IPCC climate change report: Rationale for more renewables

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change‘s  Fifth Assessment Report was released in late September 2013. A few days after its release the Australian Bureau of Meteorology reported that the year ending on September 30th was the hottest on record for almost all of South Australia; and a large part of Australia.

BoMTempsClimatologists tell us that extreme weather events are likely to become more common as climate change advances, such as the extreme winds that damaged bean crops in the Northern Agricultural Districts of South Australia on the 30th September and again on 2nd October.

20131003_5sHow long can the country’s leaders continue to ignore, or at least to trivialise, climate change? How long can they neglect the fact that Australia is one of the main culprits among the nations causing climate change?

To me it is an ethical issue – we owe it to the rest of the planet, and to future generations, to reduce our exceptionally high rate of greenhouse emissions – but apart from that, if we do nothing we are destroying our own productivity.

Developing more renewable energy infrastructure to replace the old fossil-fuel burning power stations is one of the easiest things that could be done. As South Australia has demonstrated with it’s ambitious rollout of wind farms, building more renewables energy is a proven way to reduce carbon emissions and tackle climate change.

51 thoughts on “IPCC climate change report: Rationale for more renewables

  1. When it comes to ethics, our conservative political leaders and those who deny humans can adversely affect the climate, all appear to suffer from a deficit of understanding and honesty as well as ethics.

  2. Dave Clarke is last person to be preaching about ethical issues, I can relate some rather unethical issues that he has been involved in.

    The IPCC report is dodgy, to say the least.

    It also seems that the BOM data is not all that accurate either. As it is, this so called record temperature for September is only .15 of a degree higher than the September 2005 average, hardly anything to right home about.

    The satellite data which is much more accurate, shows that 2013 has been nothing else but a very normal year.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2013/03/hottest-summer-record-in-australia-not-even-close-says-uah-satellite-data/

    As for the damaged bean crop, that just goes with the territory, I have been involved with the land for nearly as long as Dave Clarke, and over that period of time, bean crops have been damaged by strong winds on the odd occasion.

    Dave Clarke wants it both ways, he wants to put wind turbines all over South Australia, supposedly to halt climate change, so the wind doesn’t blow and damage the bean crops, then there will be no wind to produce power, see if you can work that one out.

    TCW.

      1. If that is the case, then HF would have no problems launching a class action against you, there is plenty of libelous material on your HF page, money won’t be a problem and we have the lawyers on tap.

        TCW.

    1. And another tip, Callous Wind – if you want anyone to even read beyond your first line, best not to open with a personal attack. Big turn off to most readers.

      1. Sarah, TCW is all bark with a toothless bite. She seems to be here for debating practice but doesn’t seem to be learning the lessons.

        Meanwhile in the real world, I sincerely hope the IPCC has overestimated the climate effects to come but knowing how conservative the estimations are, it would be prudent to transfer our energy sources to renewables ASAP.

        You can bet your bottom dollar that when extreme weather events put further upward pressure on insurance and general living costs, people like TCW will be whingeing the loudest because nothing was done sooner. It’s always the way.

  3. OMG, TCW thinks the IPCC is dodgy and for evidence, cites garbage from a certain Joanne Nova, a well-known conspiracy theorist and climate change denier. I’m looking forward to TCW providing his/her qualifications so we can judge the merits of his/her criticisms and credibility. I won’t be holding my breath waiting.

  4. Dave, if people are either too cowardly or dodgey to put their real names up when they post, then they are just trolls.

    Best to think of it as comedy, and save your breath for people prepared to engage their brains, not hide behind screen names.

    1. I didn’t realise being a ‘greenie’ activist was such a brain engaging occupation, Cam Walker.

      For your information, The Callous Wind is not here by choice, but when Dave Clarke decided to abuse and denigrate the people of Yorke Peninsula, across the Internet, for daring to oppose the Ceres Wind Turbine Project, The Callous Wind was brought into existence to hold him accountable. What gives him the right to call us NIMBY’s, unethical and liars, because we do not want 199 wind turbines on our doorstep. The Community is totally against this project and the District Council also voted unanimously against it as well.

      If Dave Clarke wants to abuse us and put his name to it, that is his prerogative, but we are not quite so stupid. All of the posts from The Callous Wind are in response to comments from Dave Clarke.

      If you want to talk about trolls, I would suggest Dave Clarke would be way ahead of us, he has been trolling the net for years, annoying people with his eccentric ideas.

      You certainly right about the comedy you all give us a lot of laughs.

      TCW.

      1. “…but when Dave Clarke decided to abuse and denigrate the people of Yorke Peninsula…”

        Bollocks. Where is your proof? The only thing Dave has done is highlight the obvious fallacies you and other opponents of the project keep parroting. The nonsense about agricultural aircraft is a case in point. TCW was really brought into existence to promote propaganda and misunderstandings, it’s a pity you didn’t devote your energies to advancing understanding instead.

