Tim Blair broke the story of Tim Flannery claiming to be working for Panasonic. (But wait, I hear you say, how could that be, we thought he was working for the Australian people?!)
If you are a foreign multinational and you want to influence national Australian policies, you don’t need to spend much. Prime time advertising in Australia is as cheap as chips, but it only works on politically correct topics where our national broadcaster (the ABC) will give you a free pass. When it comes to climate change, ABC adverts don’t interrupt the program, they are the program.
Flannery has been on ABC’s Q&A five times, ABC’s Lateline three times [1,2,3,], the ABC’s 7.30 report, ABC breakfast, ABC Latenight live, something on the ABC called Conversations, and too many radio spots to mention. When people question whether Tim Flannery ought be proud of promoting an electronics giant at the same time as he is paid for government funded work … the ABC comes out defending him, and their no-hard-questions approach to promoting what he promotes.
It’s not that someone of his notoriety shouldn’t be getting ABC airtime, it’s that he gets away with failed predictions, half truths, and is allowed to push his agenda without analysis or scrutiny.
Naturally if Tim Flannery helps swing Australia into the low carbon pit, then Panasonic will be there to reap the profits.
It’s disguised third party endorsements on the “government funded TV channel-that-doesn’t-do-adverts”. The ABC rightly point out that they haven’t been promoting Panasonic, which is true. But when Tim says he’s “been waving the Panasonic flag”, it’s not that he’s selling the brand Panasonic, instead he’s selling their brand of policy. Panasonic can blitz their non green competition if Australia goes “low-carbon”. And won’t they sell a magnitude more solar cells and rechargeable car batteries if the government mandates “greenness”?
The cost of influence?
Panasonic Australia pledged $690,000 to fund environmental research and public education as part of a new Macquarie University eco initiative.
Internationally acclaimed Australian scientist, explorer and conservationist, Professor Tim Flannery, has been appointed as the inaugural chair. As part of the agreement Macquarie University will provide global Panasonic executives with briefings on green issues, as Panasonic moves towards becoming the world’s number one environmental technology innovation company. Professor Flannery is expected to present a whitepaper to executives in Japan on emerging consumer attitudes towards environmental products later this year.
It’s a bargain
We’ll never know how much extra air-time Flannery got indirectly thanks to Panasonic. But they made some contribution to all that prime time endorsement and it was for just $690,000? Let’s face it, even if Panasonic did buy advertising, the Australian voter wouldn’t be impressed with a large foreign multinational telling them they should pay a carbon tax (and buy Panasonic solar cells). It’s o’ so much more convincing if a neutral scientist does it for them. Given how much prime time TV space Flannery wins, you’d have to say the Panasonic ad campaign budget was money well spent.
A little history on Panasonic’s green plans
Over the next three years, the company wants to double sales of products that meet Energy Star requirements, carry the EPEAT silver or gold labels or meet its own Panasonic Superior Green Products standards. And perhaps Panasonic is just trying to be good corporate citizens after all? But Greenpeace don’t think they’re very green. It looks like a green veneer.
Panasonic bought Sanyo in a bid to have a larger control of green markets in 2008 – which gave it nearly 40% of the rechargeable car batteries market globally, and made it the supplier for four different makes of electric cars. At least one commentator at the time asked if Panasonic were set to become “a green monster”, and pointed out that the Panasonic executives effectively agreed that greenhouse policies made a big difference to their bottom line:
“The management of power is critical to any Company competing in the consumer electronics market going forward”. They wanted in on the green profits: “We need another engine for growth,” Panasonic President Fumio Ohtsubo told reporters, acknowledging that plunging gadget prices were eating away at electronics profits. “We need another pillar for far greater growth. And Sanyo was that best partner.”
Panasonic didn’t have a solar cell line, and Sanyo did.
The acquisition of Sanyo would see Panasonic’s share of the global market for rechargeable batteries surge from 10% to 38%, according to Goldman Sachs. Sanyo is the world’s No 1 producer of lithium-ion batteries, used in laptops, cameras, mobile phones – and new green cars. This market segment is set for explosive growth as governments around the world tighten greenhouse gas emissions standards for vehicles.
Panasonic already makes batteries for Toyota’s hybrid cars. In buying Sanyo, it would take on contracts to supply rechargeable batteries for electric and hybrid cars to leading carmakers Volkswagen, Honda and Ford.
The electric vehicle batteries market is estimated to become so lucrative that 15 US technology companies formed a consortium in December to build local battery plants to end Asian dominance.
