Joyce hoist on his own petard

One of the most useful sayings that French, that fabulous language, has given us is 'hoist on his own petard' - to be blown up by your own bomb (pronounced 'bembh' for ze Pink Panther fans).

Petard also handily translates to 'fart' -- the same noise emanating from Malcolm Turnbull's opposition backbench whenever he tried to push the Coalition's promised bipartisan message on climate change action. One of the main culprits was the National's climate change denier-in-chief, Barnaby Joyce, and for his noisy efforts in the plot to install Tony Abbot as the new opposition leader in his recent climate denier coup, he has been promoted to the shadow cabinet.

You would think Barnaby would now conduct himself with polite restraint, but no. He wasted no time farting in the general direction of China, and America, only to be told by Abbot to now stop his public emissions.

Ironically, one of the best outcomes of promoting Barnaby to the front bench, is that he may finally prevented from airing his more off-tune, odorous odium.

UPDATE - it ain't gonna work out...

Phillip Coorey on the dillema facing the retail Liberal party:

Joyce rose with the full imprimatur of Minchin and Abbott but he drove a hard bargain. He wanted the key portfolio and demanded the shadow ministry be expanded by one so his entry did not result in a fellow National being punted. There are 14 Nationals in Parliament - nine MPs and five senators. Nationals make up 15 per cent of the Coalition caucus and 20 per cent of its shadow cabinet.

If the idea of promoting Joyce was to get him into the tent to curb his excesses, it failed miserably in week one.

....

There will be no reining in of Joyce. As he told the Herald on Tuesday: "It's not as though you have a personality transplant when you go into cabinet."

Being a practical peoples, I think Australians would just settle for a brain-transplant.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Dissecting the brain of an AGW denier #2

This brain belongs to Cory Bernardi:

They said ...

Senator Cory Bernardi, Liberal, South Australia: "This ETS [emissions trading scheme] will also fundamentally change the way our legal system operates. It reverses some important legal concepts such as presumption of innocence, the right to remain silent, the burden of proof and protection from self-incrimination." Altogether after me: Huh?

Peter Fitzgerald

OK, this is the same CPRS bill that has practically caused the once proud Liberal opposition to split in two as they try to process it. Pretty strong magic, huh? Imagine what it can do if enacted? Maybe gradually help us gain control over the rate of co2 we put into the atmosphere? Just a passing thought.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Who is who in the Coalition zoo

Further to my post below, you might like to know who supports the CPRS and negotiated amendments, and who doesn't. The never-learn-from-an-election Liberals/Nationals look like rabble:

Among the Coalition party room speakers in favour of the bill were Richard Colbeck, Judith Troeth, Andrew Laming, Simon Birmingham, Gary Humphries, Sue Boyce, Mal Washer, Bruce Billson, Barry Haase, Marise Payne, Scott Morrison, Judi Moylan, Don Randall, Jo Gash, Russell Trood and Steve Irons.

Those opposed included Alan Ferguson, Judith Adams, Brett Mason, Michaelia Cash, Matthias Cormann, Alan Eggleston, Alby Schultz, Cory Bernardi, Andrew Robb, Guy Barnett, Nola Marion and Luke Simpkins

If anyone of those is your senator, 'cos it's in the Senate where the rubber will hit the road, let them know where you stand, dear reader.

PS. Andrew Robb - what a clown. Anyway, Lateline Tonight should have the outcome.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Don't let evil flourish...

Calling all good men and women of Australia.

Malcolm Tunbull and the human chainsaw, Macfarlane, finally have negotiated their CPRS amendments with Penny Wong et al. Finally. The Liberal party has reconvened after dinner break to vote on supporting the bill. It looks like the doers might just trump the deniers and vote to push the bill though to the Senate for the vote to turn the bill into law.

