step in this direction but we will have to rely only on renewable energy sources soon in the future. Tony Abbott's "direct action" is not worth a cent and will cost billions. I am sure you can see that. Talk to Malcolm and ask him to answer in truth...
I hope that having a microphone in front of you or an pen in your hand does not dull your brains and make you become rabid stupid denialists who ignore the facts.
Regards. 

 

 

So the reality is that global warming continues unabated.  Despite this reality, an article by Graham Lloyd in The Australian (paywalled) claims that the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri agreed that there has been a 17-year pause in global temperature rises.  Unfortunately we don't know exactly what Pachauri said on the subject, because Lloyd did not quote him directly (which is a red flag). 

The IPCC communications office tells Skeptical Science that The Australian has not provided a transcript or audio file of the interview for verification, but it does not accurately represent Pachauri's thoughts on the subject - namely that as discussed in this post, global surface temperatures have plateaued (though over the past decade, not 17 years), and that this in no way disproves global warming.

Despite the lack of useful verifiable content, the story headline has nevertheless gone viral.  This is not the first time Lloyd has been caught misrepresenting climate science in The Australian - in January of this 2013 he wrongly claimed that a study had found no link between global warming and sea level rise.  Oceanographer John Church, who was co-author on the misrepresented research in question and also Nuccitelli et al. (2012) from which Figure 1 above originated, set the record straight, and The Australian was forced to retract the article.

....

As long as humans continue to increase the greenhouse effect by adding more and more CO2 to the atmosphere, global warming will continue.  That is a physical reality that cannot be changed by misstatements or misquotes or misrepresentations or denial.  Global warming will not stop until we do something to stop it.

http://www.independentaustralia.net/2013/business/media-2/the-australian-misrepresents-ipcc-chair-on-global-warming/

 

Read article above this one... and pass on the message to your local shock jock...

The Australian is a lying toilet sheet on global warming... Tony Abbott is a populist iddiott.

As mentioned before, as sea warms up, more water vapour comes into play in the atmospheric gaseous mix...

See also : http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/9147

and:         http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/drupal/node/19279

 

 

The Bureau of Meteorology has confirmed that Australia has just experienced its hottest summer on record.

The bureau says the previous hottest summer - measured by average day and night figures from across the nation - was in 1997-98.

Climate monitoring manager Dr Karl Braganza says a particularly hot spell in January has helped towards the new record.

"That's certainly contributed to it being the hottest summer on record, but it has been hot in December and February as well," he said.

"Both of those months right around Australia have been warmer than average and it's extending a real six-month period, so the last six months have been the hottest on record from September to February."

Overall, Australia's average summer temperature came in at 28.6 degrees Celsius.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-01/australia-experiences-hottest-summer-on-record/4547746?WT.svl=news4

 

I did not expect anything less.... Several times a day, I kept an eye on average temperature in comparison with the heat of the day and even during february — a month in which the maximum temperature might have been about half a degree Celsius cooler than average  — had minimums about 3 to 4 degrees Celsius above average...

One of the side effect of global warming is higher humidity in many places, as noted in Sydney today...

Meanwhile:

 

The weather bureau says parts of the Northern Territory are experiencing their driest wet season on record.

While the Pilbara region of Western Australia and parts of southern Queensland and northern New South Wales clean up after floods, the traditionally soggy Top End continues to swelter through a six-month build-up, with little relief except for occasional brief tropical storms.

The weather bureau says that while a weak monsoon system has formed in the Timor Sea, off the Territory coast, it is still too early to predict if it will deliver any meaningful rain.

Senior forecaster Graham King says the last time the Territory had such low rainfall by the start of March was in 1991.

But he says there is still another two months before the monsoon season ends.

Some parts of the Top End are looking at setting some new records for low rainfall, Mr King says.

"Gove has had a shocker," he said.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-01/nt-wet-season-driest-for-decades/4547122

 

So what happened?... Well, the monsoon stayed further north and the EXTRA humidity ended up flooding Indonesia as well...