Panasonic also went on to spend $30m to buy a stake in an electric vehicle maker. $690,000 is just chump change.
Flannery explains his Panasonic role
My association with Panasonic, which sponsors my Professorial Chair at Macquarie University, has been public and declared from the day I took up my position as Chief Climate Commissioner. There is no conflict of interest between the two roles.
My comments were made in the context of describing the work I have been doing on educating young Australians about sustainability at Macquarie University. To be clear, I have not advocated Panasonic as a company in my public engagements as Chief Commissioner, nor have I done so in my books or television work.
So here’s the chain. Panasonic stand to benefit from an Australian green tax, so they “sponsor” Flannery and Macquarie to be their PR team (because the answers they find are so convenient). For the same reason, the Australian government pays Flannery to be the PR team on their policy (so there is no conflict of interest after all!). Flannery claims he’s just presenting “the” science, but in the end, the Australian people pay tax so they only hear one side of the story, and another so-called scientist is “bought”.
When a scientist advises a nation on decisions that affect billions of dollars and millions of lives, shouldn’t we expect the same standards as when a doctor advises one person on an issue of their health? If it’s not OK for big-pharma to sponsor doctors, why is it ok for Big-Green Government or business to sponsor a scientist?
Me, I’m a libertarian and a free market girl. I don’t want to censor funding in science, and that funding wouldn’t matter if only the science commentators and so-called journalists weren’t so willing to promote the industry-funded scientist as if he were “neutral”. If they laughed at his gall and his failed predictions and promoted scientists with evidence, logic and reason, instead of fawning over “establishment credentials” and book sales, the national debate on scientific topics wouldn’t be a gift for big-industry to exploit.
Corporations have been dictating government actions for centuries. This is typical of the machinations that habitually separate us from our tax dollars. Anyone that claims “no conflict of interest” is either blind or lying. Mr. Flannery should not allow such influence and must resign one position or the other. That will not change his tune but it will punish his pocketbook, much as it will ours.
20
He sees no contradiction between telling Panasonic he’s “been waving the Panasonic flag” for them and at the same time assuring the public that his sinecure, financed by them and on which their financial future depends, causes no conflict of interest.
Only an academic could be so jaw-droppingly thick. The general public aren’t.
Pointman
20
This is nothing but political double speak in which reality is not supposed to be real and contradictions are acceptable. They pretend that they can have their cake, eat your cake, and mortgage all future cakes for generations to come. They have been cooking the books for so long that truth, honor, and integrity is not part of their thinking. They hope we won’t notice. We have noticed.
The political elite hardly ever seem to learn from history. It was King Louis XV of France who said, “après nous, le déluge” (After us, the deluge). He lost his head over a similar activity along with most of the French political elite of the time. Once again, it is up to us to teach the political elite the lesson that they need us a lot more than we need them. In fact, we can do better without them – a lot better.
10
I was off by a few decades in my history in #3. It was a later king and political elite who lost their heads. Apparently Louis XV got away with it. He didn’t have the internet nor a literate population to contend with. Hopefully, our having that advantage offers us a better way to give the lesson than the French had.
10
Jo
The Flanners story pales into insignificance compared to this one. in The Australian today.
This is money for jam stuff. Welfare-to-work government contracts will be worth a motza if a carbon tax is introduced!
Lionel
You’re absolutely right. We have noticed!
10
You use the title
A little history on Panasonic’s green plans
twice. Doesn’t look right.
Other than that, good article.
[Thanks Mike, that’s an editing error. I need a proof reader 🙂 -JN ]
10
OT but interesting…..
Now For the Demonisation of…Nitrogen ( in case they can’t push Co2 through):-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/apr/10/nitrogen-footprint-europe-warning
Nitrogen comprises the majority of the Earth’s atmosphere !!!!!!!!
WTF!!
10
Damian Allen:
The article also makes the statement: “Nitrates in water are bad for human health and damage wildlife including fish stocks. Nitrous oxide is also a greenhouse gas.”
I read Booker and North’s “Scared to Death” recently. I think it was in there where the nitrate scare was covered. It was entirely a mistake, it is NITRITES that are the problem. Apparently testing has been done on NITRATES in drinking water and no ill effects were shown even at concentrations where the water became unpalatable.
I wonder what these people think happens when there is lightning? How many strikes per second world wide was it again? Thousands IIRC. Each generating high temperatures and NOx.
10
Damien Allen @ 7:
This Nitrogen scare is already all over Europe.