      2. “The Callous Wind was brought into existence to hold him accountable.”

        Too funny. You’re so dull you cannot see you’ve lost the argument before you began. No wonder evidence contradicting you is beyond your understanding.

    1. Unlike you, I live near two, soon to be three, wind farms. So I do know what I’m talking about while all you can do is run around like chicken Little wailing that the sky is falling because of your ignorance on the subject of wind energy. Back to your rock.

      1. Translation:
        TCW not living near any wind farm chooses to believe anti-wind propaganda because she is too feebleminded and easily led to think for herself. On the other hand I live near two wind farms and actually know what it’s like living around them. Presumably her last comment was an attempt at humour. You should be a creationist TCW, you’d fit right in with that crowd. They believe and parrot antiscience nonsense too.

      1. So a short, simple question is too difficult for your challenged mind to consider? No wonder you like it under your rock. Go and play with the kiddies and leave this forum to the grown-ups. You typify the cowardice displayed by so many wind farm opponents.

        At least Joan is capable of a civil discussion and can answer questions. You should try it.

      2. Anyone reading your posts (rants) here and on the Ceres Debate page, would have to come to the conclusion, that you are either mentally unstable, or have severe anger management issues, Donaldson.

        TCW.

      3. Time to come clean now, you got somebody to write that for you didn’t you? It displays a slight level of wit beyond your capacity – a dead giveaway.

    1. Windbrick; 90ha of farm land lost to production if the Ceres wind farm is built is a very minor impact. If we do nothing about climate change the impact on agricultural productivity will be far greater.

      1. Says who? Firstly, the Ceres wind Turbine Project will have a minuscule effect on saving carbon pollution world wide, secondly, who says a little more Co2 is all that bad? It could actually cause an increase in production. Have a look around Crystal Brook and tell me if the crops are worse this year, than what they have been other years.

        No doubt the CSIRO tells lies as well.

        http://www.itwire.com/science-news/climate/60575-rising-co2-level-making-earths-deserts-bloom-csiro-study

        TCW.

    1. Big call considering you don’t even know me but you seem to enjoy fantasies. Keep up with the insults, the more the better. It’s all more grist for the mill. I have had some long debates with crackpot Christians and other uninformed, wantonly ignorant characters like yourself, it’s like shooting fish in a barrel. You are only at beginner level and make other fundies look almost Einsteinian in comparison to your feeble offerings. I doubt you have the wit to do any better but while there is life, there’s hope.

      So do you accept AGW is scientifically demonstrated?

      1. You have got tickets on your self, you don’t give out insults, every comment you have posted the last few days is full of them. What are you trying to tell me, that you are some kind of intellectual genius, well if your posts are anything to go by, you fail miserably.

        This is how the rest of the world sees you.

        TCW.

      2. Oh TCW, you poor little diddums. It seems you can dish it out but not take some of your own medicine? I don’t really believe I was insulting you, I’m just providing a free character assessment and highlighting your many double standards, distortions and gross ignorance. If you think that’s being insulting. Fair enough.

        It is funny though that you bitch and moan about other people supposedly insulting you when you’ve finished your latest petulant effort with another insult. Well done, mummy must be proud of you.

        What is it about wind energy that you don’t like?

    2. Come on TCW, I’m awaiting your next attempt at cutting repartee. Does it really take you so long to compose a sentence or two or do you resort to cutting and pasting the work of others?

      What is it about the work of the IPCC that you disagree with?

      1. Ah Donaldson, you really do have a problem. I was merely comparing what you were calling insults in my comments, to your rants. If you really think your rants have any effect on me, you need to think again, you are only a sideshow, to give me a bit of humour, but it also keeps me informed on what the so called pro wind mob are thinking and it gives me an insight to the people behind it.

        If your life revolves around “debating crackpot Christians and other uninformed, wantonly ignorant characters like myself”, you indeed, lead a very shallow life.

        If you think you are winding me up, think again, I don’t wind.

        TCW.

      2. Once again you misunderstand very plain English. I have had fun having discussions with crackpot Christians but that’s a part-time hobby for wet days. Don’t know where you got the idea that my life revolves around such actions, more confusion on your part apparently. It seems that anything beyond one or two sentences is beyond your grasp. I’ll try to keep responses shorter from now on giving your feeble attention span.

        I’m not interested in winding you up, nor do I care about you in any way. I’ll say it again for you s-l-o-w-l-y… My replies are only for those objective readers who may be interested.

        I certainly do not expect to change your mind, you have demonstrated time and again that you are incapable of thinking for yourself.

        So, you have no opinions/comments about the IPCC report? Is that because you don’t understand it?

