2012 THE NEW 1984

In June 2009 Senator Wong’s office announced that Australian Federal Police
(AFP) will be required to become Carbon Cops. They will be responsible for
enforcing the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme CPRS) currently
being debated in Parliament. Ms Wong’s office said that provisions had been
made to ensure compliance so that inspectors can enter premises, request
paperwork and exercise other monitoring powers.

Breaking carbon trading laws would be like breaking other federal laws for
which the AFP are responsible. Laws covering crimes such as drug
syndicates, terrorist threats, people smuggling, fraud and threats against
children. That is pretty bad company for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) a colourless,
odourless gas, which we exhale every time we breathe, is a natural
fertilizer and is necessary for life on earth to exist. And although it has been
charged with causing anthropogenic (man-made) Global warming (AGW),
this has yet to be proved. The jury is still out.

Although Senator Wong’s office is currently implying that Carbon Cops will only
track down businesses it does not preclude further refinement to include
individuals. This was originally proposed by the British Parliament as
reported in the February 27th, 2007 issue of The Bulletin:
“GreenWatch – Credit carbs:”

“Individual credit cards loaded up with your personal quota of carbon
emissions are the next front in the war on global warming .

The UK Secretary of State for the Environment …Wants to introduce a
personal trading scheme by 2012. … Price increases passed on by electricity
and gas suppliers have minimal impact on individual habits – “People just
get poorer”. …”People need to look at what they have control over… What
sized car, how many kilometres they drive, what size home they live in and
how much energy they consume.”… They (the people) would be allocated
an equal number of carbon credits, which would eventually be reduced
to conform to total carbon limits. (my emphasis) … To buy extra carbon
credits … has come up with a notional figure of 70 pounds ($200) a tonne.”
If you’ve never read George Orwell’s 1984, or even if you have, it would
make a good 101 Primer for 2012, when Big Green Brother will be
monitoring every molecule of CO2 you exhale.

I found the above story about “Personal Carbon Credits” (PCCs) depressing.
To cheer myself up I thought some satire would be appropriate, so I wrote a
short story about living in the Green Brother environment of 2012, (which I
included in my sceptical book:

“Planning Ahead for Future Generations by Highlighting Climate Change
Myths”.- For copies access www.lighthouses.com.au ). Continue reading . . .

Mandated Renewable Energy Targets – A Stealth Tax Scheme

via: carbon-sense

The Carbon Sense Coalition’s response to the draft Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2008 makes the following conclusions (among others):

• There are no climate benefits in mandating ever increasing shares of the electricity market for “renewable” energy. Therefore any scheme to generate electricity should stand on its own feet with no special tax breaks, subsidies or mandated market shares to support it.
• All of this also leads to the conclusion that mandating market shares for “renewable energy” is not justified. This is just a sneaky way to impose taxes on conventional electricity generators in a way that most consumers will not notice. It is part of a deliberate Stealth Tax Scheme. It will stifle growth and deter economic recovery.
• Mandated market shares are incompatible with the logic (if there is any) of Emission Trading Schemes or carbon taxes.

Read the stealth-taxes.pdf full submission [PDF, 184 KB]

News Update

via: carbon-sense

At last the tide seems to be turning. Businesses and consumers are coming to realize that the whole Emissions Industry is designed to deliver money and power to the government. There is nothing in it for taxpayers, consumers or the climate. Even some in the media are becoming sceptics.

For a year now, almost no media was interested in our story. But recently we have had TV, radio and newspaper reporters seeking comment from the Carbon Sense Coalition, and often the interviewers were friendly or at least open minded.

A few other developments.

1. John Coleman, the weatherman who started “The Weather Channel,” has become one of the most prolific opponents to the theory of man-made global warming. Here he reports how the whole thing started… kusi.com

2. Here is a petition you should sign. Go to: http://listentous.org.au/
Dr Dennis Jensen MP will be presenting the petition to the House of Representatives.