They (deliberately) confuse Nitrogen with Nitrates. Any school pupil doing chemistry can tell you the difference. But the scare mongrels want to make extra mileage by trying to make it look that all nitrogen is even more evil then CO2. Just to be able to fight the demonic threat to the world population, using even more of our money.
10
I suppose there should be a demand that Flannery resign. But really he is one of the trumps that the anti-tax movement has going for it. And Panasonic’s slogan would be a nice synergy for Tim’s tax. “Just slightly ahead of our time”.
Meanwhile the Prime Minister- in- waiting has interestingly shelved a green subsidy.
http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/government-and-climate-lobby-take-on-industry-20110420-1dp20.html
Would love to be a fly on the wall when Billy chats with the mother in law over Easter while Julia is so helpfully in Beijing.
10
Admitting that you are on the take does not change the fact that you are on the take.
Cheers,
Speedy
10
That’s right Timbo, just like there’s no conflict of interest in having Bill Shortens mother in law as the Governor General.
10
O/T ABC chairman Maurice Newman warns against Australia introducing any new tax.
I know he is out of step with most at the ABC, but this wont win him any more friends in that place.
10
Just follow the money. At least when you back self interest you know you’ve got an honest runner in the race.
In today’s news the Climate Institute has released a report that a “carbon” tax would be a minor contributor to increased electricity prices, overshadowed by the effect of “infrastructure” upgrades. (The ABC loved it). A talking head said it is the cost of wires and poles which will force prices up.
Does anyone know
a) how much of the additional infrastructure cost is wires and poles and how much is wind farms, solar panels and other inefficient generation; and/or
b) who funds the Climate Institute?
Panasonic’s $690,000 is just slush in the blizzard of money backing AGW.
10
It seems that everybody has their hands out … but nobody is shaking hands.
This is starting to get really interesting … pass the popcorn …
10
I’m ready to call the Climate Commission a failure. Let’s have a look at their terms of reference.
Point one, after many weeks of waiting I get this cut and paste response from the commission:
At no time have they attempted to answer my questions about the science. So, I sent them this:
Correlation is not causation. That’s some pretty fundamental science. Yes guys. Your remember that thing called science don’t you?
On point two, I have not heard a peep about the lastest round of climate talks in Bangkok. Shouldn’t this be all over their news page? Or what, were they either not invited or didn’t bother to show up?
Point three, and most important of all, carbon(dioxide) price is dead in the water. We must assume that once the carbon price(*cough* “tax”) is off the table the Climate Commission no longer has a valid terms of reference. Then, it is our duty to demand that this big, fat, expensive pig farm get closed down, for good.
10
On a more serious note, we are starting to see the CAGW crowd fracturing.
There are now several messages coming out, as they realign their positions. They know there is only so much room at the trough, and only those that are in will win.
The wild cards to watch are the major power consumers. What sweeteners has the Government promised them for their support? What are the chances of the Government delivering on those promises?
If the deal sweeteners start to look in doubt, then the support will “vanish as smoke”, leaving Julia, et al, high and dry defending themselves against an enemy who has seen the plan of attack.
That was the motive behind my question on a previous thread: “Why are Why would BHP Billiton, AGL Energy, Incitec Pivot, and Newcrest, et al, supporting this”?
10
If anything regarding Tim Flannery and conflict of interest was crying out for an investigation, it is his shareholding in public company Geodynamics and the influence he has been able to exert on the Labor Government to obtain grants. As early as 2006 he was on Tony Jones ABC Lateline spruiking the hot rocks potential in the Cooper Basin, South Australia. Subsequently Geodynamics was given a further $90M Government grant to follow earlier smaller ones. I believe there may have been at least on more since.
Can someone with more stock market expertise than I research this, particularly in regard to the effect Flannery’s use of public broadcasting opportunities plus his close ties with, and influence on the Labor Government, have had on the fluctuations in Geodynamc shares? I am surprised the Stock Exchange itself has not ordered an inquiry.
Just Google “Tim Flannery and Geodynamic” for an absolute mine of information!
10
Panasonic/Flim Flam are midgets compared to General(NBC CNBC MSNBC) Electric!
19 April: Forbes Blog: Larry Bell: How Many Politicians Are Needed To Screw Up A Light Bulb?
The lights have been permanently shut off at the last major U.S. incandescent light bulb plant, General Electric’s Winchester, Va., facility. But don’t worry. GE’s Chinese plants will replace them with a different kind that is supposed to be better.