  5. Do you really think I am sitting here at the computer waiting for you to reply, get real.

    I actually have a life and contribute to this great country of ours and for all I know, I am probably contributing to your bloody benefits, so you can sit at your computer all day and have debates with crackpot Christians, hardly of any benefit to anybody.

    Why would I waste even more time telling you about my thoughts on the decisions of the IPCC so you can ridicule them and me for the sake of a debate. You claim to be more mature than me, it certainly doesn’t come across in your rants, my mental image of you, is a mentally unstable, immature person, with a very big chip on his shoulder.

    TCW.

    1. Wow, you really are full of your own self-importance aren’t you? Are you really lacking so much self-worth that you need to believe you are contributing anything to my life? Thanks for the chuckles, there’s a bit of comedian in you after all.

      I don’t expect you to recognise maturity primarily because you don’t display any in your posts. As for your “mental image”, knock yourself out believing what you like. It’s obvious reality and your imaginary world only interact on rare occasions.

      I am interested in your thoughts on the IPCC report because it would give me a better idea about your understanding of the report and climate change is generally, and how informed you really are. Your refusal to answer will only reinforce the message that you studiously avoid all information that conflicts with your prejudices.

      1. These little rants seem to pop up all over the place.

        I think the IPCC report needs to be studied more closely. They are not 100% sure, they can not connect rising Co2 emissions to Global Warming, because the world has actually cooled slightly. There are many scientists who disagree completely with the IPCC report. They claim the increasing temperatures are being absorbed by the oceans, but there also seems to be a lot of conjecture over that.

        I am not going to get into a long and lengthy discussion with you, because I am not a scientist, I only know what I read. There still seems to be a lot of uncertainty surrounding the whole issue. From some literature I read, the world is actually greening with the higher Co2 levels. They have been as high as 1000 ppm, when there were no humans inhabiting the earth.

        From my own observations, having lived and worked on the land for my whole life, the seasons here, actually seem to be reverting back to the seasons we were having in the 50’s and 60’s.

        Laugh at and ridicule this if wish, see if I care.

        TCW.

      2. TCW, thank you for finally providing a direct answer to a direct question.

        How much study would satisfy you before you accepted the warnings and recommendations of the IPCC? – Given there is no field of science where 100% of researchers agree with 100% certainty. If you think that’s not the case, could you provide an example? Scientific understanding on any topic is always subject to further, new information which may or may not confirm what is currently known.

        Could you post some (relatively independent) links which lead you to believe that the world is cooling and that there are many scientists who completely disagree with the IPCC report? Is it irrelevant that every science Academy around the world agrees that the world is warming? (Even though some members of some of the academies don’t agree)

        It may be the case that seasons where you live seem to be reverting to what happened in the 50s and 60s but anecdotes are not science. Do you have meteorology data to support your opinion? Here, since the 60s, rainfall has decreased by around 8 inches annually and temperatures have risen. It’s easily checked on the BOM website if you have any doubts about my comments.

        Do you accept that warming figures from the IPCC are only global averages and not specific to each region? Would you mind telling me where you live? You don’t need to name a town, just a region or even state/country would do.

  6. “So, you have no opinions/comments about the IPCC report? Is that because you don’t understand it?”

    Donaldson, you need to calm down and read through the replies a little more carefully!

    TCW.

  7. “How much study would satisfy you before you accepted the warnings and recommendations of the IPCC? – Given there is no field of science where 100% of researchers agree with 100% certainty. If you think that’s not the case, could you provide an example? Scientific understanding on any topic is always subject to further, new information which may or may not confirm what is currently known”

    No I can’t, you asked for an opinion.

    “Could you post some (relatively independent) links which lead you to believe that the world is cooling and that there are many scientists who completely disagree with the IPCC report? Is it irrelevant that every science Academy around the world agrees that the world is warming? (Even though some members of some of the academies don’t agree)”

    No. You do it, you know how to use a the computer, just Google it, that is all I do.

    “It may be the case that seasons where you live seem to be reverting to what happened in the 50s and 60s but anecdotes are not science. Do you have meteorology data to support your opinion? Here, since the 60s, rainfall has decreased by around 8 inches annually and temperatures have risen. It’s easily checked on the BOM website if you have any doubts about my comments.”

    I don’t need to check with BOM, I have my own rain gauge, our averages have not dropped at all.

    “Do you accept that warming figures from the IPCC are only global averages and not specific to each region? Would you mind telling me where you live? You don’t need to name a town, just a region or even state/country would do”

    Yes. I live on Yorke Peninsula in South Australia.

    TCW.
    .

    1. You cannot or you don’t want to? Actually I asked for some evidence and anyway, you haven’t been shy about posting your opinions before now.

