‘Climate Emergency’ nothing but Watermelon Activism (Green on the Outside & Blood Red on the Inside)
On the 17th July 2019, City of Sydney mayor Clover Moore unequivocally declared the NSW capital to be in a state of ‘climate emergency.’ Sydney follows the lead of nation states like the UK, Ireland and France in recognizing what they believe to be an impending climate disaster.
But What does this actually mean?
Well, it isn’t legally binding, and it’s a long cry from a ‘national emergency’ despite the linguistic similarity. In the ABC coverage of the announcement, ‘legal expert’ Dr Michael Eburn of ANU was quoted as saying of the declaration that it “might be used to bring more pressure to bear, but as far as I can tell, [it doesn’t] have any legal meaning at all.”
Interesting. So is the City of Sydney Mayor is making meaningless political declarations to posture and gain PC points? To a large degree yes.
And considering we only recently had the ‘climate change election,’ and Clover’s side seemed to suffer a fairly conclusive defeat, you would think perhaps that softening the cataclysmic rhetoric might be a little more endearing? Not quite.
Clover has echoed the sentiments of the most hardcore environmentalists in calling for net zero emissions by 2030 and a government mandated move away from fossil fuels.
Of course, she’s totally across the economic impacts of that proposal. She’s called on Treasurer Josh Frydenberg to establish a ‘Just Transition Authority’ to assist subsequently displaced woerks.
Nothing more ‘Just’ than forcibly moving workers out of a high-paying specifically skilled contract and into a government mandated, infant-industry occupation which is almost entirely reliant on taxpayer subsidies and tax rebates for the slightest inkling of profitability.
What needs to be understood is that we’re in a state of ‘climate emergency,’ and if you’re not helping you can go rot.
An immovable pillar of support for Clover, and the organizers of the mass protests surrounding climate change, is activist Group Extinction Rebellion. The group hopes that the declaration would ramp up pressure to satiate their own four ‘demands.’
- The Government needs to recognize the scale of the crisis
2. ‘Act now’ — Governments have to present policy that represents the science on the issue
3. The economy has to have zero net emissions by 2030 at the latest
4. The Government establishes local citizens assemblies to enact the policies needed to achieve zero net emissions
So what do all these demands have in common?
The Government. The status quo, the capitalist/socialist hybrid we live in, has served us so poorly we need direct and immediate Government intervention in the economy and the press (if Extinction Rebellion actually said what they mean by ‘recognition,’)to heave us from oblivion.
Does the message sound familiar?
‘I’ll take Marxism for $100. ‘Congratulations. You’re on the money.’
Not one mention of the private sector. But most astoundingly, not a single mention of the massive radioactive elephant in the room. In Australia, the real give away that all these protestors, professional posture makers and closet totalitarians are not what all that they seem, is the total ignorance and intolerance of the one REAL Golden Ticket in the game. Nuclear energy.
Clover More has called for the reintroduction of a Carbon Price in addition to vast increases to renewable energy infrastructure, both of which are massive governmental interventions into the economy, but doesn’t mention the possibility of Nuclear at all.
Nuclear Power has been banned in Australia since 1998 under two Acts of Parliament: the Australian Radiation and Nuclear Safety Act and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act.
But Nuclear is Utilised by more than 30 countries globally, providing 10% of all energy needs, with Australia being the third largest Uranium producer. We hold over 29% of the Global Uranium deposits & have been mining since 1954, with three mines currently operating.
In 2016, the South Australian Royal Commission into nuclear energy recommended Australia as a high-level nuclear waste repository. According to the Switkowski report on uranium mining and processing, Life cycle greenhouse gas emissions are more than ten times lower than emissions from fossil fuels.
But, when one looks at Climatecouncil.org.au we find the first and largest article relating to Nuclear energy is ‘Nuclear Power not appropriate in Australia — And Probably never will be.’ The article cites Australia’s lack of water, their controversial nature, the Fukushima incident and our abundance of sun and wind as rock solid, nail-in the coffin arguments.
To quote the article, ‘Australia is one of the sunniest and windiest countries in the world, with enough renewable energy resources to power our country 500 times over.’ The climate council is all in on renewables, which are ‘low risk, clean and reliable.’
One only has to look at the South Australian power crisis to understand that intermittent solar and wind power provides exactly the opposite of what the Climate Council is claiming. Solar and Wind energies are by their own nature intermittent, and the ability to deliver affordable renewable energy has come almost entirely by virtue of Government subsidies. If renewables were totally reliable and cheaper than existing alternatives they would compete on their own merits.
Without considering Australia’s miniscule contribution to global emissions (less than 1.5%) we should assume arguendo for a moment. Even if we concede that the dubious scientific underpinnings of the climate change thesis (climategate) are all rock solid, the lack of nuclear backing or even consideration from high profile environmentalists like Clover Moore speaks to the larger truth underpinning this debate. These people don’t care about the environment or emissions. They’re skin-deep green but soul crushing red. They care about the power of the state and Nuclear energy is showing all of us that the green emperor has no clothes.