Anyway, we really won’t have any choice. Thanks to pressure from environmental activist groups, a 2007 law passed by the Democrat-controlled Congress and signed by Republican President George W. Bush will make the sale of standard incandescent 100-watt bulbs illegal effective January 1, 2012, 75-watt bulbs on Jan. 1, 2013, and 60- and 40-watt bulbs as of Jan. 1, 2014.
Chief sponsors were Rep. Jane Harman (D-CA) and Fred Upton (R-MI). Rep. Upton, now Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, has since offered to hold a new hearing to consider removing the ban. He hasn’t promised to repeal it, but maybe he’ll finally see the light.
So that currently leaves us with two alternatives. It’s to either use expensive compact fluorescent lamps (CFL) that contain toxic mercury, or even much pricier light-emitting diode (LED) bulbs that don’t, but which produce even poorer illumination color quality…
On one hand, politicians who legislated the incandescent bulb ban virtually mandating use of CFL don’t appear to regard mercury to be a big deal. At the same time, the EPA now plans to regulate mercury emissions from coal plants that provide the electricity to power half of those lights…
GE has been increasingly shipping jobs overseas. At the end of 2000 more than half of its employee workforce (54%) was located in the U.S. By 2010 U.S. workers comprised 44% of the total, with foreign business providing $9 billion of their total $14.2 billion profits. Yet last year they not only avoided paying any U.S. taxes, but actually received a $3.2 billion tax benefit…this after receiving $16 billion in 2008 Federal Reserve bailouts along with hundreds of millions more in green energy business subsidies. Given those remarkable financial achievements, there should be little wonder that GE’s CEO, Jeffrey Immelt, would be selected to chair a new Obama administration Council on Jobs and Competitiveness…
http://blogs.forbes.com/larrybell/2011/04/19/how-many-politicians-are-needed-to-screw-up-a-light-bulb/?partner=yahootix
20 April: UK Tele: Victoria Ward: Energy saving light bulbs ‘contain cancer causing chemicals’
Their report advises that the bulbs should not be left on for extended periods, particularly near someone’s head, as they emit poisonous materials when switched on…
Andreas Kirchner, of the Federation of German Engineers, said: “Electrical smog develops around these lamps…
The latest report follows claims by Abraham Haim, a professor of biology at Haifa University in Israel, that the bulbs could result in higher breast cancer rates if used late at night…
The Migraine Action Association has warned that they could trigger migraines and skin care specialists have claimed that their intense light could exacerbate a range of existing skin problems.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/8462626/Energy-saving-light-bulbs-contain-cancer-causing-chemicals.html
20 April: WUWT: Do CFL twisty bulbs explode?
Here’s a story that suggests that they can. Like any poorly manufactured or quality controlled product, failures can occur. But with CFL bulbs, there’s additional things that can go wrong over the simple and century long proven incandescent bulb. Read on and see below for some technical details on CFL bulbs. Some “explosive” video also follows. – Anthony…
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/20/do-cfl-twisty-bulbs-explode/
the sooner the CAGW nonsense is finished, the better.
10
Rereke @ 17
The tax involves a four cornered negotiation with the ALP/corporates/(now)unions and the Greens. Will the Greens accept exemptions and significant industry compensation? Hardly likely. Whilst the negotiations between the ALP and the corporates/unions will have some semblance of rationality the negotiations with the Greens regarding industry compensation will be (for the ALP) the wildcard. Almost nobody in the ALP I have spoken to really beieves that the tax will influence the climate. But the G
10
manfred listing @ 14.
For more information on Climate Institute:- http://www.climateinstitute.org.au
Two interesting Board members are AFL chief Andrew Demetriou and Labor’s former Chief minisiter of NT, Clare Martin
In a recent article titled “Climate Change” there was a particularly odious, patronising diatribe from some wet behind the ears young know-it-all named Corey Watt, described as a regional project manager with “The Climate Institute”
Some gems from this fountain of wisdom:
“Despite growing evidence in support of CC – in recent weather events and scientific research – a significant number of people still don’t accept it as a real threat.
“Religion and fear drive sceptics who generally disputed the existence of Climate Change because it conflicted with their identity, ideology or interests.
Some viewed CC as a cause for greenies and environmentalists. Others don’t believe the science supporting CC and are distrusting of scientists.
People who worked in…..logging and mining were likely to be among those most resistant to CC, because of potential threats to their livelihood.
He said “concerted campaigns to sow the seeds of doubt by powerful bodies, including the mining industry, had also had an impact.
then there are a few people, not many I think, who have ideological reasons to refute CC.