Now is the time to come to the aid of your party, and let them know where you stand. Contact your Senator, below. That is all it takes:

Senator Abetz senator.abetz@aph.gov.au

Senator Adams senator.adams@aph.gov.au,

Senator Arbib senator.arbib@aph.gov.au,

Senator Back senator.back@aph.gov.au,

Senator Barnett senator.barnett@aph.gov.au,

Senator Bernardi senator.bernardi@aph.gov.au,

Senator Bilyk senator.bilyk@aph.gov.au,

Senator Birmingham senator.birmingham@aph.gov.au,

Senator Bishop senator.bishop@aph.gov.au,

Senator Boswell senator.boswell@aph.gov.au,

Senator Boyce senator.sue.boyce@aph.gov.au,

Senator Brandis senator.brandis@aph.gov.au,

Senator Brown senator.carol.brown@aph.gov.au,

Senator Bushby senator.bushby@aph.gov.au,

Senator Cameron senator.cameron@aph.gov.au,

Senator Carr senator.carr@aph.gov.au,

Senator Cash senator.cash@aph.gov.au,

Senator Colbeck senator.colbeck@aph.gov.au,

Senator Collins senator.collins@aph.gov.au,

Senator Conroy senator.conroy@aph.gov.au,

Senator Coonan senator.coonan@aph.gov.au,

Senator Cormann senator.cormann@aph.gov.au,

Senator Crossin senator.crossin@aph.gov.au,

Senator Eggleston senator.eggleston@aph.gov.au,

Senator Evans senator.evans@aph.gov.au,

Senator Farrell senator.farrell@aph.gov.au,

Senator Faulkner senator.faulkner@aph.gov.au,

Senator Feeney senator.feeney@aph.gov.au,

Senator Furguson senator.ferguson@aph.gov.au,

Senator Fielding senator.fielding@aph.gov.au,

Senator Fierravanti senator.fierravanti-wells@aph.gov.au,

Senator Fifield senator.fifield@aph.gov.au,

Senator Fisher senator.fisher@aph.gov.au,

Senator Forshaw senator.forshaw@aph.gov.au,

Senator Furner senator.furner@aph.gov.au,

SenatorHanson-Young senator.hanson-young@aph.gov.au,

Senator Heffernan senator.heffernan@aph.gov.au,

Senator Hogg senator.hogg@aph.gov.au,

Senator Humphries senator.humphries@aph.gov.au,

Senator Hurley senator.hurley@aph.gov.au,

Senator Hutchins senator.hutchins@aph.gov.au,

SenatorJohnson senator.johnston@aph.gov.au,

Senator Joyce senator.joyce@aph.gov.au,

Senator Kroger senator.kroger@aph.gov.au,

Senator Ludlam senator.ludlam@aph.gov.au,

Senator Ludwig senator.ludwig@aph.gov.au,

Senator Lundy senator.lundy@aph.gov.au,

Senator McDonald senator.ian.macdonald@aph.gov.au,

SenatorMcEwan senator.mcewen@aph.gov.au,

Senator McGauran senator.mcgauran@aph.gov.au,

Senator McLucas senator.mclucas@aph.gov.au,

Senator Marshall senator.marshall@aph.gov.au,

Senator Mason senator.mason@aph.gov.au,

Senator Milne senator.milne@aph.gov.au,

Senator Minchin senator.minchin@aph.gov.au,

Senator Moore senator.moore@aph.gov.au,

Senator Nash senator.nash@aph.gov.au,

Senator O’Brien senator.obrien@aph.gov.au,

Senator Parry senator.parry@aph.gov.au,

Senator Payne senator.payne@aph.gov.au,

Senator Polley senator.polley@aph.gov.au,

Senator Pratt senator.pratt@aph.gov.au,

Senator Ronaldson senator.ronaldson@aph.gov.au,

Senator Ryan senator.ryan@aph.gov.au,

Senator Scullion senator.scullion@aph.gov.au,

Senator Sherry senator.sherry@aph.gov.au

Senator Siewert senator.siewert@aph.gov.au,

Senator Stephens senator.stephens@aph.gov.au,

Senator Sterle senator.sterle@aph.gov.au,

Senator Troeth senator.troeth@aph.gov.au,

Senator Trood senator.trood@aph.gov.au,

Senator Williams senator.williams@aph.gov.au,

Senator Wong senator.wong@aph.gov.au,

Senator Wortley senator.wortley@aph.gov.au,

Senator Xenophon senator.xenophon@aph.gov.au,

Don't hold back, now. Consider your kids' and grandkids' quality of lives

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

About f'king time, Mr Rudd

Respectfully, you should have been using this sort of hard language to publicly out and route these most insidious AGW deniers (not sceptics ~ sceptics form their views based on the peer-reviewed evidence) in the Liberal party, a lot earlier. We've already seen how many political cowards in the Liberal Party snuck across into the denier camp as the public bought your you-are-doing-something and climate change concern dropped in its priorities.