      Of course I can find all sorts of things on Google but I’m picky about the quality of the evidence. If I believed as readily as some wind farm opponents and climate change deniers, I’d be certain we are being visited by aliens, that the illuminati are controlling the world and that homoeopathy works. Are you saying you are incapable of discerning fact from fiction?

      Well it’s likely your averages haven’t changed so much because you have water on either side of you moderating the temperatures, it’s a peninsula thing. And as for a single rain gauge, well, that’s just one data point for a very specific place. You don’t seriously suggest that what you record in your rain gauge applies to mainland Australia do you?

      Have you ever visited an operating wind farm?

  8. “Come on TCW, you have shown you can be civil. Would you mind answering my questions?”

    Don’t patronise me Donaldson, your comments have been anything but civil up until now!

    “You cannot or you don’t want to? Actually I asked for some evidence and anyway, you haven’t been shy about posting your opinions before now”

    I have better things to do.

    “Of course I can find all sorts of things on Google but I’m picky about the quality of the evidence. If I believed as readily as some wind farm opponents and climate change deniers, I’d be certain we are being visited by aliens, that the illuminati are controlling the world and that homoeopathy works. Are you saying you are incapable of discerning fact from fiction?”

    If you search it, then you decide if it is quality evidence, instead of ridiculing me every time I put something up.

    “Well it’s likely your averages haven’t changed so much because you have water on either side of you moderating the temperatures, it’s a peninsula thing. And as for a single rain gauge, well, that’s just one data point for a very specific place. You don’t seriously suggest that what you record in your rain gauge applies to mainland Australia do you?”

    That would be correct. I never suggested my records applied to mainland Australia.

    TCW.

    1. TCW, here is the trend map for South Australia for the last 40 years. In that time rainfall in your region has decreased between 5 to 10 mm per decade. It’s getting drier.
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&tracker=trend-maps&tQ%5Bmap%5D=rain&tQ%5Barea%5D=sa&tQ%5Bseason%5D=0112&tQ%5Bperiod%5D=1970

      And here is the annual mean temperatures showing that it’s getting warmer:
      http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/change/#tabs=Tracker&tracker=trend-maps&tQ%5Bmap%5D=tmean&tQ%5Barea%5D=sa&tQ%5Bseason%5D=0112&tQ%5Bperiod%5D=1970

      Now if you think the bureau of meteorology is not credible (and I’m not suggesting you are) who would you recommend as a more credible authority?

      This data does highlight a major flaw in your claims that the IPCC is wrong. What would it take for you to acknowledge your current opinion on the IPCC and climate change is mistaken? What further evidence would you need?

  9. “TCW, here is the trend map for South Australia for the last 40 years. In that time rainfall in your region has decreased between 5 to 10 mm per decade. It’s getting drier.”

    I have never said BOM is not credible. Our average rainfall for this area is 16″ (400mm).
    My records over the last 10 years average out at just a shade over 16″ (400mm)

    “This data does highlight a major flaw in your claims that the IPCC is wrong. What would it take for you to acknowledge your current opinion on the IPCC and climate change is mistaken? What further evidence would you need?”

    I did not say they are completely wrong, I said their evidence is inconclusive and needs more investigation.

    Australia’s average temperature rose by .3 of a degree over 42 years, for christ sake, that hardly warrants doomsday predictions.

    Alaska’s temperature went down.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2256188/What-global-warming-Alaska-headed-ice-age-scientists-report-states-steady-temperature-decline.html

    TCW.

    1. And I have never claimed you have said the BOM is not credible. I’m just providing another source of information that backs up the findings of the IPCC. Even the graph using the entire rainfall data for South Australia shows your region has become drier.

      So what evidence would you require to accept the warnings from the IPCC?

      An average of .3 of a degree doesn’t mean everywhere changes by the same rate. The Yorke Peninsula would not warm as fast because of the water on either side whereas inland Australia is warming much faster. It’s basic physics. The link you provided highlights this for a part of Alaska. The first paragraph…”New research from the Alaska Climate Research Center shows that since the beginning of the 21st century, temperatures in the snow covered land of Alaska are actually getting colder – bucking the overall global warming trend.” and “Before the 2000s, the warming trend in Alaska has actually been twice the overall warming rate.” The researchers know the cooling is due to an offshore current affecting local weather. The evidence is supported by Barrow, a nearby town that is protected by a mountain range and as a result, it’s temperatures are 3.1° higher. Your link supports the evidence for increased warming.

      As for doomsday predictions, that will depend on where you are living. People in low-lying areas around the world are being affected right now with flooding, inundation and loss of freshwater, some Pacific Islanders are having their livelihoods destroyed because their islands are being submerged. I would suggest they are thinking it’s near enough to a doomsday scenario for them.

      I find it interesting that wind farm opponents want people to understand them and display some sympathy for their cause but those same individuals care nothing for other people who are being directly affected right now.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s