Debate about CC was akin to yesteryear’s debate about whether the earth was flat or round
It’s not to say people are stupid or foolhardy. Everybody has their own interests and will come at this in their own time.
The problem is we just don’t have a lot of time. For each year we let go by without acting, the options to avoid suffering become less and less.”
How can we ignore such stellar examples of “the science”! sarc!
10
Rereke Whakaaro: @17
Really good point Rereke.
Those without snouts in the limited trough will feel economically disadvantaged and start squealing.
If you believe Combet (or is that combat?) 50 percent of the fleeced cash is going to be handed back to “working families” leaving much less to bucket into the business trough.
And that’s not even taking into account the slops required to fill the government and UN troughs.
This should be very interesting.
10
Look it’s just good business sense for Panasonic, as far as I am concerned. I don’t have any issue with Panasonic -they’re playing by the rules of the game as has been set out. One thing is for sure, by the heat coming off my Panasonic TV, not all their products are green!
The problem here is continual expansion of government.
If the government isn’t allowed to grow to the size it is, then companies like Panasonic don’t have anywhere to push their cash and influence.
If there was no climate commission, then there is no problem. It’s the never ending growth of quasi-government bodies like this that suck taxpayers money and just give big business a leverage point. If the committees don’t exist, the big companies can’t take them out for lunch. It’s as simple as that. All these hanger-on quasi-government committees need to be abandoned, and now. It’s either part of a ministry (and therefore falling under conflict of interest rules, which ministers can get jailed for – see Gordon Nuttal) or it’s not funded by taxpayers. I mean, if there was an indepdendent farming commission, and the chairman was paid by Woolworths, well, there would be an outcry, wouldn’t there?
The useful idiots of socialist leaning always yearn for bigger government to control more people, and fail to recognise that the larger the government, the more success big business has in controlling the markets and reducing competition by leveraging the size of government to legislate in its favour. So you either have 100% government industry (communism) or you try and keep the government size below a certain percentage of GDP. The current situation of creeping socialism is the worst of all worlds because it entrenches both big government and big corporate entities, none of which act in favor of the individual. I don’t know what the magic number of government size is, but I’m damn certain it’s less than 50% which a lot of places are looking at.
10
Bolt has an article from Ross McKitrick about the corruption of peer review that is referred to by Tony at Jennifer Morohasy’s blog.
I agreed with Tony’s concern but then went on to another article by Bolt that just proves what some of these people are all about.
Tony I read that article from McKitrick as well, but another article by Bolt today is just as ( or more) disgusting because these promoters dream of a dictatorship to close down any debate about climate change.
This just shows the extreme opinions and nature of some of these prominent people.
This type of corruption of science and free opinion should be exposed by everyone who understands what some of these groups believe and the future they would impose on all of us if they could get away with it.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/warmist_sighs_for_the_freedom_of_a_dictatorship/
Leave a Reply
Name (required)
10
Flannery and the idiot notion of AGW aside….. I have to say that you are not quite right PJB.
Corportations are not entirely at fault, for it is Government that regulates industry…. In Socialist countries, industry has no say whatsoever. The Government entirely determines what the people will make, use, import and export…
I put it to you, that it is better to live in a society in which the people’s spirit of endeavour dictates what the Government will allow…. Rather than what the Government or a “Ruling elite” will Allow the people to do…… Yes?
…. It is too easy to say that Corporations are evil, that Government is responsible… In the Western sphere, the ideal is that corporations are the triumph of our freedom of endeavour and that Government is the representation of our will…. How we enjoy the mix is manifest in our ability to understand and to participate.
…. Not knocking you PJB. Just trying to clarify. God forbid that people like Flannery or useless Governments like Gillard’s Labor/Green alliance should confuse the issue….. When business is forced to crawl on it’s belly to the idealism of Socialist Governments, we may decry industy’s weakness in the face of adversity, or condemn Corporate Quisling sycophancy, but the fact still remains that it is the violence of government regulation and decree that has them so wretched…. Either industry is bending to the peoples will, or Government has slipped beyond its mandate.
10
Keith H@18; you are exactly right; Flannery’s connection with public subsidisation of a private company is a major conflict of interest which has never been aired except here and by Bolt;
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/flannerys_little_earner/#commentsmore
Geodynamics, which is the ‘hot rocks’ company Flannery is associated with has an ASX listing under GDY; the company is a cash burner with shares issued rising from 40m to 292m since 2002; it still has a lot in the bank however with cash reserves of $71m. Flannery is neither listed as a major shareholder or director; I can’t see any declaration of any subsidy which would be a cash advance unless there is some lending facility structure attached to it in which case it should appear under debt due which it doesn’t.