But, these words are as pleasing on the eyes as the drought-breaking rain is on the parched face of a cockie:

"These do-nothing climate change sceptics are prepared to destroy our children's future,"

"The do-nothing climate change sceptics are still alive and well in the coalition,"

"The argument that we must not act until others do is an argument that has been used by political cowards since time immemorial, both of the left and the right.

"They are reckless gamblers who are betting all our futures on their arrogant assumption that their intuitions should triumph over the evidence.

"You are betting our jobs, our houses, our farms, our reefs, our economy and our future on an intuition, on a gut feeling, on a political prejudice you have about science."

Well put, sir. Though, technically speaking, you just pinged them Do-Nothing Deniers. Now route 'em hard, and route 'em for good. Take the best damned deal you can to Copenhagen. We want 25% emissions cuts below 2000 levels, minimum.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Who would have tipped that Tip would tip?

Staunch to the last:

Andrew Bolt

Monday, June 15, 2009 at 02:53pm

Nice profile on the (perhaps) next member for Higgins. I suspect, however, that Peter Costello will make the impressive John Roskam wait.

UPDATE

No sooner predicted than contradicted. Roskam is as startled by the news as am I:

PETER Costello has finally put an end to speculation about his future, confirming he will not contest the next election. The former Treasurer announced this afternoon he would not renominate for party endorsement in his seat of Higgins.

Andrew must have had a late lunch. His bloggers started rolling in with the tragic news at 02:02pm:

Peter Costello will be the sitting member that gets pre selected. Anyone that thinks different is off with the fairies.

Daniel of Sydney (Reply)
Mon 15 Jun 09 (12:56pm)

Tracey Conlan replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:02pm)

After announcing he will not contest the next elecion, do you feel a little silly ?

Dont worry. Mr Bolt was wrong as well!

Stu Morgan replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:08pm)

Unfortunately, the fairies are very real. :(

polytickle replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:08pm)

Daniel,

Looking forward to you posting a picture of yourself in your “fairy tutu”

Aslan replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:09pm)

According to his website, he has announced that he will stand down and leave politics.

Bugger!

Janine I replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:10pm)

I suspect, however, that Peter Costello will make the impressive John Roskam wait.

Costello just said differently.

Shaun replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:18pm)

Oops.. ha ha. Sorry, your messiah is gone.

Alan of Sydney replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:19pm)

Hey Dan, maybe there really is fairies at the bottom of your garden....

Rudi replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:22pm)

How about them fairies hey Daniel?

LH replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:27pm)

You were saying, Daniel?

Valleys Boy replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:29pm)

Daniel,

You were saying?

rob of glen iris replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (02:35pm)

Well, I guess it takes a fairy to know one. When it comes to getting things wrong about PC, you and AB stand out!

Bill O Tas replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (03:05pm)

Daniel, you deserve some kind of prize!

bennoba replied to Daniel
Mon 15 Jun 09 (03:08pm)

Janine I is back!

