Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

From the Sydney Morning Herald 31.01.2007:

Prime Minister John Howard has backed a new energy report which supports his push for nuclear power as a way to combat climate change.

The Energy Supply Association of Australia (ESAA) said that substantial greenhouse gas emission reductions were possible by the year 2030 but it would cost $75 billion.

It also says nuclear power, cleaner coal and gas would help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but renewable energy such as wind and solar power would not be cost effective.

"The answer is a greater emphasis on clean coal and nuclear power," Mr Howard told reporters.

Even if we accept these figures at face value, $75 billion spent over the next 23 years (to bring us to 2030) translates to $163 per capita per year. That Howard should find this a prohibitive cost for saving the planet beggars belief. (Though he does commute a lot, mainly in his taxpayer-funded CO2-spewing personal jet, between Canberra and Kirribilli.)

“Mr Green [American Enterprise Institute] denied sending letters to Australian scientists, economists or policy analysts.” (Incentives to attack warming study denied, The Australian, 3/2,) see also “Scientists offered cash to dispute climate study”, the Guardian, 2/2, )

That’s small change for an Exxon neoCon front like American Enterprise Institute. Their Iraq war (and it is theis bloody war, and they profit hugely from it) is currently calculated at US$10,000/second. That’s a lot of humidicribs, ICUs, dialysis and heart-lung machines, or operating theatres. Otherwise available to folks with health insurance only.

And they’re sending D*ck Cheney Downunder this month to twang Mr Kirribilli’s sad old pantaloons, and perhaps even snap a wedgie in Alexander’s fishnets. I don’t expect David Hicks will be on the luxurious US Air Force 2 when it touches down at RAAF Fairbairn, which has been massively refurbished at Oz taxpayer expence (along with the local Liberal Party branch’s Canberra Airport) for just such an honour.

I intend to whack Cheney’s massive armoured vehicle en route to Yarralumla/Barton with my trusty old .50 cal Barrett rifle, loaded with depleted uranium projectiles. You read it here first. The massive flame-out should be visible from outer space. I will be ultra-safe in my WWII Pialligo orchard bunker, which even has a complimentary mini-bar and home theatre with cableTV and surroundsound (one doesn't want to miss the news that night). When it's late, if there's no dogs, I might nip out and scrump a few Pink Ladies.

But back to the non–offer to Australians of Exxon’s science bribe. Gee, US$10,000. I bet that’s one mighty sore Director of the Australian Environment Foundation, Jennifer Marohasy. But one expects she’s quite adequately funded for the same stuff at our own far-Right Institute of Public Affairs.

Frère Jihad Jacques OAM née Woodforde of the Persian Overseas Secret Service, still in the Bekaa Valley orchards, defusing the American Enterprise Institute’s playground and olive grove cluster bomblets (and you wonder why I want to knock over Exxon creeps like Cheney).

Is there an economist among our ranks who could give some advice regarding the likely costing - across Australia - of the following:

1. Installation of solar panels on all buildings in all major and provincial cities, and linking them to the national grid;

2. Installation in all buildings in all major and provincial cities of grey water recycling;

3. Installation in all major and provincial cities of water recycling units, (a) to potable water quality, and (b) to garden/agricultural use quality;

4. Tax breaks for (1) and (2) for the full cost.

Note to the coal companies – what about getting into the retrofitting business? Could be a nice little earner.

My dream is for cities and towns to be self-sustaining with respect to power, and close to self-sustaining with respect to water.

More on transport, health, education, and justice later.