10
The Panasonic Chair in Environmental Sustainability at Macquarie has fascinating educational seas to explore.
Training Japanese fishermen: “Professor Flannery is expected to present a whitepaper to executives in Japan on emerging consumer attitudes towards environmental products later this year.” http://www.science.mq.edu.au/the_faculty/news_and_events/news/new_panasonic_chair_in_environmental_sustainability
Training the fish: “We think that consumers get influenced when they go into a store and they forget about environmental messages”. http://youtu.be/Qc2YBaIlgY0
Training students to talk to the fish: ” Some of our topics include the popularisation of science; the role of citizenship journalism; the emotional and affective dimensions of communication and the impact of new media technologies on the communication of science. This is a highly interactive unit where you’ll have the opportunity to engage with Professor Tim Flannery, a world leader in science communication.”
http://www.handbook.mq.edu.au/2011/Units/UGUnit/SCOM100
Philosophizing about talking to fish: “The role of truth, ethics and power in science communication will be explored.” http://www.science.mq.edu.au/the_faculty/news_and_events/news/tim_flannery_launches_new_science_communication_program
Macquarie seems to be a one stop shop that can supply both the questions… http://blogs.panasonic.com.au/consumer/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Panasonic-booklet.pdf
❙❙ How and by whom should these messages be developed and disseminated?
❙❙ What source will be credible and compelling for consumers to the extent it drives
behaviour change?
❙❙ Should industry collaborate in developing these messages to educate consumers?
❙❙ What is the role of government?
❙❙ How do organisations effectively communicate to the consumer the imperative of
making purchase decisions based upon the lifecycle of the product, not simply the
period of their usage?
…and all the answers.
10
ANOTHER COMMUNIST ORGANIZATION PROMOTING THIS CARBON DIOXIDE (PLANT FOOD) TAX – “THE CLIMATE INSTITUTE”
If GetUp is a problem, then this so-called Climate Institute, is even worse!!!!!!!
http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/
The Institute??? was founded by a donation of ten million dollars. I guess that ten million has well and truly disappeared by now, so who funds this promotional arm of the government now?
The obvious ramping up of pro AGW media releases is evidence of how desperate the government has become lately.
List of directors of the Climate Institute.
Note the first person is a grazier, well, he better cull all his cattle, hadn’t he.
Mark Wootton (chair) with his wife Eve Kantor own, manage and live on a 12,000 acre grazing property at Hamilton, Victoria. Mark is also a director of the Poola Foundation. Poola’s current main responsibility is to distribute the funds of the late Tom Kantor, Eve’s brother. $10-million from this fund has been used to establish The Climate Institute. The impetus for this was simple: a belief that the extreme urgency of the situation requires decisive commitment and action from government and industry on a grand scale. Mark is also Chair of the Glenelg Hopkins Catchment Management Authority and is a board member of the Victorian Ministerial Council for Climate Change Adaptation
John Connor, CEO of the Climate Institute, initially trained as a lawyer and worked as a research assistant for a Judge in the Land and Environment Court of NSW. After a stint as an environmental consultant to business he became a researcher for Dr Peter Macdonald the Independent member for Manly, during and after his role in holding the balance of power for the minority coalition government of the time. From there he ran the Nature Conservation Council of NSW and then moved to the Australian Conservation Foundation helping forge links with farmers and business developing solutions on salinity and climate change. John most recently worked for World Vision where he co-convened the Make Poverty History campaign. John joined the Institute in March 2007.
Andrew Demetriou has been CEO of the Australian Football League since 2003. He is former teacher in business, law and politics and AFL player. Andrew was appointed Managing Director of the Ruthinium Group in 1989 a position he held until his appointment as CEO of the AFL Players Association in 1998. Andrew remains a director of Ruthinium Group which is one of the world’s largest manufacturers and distributors of acrylic teeth, exporting to over 70 countries worldwide.
Susan Jeanes is the Chief Executive of the Australian Geothermal Energy Association (AGEA) the national body representing the Australian geothermal energy industry. Susan is also Managing Director of new energy directions (ned). ned works with progressive energy companies to promote their contribution to climate change and sustainability solutions to government and to the general public. Susan has previously worked in the political arena, serving in the Federal Parliament as the Member for Kingston and working as an Advisor to the former Environment and Heritage Minister Robert Hill on climate change and energy policy. She has also worked for a number of shadow ministers in various portfolio areas prior to the election of the Howard Government in 1996. Susan also held the position of Chief Executive of the Renewable Energy Generators of Australia (REGA) until October 2007.