If Andrew Bolt has been so wrong about Peter Costello for so long, is it possible he could be wrong about other things he campaigns for... like anthropogenic global warming.


Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Australia's climate bill may be scuttled

The ETS circus plays on:

Australian Greens climate change spokeswoman Christine Milne said the Government would also have no alternative but to reverse its plan to link passage of the emissions bill to renewable energy measures.

"The [emissions trading] bill will be defeated. There is no question about that," she told ABC Television.

"The Government hasn't been able to reach a compromise with the Coalition and in terms of the Greens, the Government has not come back with more ambitious targets on the table.

"We are determined that Australia plays its fair share internationally."

Senator Milne said the UN meeting in Bonn was now declaring that the main roadblock to a global agreement at the Copenhagen climate change conference later this year was the lack of ambition from developed countries.

She said emissions reductions targets between 16-24 per cent were on the table and that was nowhere near the 25-45 per cent needed for developed countries.

Senator Milne said the Government had added a complication by tying renewable energy target legislation to passage of the emissions reduction scheme.

"The Government is going to have to back down on that because so many businesses around the country are desperate to get going with expanding renewable energy."

As we know, Family First's Stephen Fielding has been blinded by staring at the sun for too long when hanging out with fellow gullibles at the Heartland Institute of Kitchen Science and Propaganda. He's no bloody use to Labor (but at least he is more honest and open in his denial than the damned Liberals), so if Big Kev wants to get his second-best emissions scheme though, he's gonna have to bite the bullet and turn it into the first best plan.

Hey Kevin, as still per the last election, Aussies want to be world leaders in the new carbon economy, starting today; if you won't give us that chance, we'll find a leader who will.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Fielding staring at the sun for too long

My reaction to the news of Senator Stephen Fielding coming back from attending an AGW denier's conference hosted by the Heartland Institute, is that he seeks to betray the path of ETS legislation for thirty pieces of Big Fossil-Fuel silver. My evidence? Simply that Fielding is replaying their great canard, 'It's the sun, stupid'.

Professor Barry Brook's reaction is to patiently explain why the peer-review science says Fielding is wrong. He sets out thus:

‘Solar variability does not explain late-20th-century warming’, says the title of a short paper published earlier this year by Philip Duffy, Ben Santer and Tom Wigley in Physics Today. The reason I bring up the topic of the sun and climate now is that an Australian Senator, Stephen Fielding of the Family First party, has recently been concerned that the solar variability could be a cause of recent warming, as the vote for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme comes before the Upper House. Apparently, he got this information from the American Heartland Institute. Well, let me put the good Senator’s concerns to rest.

He puts mine to rest... read it... leaving only concerns about Fielding himself.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

US Emissions Talks With China Hit Great Wall

Five months ahead of the Copenhagen talks, a round of climate talks between the world's two biggest polluters has stalled, reports the Financial Times:

Chinese officials maintained that the two countries should have a “common but differentiated approach” – code for Beijing’s reluctance to adopt a formal domestic mandate to reduce its carbon emissions. The US Congress is considering a bill that would reduce US emissions to 83 per cent of 2005 levels by 2020. China wants the US to cut its emissions to 40 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 – a different order of magnitude. It also wants the US to pledge up to 1 per cent of its gross domestic product to pay for clean technology in China and elsewhere.

“It is going to be really tough to get the Chinese to make significant concessions by Copenhagen,” said Bruce Braine, a board member of the International Emissions Trading Association. “There seems to be a lack of realism in ... the developing world about what the US can achieve at home.”