3. And Australia has its Climate Sceptics Party. See: http://www.climatesceptics.com.au/

4. Professor Ian Plimer has a new book: “Heaven and Earth”:
http://www.connorcourt.com/catalog1/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=103&zenid=1b2bf53b161f52ca5117787e8492eb91

5. Another Australian, David Archibald has released a very informative book on the solar links to world climate changes: “Solar Cycle 24”. See: davidarchibald.info/

6. Last but not least, The Lavoisier Society has released Thank God for Carbon, the latest booklet by Ray Evans. See: lavoisier. You may order copies of the book by e-mail from the Society order@lavoisier.com.au. Please include your name and postal address and the number of copies you would like to receive. The Lavoisier Group would be grateful to receive donations to cover postage and printing costs.

This is a critical year in the battle for Carbon Sense. All over the world the Warmists are becoming desperate as skepticism grows and voters are diverted to real problems like jobs and financial security.

Any help you can give us in this battle of our times is appreciated.

CARBON DIOXIDE: The importance of Carbon Dioxide to your health

via: nzcpr

By Robert Chouinard

First, do you know that carbon dioxide (CO₂) in our atmosphere is

Þ      only slightly more than 1/3rd of 1/10th of 1 percent? 
Þ      just recovering from the lowest level in the history of the earth?
Þ      the source of carbon for all life forms, on land or in the sea?
Þ      only slightly above the suffocation level for green plants?
Þ      a fraction of the level for which evolution designed plants?
Þ      so low as to cause some people breathing problems?
Þ      increased by 130 times and more when administered to sick patients?
Þ      considered, thanks to Al Gore, a pollutant by the U.S. Supreme Court?
Þ      now a commodity to be traded on Al Gore’s Carbon Exchange?  (See lawsuit against Al Gore for fraud)

It’s common knowledge that when we breathe we take in oxygen and give off carbon dioxide but what is not generally known is that we are greatly affected by the level of carbon dioxide in the air we breathe as well as the way we breathe.  Because many people with a wide range of health problems find relief when given enhanced levels of carbon dioxide, it follows that these people would benefit from any rise in the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  The importance of CO₂ and proper breathing is nicely covered in the following audio lecture and followed with scientific references.

Audio lecture:  aetherin.com

What are safe levels of Carbon Dioxide? 
Source:  cdiac.esd.ornl.gov

Levels of carbon dioxide (CO₂), a colorless, odorless gas, have been known to reach 3,000 parts per million (ppm) in homes, schools, and offices with no ill effects. The maximum recommended by the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for an 8-hour occupation is 5,000 ppm (13 times the current level of 380 ppm). The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) also use 5,000 ppm as their threshold for occupational safety.

But 5,000 ppm appears to be a very conservative estimate of safe levels because other sources claim we can tolerate up to 1.5% of it in air, 15,000 parts per million. 

Consider: people with respiratory problems are given medical gas typically consisting of 95 percent oxygen and 50,000 ppm (5 percent) carbon dioxide.  This gas can also be obtained with CO₂ ranging from 1% to as high as 10% for treating people who have been asphyxiated.

Also consider: we would die if we did not breathe in such a way as to retain very close to 65,000 ppm (6.5%) of CO₂ in the alveoli (tiny air sacs) of our lungs.

And finally, the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA) reports that 100,000 ppm (10%) of CO₂ is the atmospheric concentration immediately dangerous to life.

Scientific studies on higher levels of CO2Altitude sickness is caused by hyperventilation which results in increased oxygen (O₂) in the blood but decreased CO₂. (Note: oxygen (O) occurs as a molecule in nature, hence the symbol O₂) The lowered CO₂ will not allow the increased O₂ to be utilized.  Adjusting to this condition is called “ventilatory acclimatization”.  While it is not completely understood all that happens during this process, it has been observed by experimentation that supplementing CO₂ prevents this acclimatization as well as preventing the sickness.  It appears that respiratory distress due to lower levels of O₂ (requiring ventilatory acclimatization) can be relieved or eliminated by the application of a higher level of CO₂. 