Adam Kilgour is Managing Director of Diplomacy Pty Limited. He is a former adviser to Victorian and Commonwealth Government Cabinet Ministers and founder of public affairs firm CPR. He has also been a Managing Director of the ASX listed Photon Group Ltd, and is Chairman of Stirling Henry Global Migration.
Clare Martin brings a wealth of experience to the Climate Institute through her work in journalism, and public life. Clare was elected to the Northern Territory Legislative Assembly in 1995 and appointed Opposition Leader in 1999. She was elected the Northern Territory’s first Labor Chief Minister in 2001 and served in that capacity until 2007, retiring from Parliament in 2008 to become CEO of the Australian Council of Social Service. In August 2010 she took up appointment as a Professorial Fellow at Charles Darwin University’s Northern Institute – an Institute focussed on issues of Northern Australia and SE Asia.
Professor Tony McMichael is an environmental epidemiologist, at the Australian National University (ANU), Canberra, with a long record of research and publication. During 2001-2007 he was Director of the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health at ANU. He has, over several decades, advised the World Health Organization, the UN Environment Program and the World Bank on matters of environmental risks to health. During 1993-2007 he played a central role in the assessment of health risks due to climate change for the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), as an Australian Government-nominated scientist. He is currently assisting the World Health Organization develop that body’s newly-mandated international program of research and risk management in relation to climate change and human health. He is supported by a five-year Australia Fellowship from the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC).
Sam Meers is managing director and a trustee of the Nelson Meers Foundation. She is currently deputy chair of Philanthropy Australia, a trustee of the Art Gallery of NSW, a director of the State Library of NSW Foundation and the Documentary Australia Foundation, and a member of the Advisory Councils of the Centre for Social Impact and of the Sydney Women’s Fund. Previously Sam practised as a specialist media lawyer, holding senior management positions within the media sector. She is a former deputy chair of the Australian Subscription Television & Radio Association and a former board member of the Belvoir St Theatre and the Power Institute for Art & Visual Culture.
Dr. Graeme Pearman was elected to Fellowship of the Australian Academy of Science in 1988 and has been a member and chair of many Australian and international meteorological/global change committees. Graeme was the former head of CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research. He was also a recipient of a United Nation’s Environment Program Global 500 Award in 1989 for his active involvement in a national awareness program on climate change and in 1999 he was awarded the Australian Medal of the Order of Australia for his services to atmospheric science and promotion of the science of climate change to the public.
Dr Hugh Saddler is currently a Principal Consultant with Pitt&Sherry and the Managing Director of Sustainability Advice Team Pty Ltd. He is also an Adjunct Professor at the Australian National University. He has a degree in science from Adelaide University and a PhD from Cambridge University. He is the author of a book on Australian energy policy, Energy in Australia, and over 70 scientific papers, monographs and articles on energy technology and environmental policy, and is recognised as one of Australia’s leading experts in this field.
10
Here is the email address of this TRAITOROUS “climate institute”……….
info@climateinstitute.org.au
TELL THEM HOW ANGRY YOU ARE ABOUT THIS GLOBAL WARMING FRAUD !!!!!!!!!!
10
I’ve done a quick search at the ABC website for references to “Tim Flannery” (scientist, explorer and conservationist), found over 100 pages and over 1000 discrete entries that only go back to about 2003.
Flannery is no doubt a very clever guy but it’s no exaggeration, I think, to say he owes his present prominence to his knack for self-promotion together with the eager support of ‘his’ ABC without which he would probably still be tucked away in some dusty Museum corner amongst his old bones.
10
Damian thanks for that info on the CI board, I’ve been there before but didn’t notice the board members.
The husband and wife featured on the ABC country hour when it was founded and I thought then , what a waste of 10m$.
If Australia stopped emitting co2 today it wouldn’t have the slightest effect on climate or rainfall or drought or whatever, what a pack of leftwing loons.
10
Not only is the ALP/Greens’ carbon dioxide tax unlikely to affect the global temperature by anything more than an unmeasurably infinitesimal amount (if at all), it is unlikely to affect Australia’s per capita CO2 emissions.
Take the countries with the longest record of taxing CO2 emissions:
Sweden enacted CO2 tax in 1991, CO2/cap.: 1990, 6 m.t. ..2007, 5.4 m.t.