It can be argued that there seems to be a lack of realism in the developed world about who has emitted most of the greenhouse gasses that have created the global warming we have consequently experienced to date. Nevertheless, the US and China are in this together, as we all are. The more united we are, the better off we will be; just as, the sooner we move, the better off we will be.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Government ETS delay: A back-flip to the future

I don't know what to think about the Australian Government's 2011 back-flip on the starting date of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

The economy is going sideways. This means fewer carbon emissions caused by lower productivity. A delayed introduction will help businesses by delaying compliance costs, but it is only a delay. And, we miss the chance to go to Copenhagen and negotiate with more leverage. I do think this is a big-picture mistake because Australia's (or any country's) best shot at mitigation is as part of a global effort.

In what's becoming a knack of this government, it's a back-flip with a twist. In the following case, for the greater good:

The government has delayed its emissions trading scheme (ETS) a year to July 2011, citing the global economic crisis.

But Labor has also pushed up its emissions reduction target to 25 per cent of 2000 levels by 2020 - up from a maximum of 15 per cent - depending on the strength of an international agreement. The bottom end of the target range is still five per cent.

They sneaked that in without much protest. Wong and Co also neutralised one of the criticisms of the pollution reduction scheme — that carbon emissions savings by conscientious households would allow business more ceiling to pollute in. Well, Rudd's mob seem to have thought about that.

Concerned householders will be able to calculate their carbon output and buy permits to pollute, effectively taking these permits out of circulation.

Because the scheme will have a set number of permits for trading, permits bought in this way will not be available to polluting industries, thus reducing the amount of pollution able to be pumped into the atmosphere.

These permits will be bought by a new Australian Carbon Trust – Energy Efficiency Savings Pledge Fund, which will pool donations to buy the permits.

Seems like they have been consultative, which is a good sign. If I could say anything to them, my echo in the blogiverse would be to take heart from the British Colombian government's recent victory.

The only government in North America to implement a carbon tax to fight climate change has been re-elected handily in British Columbia.

And to take heed.

Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Who is fueling new Climate Sceptics political party?

Witness the birth of The Climate Sceptics, Australia's newest political party. Aren't we truly the lucky country? They bill themselves as 

"The World's first up front political party representing climate sceptics"

Well, after John Howard's Liberals here in Australia, and George W. Bush's Republicans in the US. And then there was that Vaclav Klaus' Civic Democratic Party in Checkloslavakia. That's why we are in the mess we are in.

Forth time lucky's president, Leon Ashby, used to run the The Australian Environment Foundation, a front group founded by the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA), a conservative Melbourne-based think tank, according to Sourcewatch.

The newest party's website is carrying advertising for the US ExxonMobil funded AGW denier outfit, The HeartLand Institute.

Gee, I wonder who is financing The Climate Sceptics?

 Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Cheney grounded $100 million climate satellite

Desmogblog is right into the unfolding story of the Bush Administration's interference with NASA's climate science research. This time it is allegations of Cheney's hand in the mothballing of the DSCOVR satellite question :

An unnamed source within NASA intimately familiar with the mothballed Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) mission spoke to Desmog Blog on the condition of anonymity.

The story is incredible.

The big question has always been: who would want to kill a $100 million fully completed climate satellite that has sat in a box since the 2000 presidential election - even though dozens of leading scientists have demanded it be launched?

“Apparently Cheney was the hatchet man”, said the source. “Bush tried the keep his hands clean so he didn’t actually have direct involvement. It almost reminds me of the way Nixon used to operate…He assigned Cheney to be the hatchet man job on DSCOVR… Bush’s fingerprints weren’t on it but Cheney’s were… That’s what we heard through the grapevine.”

All allegations, though. No nitty gritty yet. Watch this space.


Global Warning Climate Change Energy

Global warming — bad guys found at last

The science on global warming is so clear that it's hard to understand why the public doesn't push the politicians to pass the laws necessary for our preservation.

But, as a species we do not respond to changes on a geological time-scale, even those as rapid as our anthropocene. We can intellectualise the threat of climate change, but it takes a visceral threat, say - a bushfire, to move us into survival mode.