This might be a good time to ask: since we exhale CO₂, why do we need it to be present in the air we inhale?  Good question, but apparently, we do as demonstrated by the above experiment.  Other experiments found that simply circulating CO₂ up one nostril and out the other while the subject held their breath cured migraine headaches as well as allergic symptoms.  Other researchers propose administering CO₂ to people who suffer from epilepsy, Parkinson’s, and autism as well.  Clearly, we are affected by low levels of CO₂ in the air we breathe and need to acclimatize to these low levels, if we can, but not everyone can.  Consider:

• People who experience periodic breathing as well as apnea (cessation of breathing) during sleep benefit from higher levels of CO₂.  These conditions affect a lot of older people.

• Increased levels of CO₂ can improve the sleep of young people as well.  One study found that healthy young men on a submarine slept well when CO₂ levels rose but not as well when the levels dropped.  

• Furthermore it’s administered in the form of medical gas (1% to 10%) for many medical conditions to stimulate respiration. For example, people with asthma require from 3% to 5% for therapeutic effect.  Studies suggest that a lower level than this but somewhat higher than present atmospheric levels would prevent the attacks in the first place and prevent subclinical symptoms associated with asthma such as anxiety, insomnia, immune dysfunction and excessive sensitivity to pain.  CO₂ levels higher than 5 per cent are used for extreme cases such as for treating victims of asphyxiation and to stimulate breathing of newborn infants as well as speeding recovery of patients who have been anesthetized.

• The majority of us have some degree of lung impairment, which affects the more critical function of the lungs in regulating the proper level of CO₂ in the alveoli (tiny air sacs).  Metabolic syndrome alone includes approximately 20 – 30 % of adults in the U.S. and Europe.  Then there are smokers, asthmatics, and people with miner’s lung, emphysema and scarred lungs due to previous bouts of pneumonia, old people, and many more conditions.  Furthermore, a wide range of medical conditions and infectious diseases manifest in pulmonary symptoms.  All these conditions can require medical gas because the present atmospheric level is not optimum and appears to lack a safety margin for people with lung impairment. Breathing is a tricky business.  We have to breathe fast and deep enough to get the O₂ we need but not so fast as to hyperventilate and lose control of our blood’s CO₂ balance (pH).  Over the last 50 million years the O₂ level and CO₂ level have both dropped as well as atmospheric density which puts us into the same predicament as the mountain climber who must acclimatize to a higher altitude.  Even healthy mountain climbers reach a level at which they cannot further adapt.  People with lung impairment are like the climber who has reached that level.  Either an increase in the O₂ level or an increase in the CO₂ level would be a benefit.  It is for good reason that people hospitalized are fitted with air tubes to their nostrils providing them very high levels of oxygen and carbon dioxide.  (Typically, 4.5 times the oxygen but, more importantly, 130 times the carbon dioxide that is in the atmosphere)

• Experiments have shown that even healthy people have different tolerances (or sensitivity) to CO₂ levels.  However, we can all acclimatize to much higher levels simply by constant exposure to those levels.  Physiological changes occur as well as adaptive breathing changes.  There is a curious variation in these physiological changes noted in studies of people who live at higher altitudes, which seem to be a result of genetics.  The natural experiment of human colonization of high-altitude plateaus on three continents has resulted in two—perhaps three—quantitatively different arterial-oxygen-content phenotypes among Andean, Tibetan and Ethiopian high-altitude populations.  The dominance of Ethiopian (and neighboring Kenyan) athletes in endurance marathon running events would appear to be a result of their unique evolutionary adaptation in this regard.

Making Sense of it all while keeping it simple

The two most immediate concerns when treating patients in intensive care are their blood gasses and their blood electrolytes.  Marathon runners frequently pass out and can even die because they did not replenish their electrolytes which were depleted through excessive sweating. One of these electrolytes (bicarbonate) acts as a buffer in the blood to regulate the blood’s pH but can be depleted in an attempt to compensate for blood gasses. (The reverse can also happen as respiration can change and become distressed in an attempt to compensate for bicarbonate.)  Consider the mountain climber who has to acclimatize to a higher altitude over a one or two day period (ventilatory acclimatization).  It is a slow change in his body chemistry using his available bicarbonate that makes this possible.  To a lesser degree, we all depend on these electrolytes on a daily basis; a proper diet is essential to replenish them.