We can be moved to action by moral threat, as Howard showed us when we stood firm against invading refugee fleets armed with nothing but children for projectiles. We weren't going to let them tell us how they were going to come into the country. No sir. Howard skilfully turned those poor refugees into the bad-guys by suggesting they use their children to evoke our sympathy.

The problem with climate change, in terms of generating public outrage, is that it had no 'bad guys'. There is no identifiable moral threat oil companies represent, considering...

Until now. NY Times reports:

Sex, Drug Use and Graft Cited in Interior Department

WASHINGTON — As Congress prepares to debate expansion of drilling in taxpayer-owned coastal waters, the Interior Department agency that collects oil and gas royalties has been caught up in a wide-ranging ethics scandal — including allegations of financial self-dealing, accepting gifts from energy companies, cocaine use and sexual misconduct.

In three reports delivered to Congress on Wednesday, the department’s inspector general, Earl E. Devaney, found wrongdoing by a dozen current and former employees of the Minerals Management Service, which collects about $10 billion in royalties annually and is one of the government’s largest sources of revenue other than taxes.

“A culture of ethical failure” pervades the agency, Mr. Devaney wrote in a cover memo.

The reports portray a dysfunctional organization that has been riddled with conflicts of interest, unprofessional behavior and a free-for-all atmosphere for much of the Bush administration’s watch.

The highest-ranking official criticized in the reports is Lucy Q. Denett, the former associate director of minerals revenue management, who retired earlier this year as the inquiry was progressing.

Never mind the intergenerational accumulating existentialist threat to the species these folk are perpetrating, what about the sex, drugs and graft renting at the very moral fabric of our society? They are the types of people who would throw their children overboard. You just know it.

Here's a report from the Globe and Mail: Sex, drugs, oil and gas

Sarah "Shapeshifter" Palin's climate change change

From this audio of a long letter of a disgruntled Alaskan, who claims to know Sarah Palin — minus lipstick — we learn that she does not believe that man-made global warming is shrinking the habitat of polar bears. Ergo, legislation protecting their habitat — from oil extraction — should be overturned.

That's from before she was thrust into the public spotlight (and into dissonance with McCain's stance). But Desmogblog now detects a subtle shift in stance:

... show me where I've said there's absolute proof that nothing that man has ever conducted or engaged in has had any effect or no effect on climate change. I have not said that. I have said that my belief is there is a cyclical nature of our planet — warming trends, cooling trends — I'm not going to argue scientists, because I believe in science and have such a great respect for what they are telling us. I'm not going to disagree with the point that they make that man's activities can be attributed to changes."

The denial lobby are boning her up as we read this. Count on it.

Australians would dig deep to fight climate change

Good news for the government implementing an ETS. We won't stand in your way (but woe betide it turns out trust is misplaced).

A MAJOR survey of Australians' views on climate change has found an overwhelming majority think it is happening and they're prepared to pay to address it.

The study by University of Technology Sydney found Australians wanted to see cuts in the nation's greenhouse gas emissions irrespective of the actions of other countries.

The key findings include that 83.7 per cent believed global warming was occurring and, of those, 84.9 per cent said Australia should proceed with an emissions trading scheme (ETS) regardless of the international response. "The bottom line from this study is that Australians think now is the time to adopt a climate change program that has some real teeth," visiting economics professor at UTS Richard Carson said.

"They believe that climate change will cause serious problems in Australia and elsewhere in the world, and they understand there will be sizeable cost going along with it."

We want the revenue an ETS will earn, to help low-income earners cope with the changes, and middle income earners want the GST reduced. Will it be an unnecessary tax, after the cost of pollution becomes a production input?

An interesting question about the role of government arises. Is it more efficient to tax consumption, or 'externalities', that is, the social cost of pollution.

And most want 20 percent of the ETS revenue to be dedicated to climate change R&D.

Professor Carson said 58.7 per cent of participants supported spending 20 per cent of ETS revenues on R & D, in keeping with a recommendation of the Rudd Government-commissioned Garnaut Review.

"The public clearly favours spending 20 per cent of the money on R & D … even though we told them that if they did that they would redistribute less money to the public," he said.

"That shows the Australians are very forward-looking, they see it as a long-term problem and the R & D efforts will help them get over the hump."

Survey participants' views were also sought on the different government plans and opposition policies to tackle climate change.

A majority (57.1 per cent) supported the government's plan to begin emissions trading from 2010 over the Liberals' later 2012 start date.

Participants were quizzed on their political leanings and Professor Carson said Green and Labor voters were more likely to favour the government's plan.

Interestingly, more than half (53 per cent) of Liberal-aligned survey participants also favoured the earlier 2010 ETS start date instead of official policy held by the Federal Opposition.

Views were split on whether transport should be exempt for the first three years of the ETS - with just over half (50.6 per cent) for the move to temporarily delay price increases at the petrol bowser.

The study, entitled Survey on Controlling Greenhouse Gases, was conducted by the UTS Centre for the Study of Choice.

Professor Carson is a Professor of Economics at the University of California and is a Visiting Distinguished Professor at the UTS.

These figures are consistent with other surveys. If this survey gets media traction, it's the death-knell for the AGW denial industry.

Hurrican Gustav to test Obama/Biden, McCain/Palin

The damage wrought by Hurricane Katrina also ruined Bush. A point clearly not lost on all presidential candidates as they prepare to respond to the 'certain political fallout' claimed for Gustav:

Republican White House hopeful John McCain and running-mate Sarah Palin will Sunday ditch their pre-convention plans and visit people in Mississippi bracing for deadly Hurricane Gustav.

The visit comes as the fearsome category four storm's approach overshadowed the buildup to the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota on Monday, and stirred memories of the botched response to Hurricane Katrina exactly three years ago.

Katrina is still affecting the GOP.

Earlier, in an interview to be broadcast on Fox News Sunday, McCain suggested he might go as far as suspending the convention, if the storm turned into a huge human tragedy on the par with Katrina.

"It wouldn't be appropriate to have a festive occasion while a near tragedy or a terrible challenge is presented in the form of a national disaster.

"So we're monitoring it from day-to-day and I'm saying a few prayers, " he said.

..

Forecasters said the storm could hit top category five force as it moved toward the US Gulf Coast for a direct hit Monday or Tuesday. In any case, "Gustav is forecast to remain a major hurricane through landfall along the northern Gulf coast," the US National Hurricane Center said.

Obama is keeping weather eye out as well.

Will the fallout involve a discussion on the US's response to combating global warming?

AGW Denial: Obama makes fun of wilful ignorance

Oh yea... tell it like it is.

Obama Insists Inflating Tires Better Than Oil Drilling

Obama's Energy Plan: Really good

So says Climate Spin:

Obama came out with his energy plan yesterday. I agree with Joe over at Climate Progress that its pretty darn good from a major-party candidate (I don't recall if its better then Gore's 2000 plan. Anyone?)

Here are some good points:

• cap-and-trade program with all credits auctioned
  
• Reduce emissions to 80% of 1990 levels by 2050.
  
• Raise CAFE by 4% a year
  
• Increase building, appliance and power generation efficiency (still the easiest "win")
  

And tucked way at the bottom was this nice part about building more sustainable and livable communities: "Obama is committed to reforming the federal transportation funding and leveling employer incentives for driving and public transit." Yeah!

I didn't like the mention of exploiting oil shales in Montana and clean coal but, overall, this is great. Too bad energy, except for gas prices, and climate has fallen off the radar in the campaign or this might get more attention.

Technorati Tags: global warming, climate change

People to Rudd: Grow spine, show climate leadership

Yes.

Australia said it when we recently voted, and we are saying it now in response to the opposition abandoning bipartisanship on climate change, and the government politically neutralising the issue by adopting Howard's old Shergold Report recommendations.