Our blood gasses (O₂ & CO₂) depend on the efficiency of our respiration, which consist of two phases: oxygenation (intake of O₂) and ventilation (exhalation of CO₂).  The audio clip nicely explains the ventilatory phase and what happens when we breathe too fast and lose control of our CO₂ but what it fails to address are the problems we can encounter when we don’t get enough oxygen.  These problems are the result of the ventilatory phase being much more efficient than the oxygenation phase due to various factors.  Here are three: (1) ease of exchange of CO₂ is normally 20X the ease with which O₂ can be exchanged; (2) swelling and/or scarring of the lung tissue will impede O₂ transfer more than CO₂; (3) the impulse to take another breath is determined by the CO₂ content of our blood, not the O₂ content.  Here is how a higher CO₂ level helps: it decreases the CO₂ rate of exchange during the ventilatory phase causing the need for more vigorous breathing to maintain a CO₂ balance and this helps our uptake of oxygen.  In other words, it stimulates our breathing and better balances the oxygenation phase with the ventilatory phase.    

Conclusion

Over the last 350 million years CO₂ has varied by 10 fold, approximately 250 ppm to 2,500 ppm with an average level of 1,500 ppm.  This average level happens to be the optimum level for plants, it seems by evolutionary design, and is the reason that this level of CO₂ is used in greenhouses  Since plants and animals evolved together it’s likely that humans also evolved to function best at some higher level.  However, at 380 ppm we are not far from the lower end of that 10 fold range. Because so many people benefit from enhanced levels of CO₂, it appears that our present atmosphere is already lower than the minimum to which some people can adapt.  Scientific studies and established medical practices leave no doubt that increased levels of CO₂ help people with respiratory problems and, some time in our lives, that will include nearly every one of us.

Scrap the Cap-n-Tax Scheme

via: carbon-sense

The Carbon Sense Coalition has forwarded a submission to the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Economics in response to the Exposure Draft of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009. The introduction states:

“This enquiry is focussed on The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009. The name itself is a deliberate deception – the only truthful word is “Scheme” which the Oxford Pocket Dictionary defines as “artful or underhand design”. It is not about carbon or about pollution – it is “The Carbon Dioxide Cap, Trade and Tax Scheme Bill” (referred to hereafter as “The Cap-n-Tax Scheme” or “The Scheme” for short).

“There is substantial doubt on the science on which this Scheme is justified. The chief justification is scare forecasts based on complex computerised climate models that few people believe and even fewer people understand.”

Here is the full submission [PDF, 211 KB].

Earth Hour or Blackout Night?

via: Heritage

The Carbon Sense Coalition today came out in support of Earth Hour, but said it should be renamed “Blackout Night” and be held outdoors, for the whole night, in mid-winter, on the shortest and coldest day of the year – 22 June in the Southern Hemisphere.

The Chairman of “Carbon Sense”, Mr Viv Forbes, said that spending just one night in the cold and the dark, with no hot coffee or beef on the barbecue, using no light, heat or vehicle energy from coal, gas, petrol or diesel, and without protection from metal or concrete structures, would be good practice for the blackouts and shortages to come if world rationing of carbon products and carbon energy is achieved.

“Winter nights are usually still and cold, so the candles crew can really experience what it will be like to depend on alternative energy when there is no sun and no wind. The back-to-nature brigade can also try living without iron roofs and concrete walls. And the eat-no-meat mob can experience a night without hamburgers and cappuccinos.

“To hold a candles-and-champagne party indoors, on the mildest night of the year, for just one hour, shows that the whole thing is tokenism. Moreover both candles and champagne emit carbon dioxide. Let the true believers try the real thing in one of the extreme seasons so they can appreciate the great benefits we take for granted when using all of our carbon fuels and foods.

“Instead of sneering at human achievements they should salute the people who keep the lights on for the other 364 days of the year.

“Australia gets almost 90% of its electricity from hydrocarbon fuels – black coal, brown coal, gas and oil. And without the nuclear power that underpins electricity supplies in more advanced countries, the massive cuts in carbon dioxide emissions demanded by the deep greens would see Australia headed for the Romanian power rationing experience – during the Ceaucescu regime in Romania, each house was limited to one25 watt bulb for all of their light.