Reproduced in full. Phillp Coorey reports:

Don't fiddle a world burns

AN OVERWHELMING majority of voters support Kevin Rudd's drive to tackle climate change and 77 per cent believe Australia should press ahead and cut its greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of what other countries do.

The latest Herald/Nielsen poll, the first since last week's green paper on a proposed emissions trading scheme, finds that Australians are willing to pay the price for cutting carbon emissions, even though most do not understanding how the scheme
will work.

When informed that greenhouse gas abatement would cause the price of goods and services to increase, 68 per cent said they were prepared to pay more while 24 per cent were opposed.

The poll coincides with another bleak assessment of the Murray-Darling River system, handed to federal and state ministers, saying there may not be enough water to guarantee supply to regional towns by 2010. It recommends that available water be used only for human consumption in towns of the lower Murray-Darling.

As the Government started a multimillion-dollar "awareness" campaign on its climate action last night, the poll found six of every 10 voters either slightly understood or had no understanding at all of the emissions trading scheme. However, two-thirds still supported introducing a scheme.

The poll of 1400 voters was taken from Thursday to Saturday. On Wednesday, the Government released its green paper outlining how a domestic emissions trading scheme would work.

In the preceding week, the Coalition was split over climate change. Its leader, Brendan Nelson, contradicted senior colleagues by saying Australia should do nothing until other big polluting countries acted. Only 19 per cent of respondents to the poll agreed with this course of action.

The poll finds the Government about as popular now as it was at the election. On a two-party-preferred basis, Labor leads by 54 to46 per cent and, on primary votes, by 43 to 40 per cent. Both show small shifts to the Opposition since last month's poll but the movements are within the margin of error and not enough to give the Opposition great heart.

Mr Rudd's approval rating remains relatively unchanged at 66 per cent compared with 36 per cent for Dr Nelson. Mr Rudd leads Dr Nelson as preferred prime minister by 65 to 20 per cent, a 3-percentage point drop.

With climate change policy full of political risk, 54 per cent are satisfied with the way Mr Rudd is handling the matter while 38 per cent are unhappy. The Government will welcome the findings as it is battling an increasingly hostile Opposition and corporate
sector.

"These findings suggest clear support for the Government's climate change policy," the Nielsen research director, John Stirton, said. However, last month's poll showed 78 per cent wanted the Government to intervene over petrol prices and Mr Stirton said this gave "food for thought about the real depth of support for a
tough policy on climate change".

Last night the Government launched its taxpayer-funded advertising campaign to promote awareness of the proposed trading scheme. Labor had been critical of the Howard government's political advertising but the Climate Change Minister, Penny Wong, said this campaign would adhere to new guidelines that require the
auditor-general's approval.

The Treasurer, Wayne Swan, said: "We want to have a very mature conversation with the Australian people about this because big economic reforms like this are not cost-free."

The shadow treasurer, Malcolm Turnbull, said Labor was rushing when "great care and deliberation" were needed to protect industry and households. He suggested the Coalition would oppose gradually reducing total emissions allowed under the scheme until other countries cut theirs.

Thoughts on Rudd's Petrol Excise Cut 'n Run

Considered thoughts on the green paper on emissions trading from Oikos. He has approximately the same take on the petrol excise offset as I have, though is more eloquent in expressing it.

There are two ways to look at this – from a practical perspective or from a principle perspective. Either way, my view is that cutting the petrol excise isn’t good but isn’t really all that bad either.

The practical implication of cutting excise and therefore neutralising the impact that the scheme has on the petrol price is that...

Oikos also prefers for the review of the excise cut after a three year period to be a permanent cut instead, — why defer uncertainty for three years. I agree, it also makes Labor a political target, by keeping open the notion among industry lobby groups they can keep getting exemptions. The opposition has already signalled they could break from bipartisanship.

I don't know what configuration of emissions trading scheme is best for Australia, but surely political courage is an enabling ingredient.