“All over the world we have aging power stations and an orchestrated campaign by a few warm and well-fed agitators to harass, delay and deter construction of new power facilities.

“Such a campaign can only have one result – blackouts and brownouts will recur erratically every time we have extremes of cold or hot weather.

“So we support ‘Blackout Night’ to prepare our population for the dark days ahead”.

Viv Forbes

Two Fatal Flaws

via: carbon-sense

The Carbon Sense Coalition has delivered its submission to the Australian Senate Standing Committee on Climate Change in response to the Exposure Draft of the “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009″.

The recommendations are:

1. The Senate must reject the “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill” on the basis of its “Two Fatal Flaws” – the science and the economics. It is not supported by independent scientific assessment, nor does it present any credible cost benefit analysis. Moreover, at a time when politicians are calling for better financial disclosure and discipline, this Bill is alarming in its deceptive advertising, shows contempt for good practice by omitting independent expert reports, and stands condemned for failure to disclose the numerous vested interests supporting its claims.
2. The Bill should also be rejected for promoting the risky and repugnant idea that Australia can or should lead the world into universal acceptance of a massive program of wealth distribution administered by bodies such as the United Nations. This shows a lack of appreciation of the fact that popular opinion all over the world is turning strongly against the global warming hysteria, and many significant industrial nations such as China, India, Brazil and Russia are motivated solely by what they see will promote their own national interest and industrial strength.
3. Finally the Bill should be rejected because of the naivety of people who tell us that a nation which generates 90% of its electricity from coal, and which also prohibits nuclear power, can maintain energy supplies for its people while cutting per capita production of carbon dioxide by 30% over the next decade or so. This cannot be done without either significant cuts in living standards or reduced population.
4. However, the Carbon Sense Coalition supports every initiative to reduce pollution of land, air or water. We also support energy conservation, and oppose any subsidies that encourage waste and overuse of any energy type.However neither of these worthy goals have anything to do with the effect of carbon dioxide on global warming. Unproven climate scares should not be used to promote secret agendas to introduce massive new consumption taxes on top of the rash of taxes already there such as Goods and Services Tax, Income Tax, Payroll Tax, Coal and Oil Royalties, petrol excise, vehicle and stock levies and so on

The full submission is available here. [PDF, 818KB]

Where the Global Warming Hoax Was Born

By Marjorie Mazel Hecht

“‘Global Warming’ is, and always was, a policy for genocidal reduction of the world’s population. The preposterous claim that human-produced carbon dioxide will broil the Earth, melt the ice caps, and destroy human life, came out of a 1975 conference in Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, organized by the influential anthropologist Margaret Mead, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), in 1974.”

Full document here

Dispelling Delusions: Human-caused climate change and carbon “pollution” mythology

By Dr G LeBlanc Smith, PhD, AIG, AAPG

Excerpt from the full article:

“Knowing and understanding the past is a vital key to the future, and earth scientists can present much of this information in a context that can assist in exposing the truth and misrepresentations of the current “Climate Change” debate.

“It is fact that the vast bulk of the Great Barrier Reef area was exposed land and above sea level, prior to 10,000 years ago, when sea levels were over 70m lower than present. There was no great coral reef there until recently, and Kakadu was probably not a swampy wetland then either.”

The One Legged Stool

The Carbon Sense Coalition submission in response to the Government Green Paper on The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is here in full

The recommendations are:

1. Abandon attempts to get global or national support for an Emissions Trading Scheme or any other carbon emissions reduction strategy.
2. Do not introduce ETS by stealth, by legislating for the whole reporting and compliance structure but with so many tax exemptions and compensations that most people do not notice the change. Once it is in place, and no matter what is promised, the Emissions Tax burden will rise, no matter what the Climate
   does.
3. Accept “adapting to climate change” as the sole leg of Australia’s Climate Policy.
4. Support policies that allow markets to ration scarce resources.
5. Apply policies that impose costs and deterrents on real polluters.