Norway …………….CO2 tax in 1991, CO2/cap.: 1990, 7.4 m.t. ..2007 9.1 m.t.
Denmark ………… .CO2 tax in 1996, CO2/cap. : 1990, 9.8 m.t. ..2007, 9.2 m.t.
Finland……………..CO2 tax in 1990, CO2/cap.: 1990, 10.2 m.t…2007, 12.1 m.t.
Netherlands………..CO2 tax in 1990, CO2/cap.: 1990, 11 m.t…..2007, 10.5 m.t.
Australian per cap. is naturally higher for many reasons, not least geography:
Australia……………CO2/cap. 1990, 17.2 m.t. ..2007 , 17.9.
The point is that the proposed CO2 tax is just that, a tax, designed to boost government revenue dressed up as an anti-pollution measure i.e. blatant deception.
If anyone knows of a country where a CO2 tax has effected a significant reduction of CO2 emissions please let us know.
references:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_tax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions_per_capita
10
Looks like our friend from the UEA is still hanging around. You kinda shot yourself in the foot with your last post.
– http://www.climateinstitute.org.au/faith
The Climate Institute really summed up it’s position on climate science science quite succinctly.
Percy/Wendy, while you do your best to create the illusion that us sceptics are interested in pursuing ad hom attacks on the AGW crowd you have only shown how shallow and limited you capacity to have input into this debate really is. The climatastrophist culture of smear and deceit continue.
10
Damian???
Your post @28, re Climate Institute is informative, thank you for posting, however I also find it on another site posted by a (Paul O). I have the feeling you have just cut @ pasted Paul’s post which is OK, but if you are going to re-post someone else’s
post from another site it would be polite of you to acknowledge the original poster and the site it was previously posted.
This is not the first time I have observed you doing this.
10
Where, pray tell, are the usual insightless interjections from MattB?
10
I almost had the impression yesterday that Matt might be taking his medication again!
(Just kidding)
10
In the late 1960s BP and Shell had massive reserves of worthless North Sea natural gas. The only potential new market for gas was power generation. To create a market for gas generated electricity it was necessary to destroy the coal industry. So in 1969 Shell and BP created the CRU at the University of East Anglia. They chose UAE because it was newly created, cash-starved and a haven for extremist left wing views. Shell and BP knew that the third rate academics of climate science would be guaranteed to provide the results they wanted.
10
@Bob : do you think Jo’s site is the only place this character trolls at? You might recall this:
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/04/newsflash-the-fightback-campaign-against-sceptics/
Oh, and our imposter is commenting my the name of Ronnell on the above thread. 🙂
10
Bananabender @ #37
And who do you imagine own BP and Shell? The British and Dutch governments, with some ‘public’ shareholders to make it seem legitimate.
10
Jo,
Many times our influence has been bought for a certain outcome. Be it politicians, scientists(through discoveries or opinions), manufacturers or scam artists. The results trying to be achieved is influence and many cases a following.
There has been a great deal in science that has made me scratch my head at “how did they come to this conclusion?”
I have done a great deal of research into Ice Ages and what was before that. So far ALL the research is pointing that this planet had at least 10 times more water volume of oceans.
Why was there no plant and animal life before 500 million years ago out of 4.5 billion if we had all this exposed rock? Why does carbon dating give us different time lines in rocks being formed? You cannot carbon date objects that were not being exposed to air and dry this is why our oldest salt mine is only a billion years old at a height of 350 meters. Our ocean core sample dating is through the accumulation of H2 18 O in the shells of animals that have died.
The conclusion of Ice Ages shaping our landscape and making rock is very faulty as the pound per square inch of ice is too light to that of the same volume of water. Why is that? Water collapses on itself to a point in a cone shape making pressure. Ice is too porous and objects melted around it will NOT feel much pressure similar to rock.
Take sand. Abundant all around this planet on the surface and in the oceans but how was sand made? Theory is through water hammering rocks over the billions or rainwater. I have yet to see rain create a grain of sand unless it is on a rock already compressed from sand.
But,volcanic activity creates porous rocks under immense pressure these can implode due to pressure and trapped gases. Some very old volcanic rock is highly compressed( creating some nifty formations) and not porous like todays volcanoes, why?
Still getting more answers but the areas is vast to look into.
10
@Rereke Whakaaro: #35
“Where, pray tell, are the usual insightless interjections from MattB?”
I hope they havn’t gone the same way as ‘July’s’ posts Rereke.
Even though he has had no answer for my posts for the past couple of weeks, I would miss his interjections if he were to abandon this site.
Come back MattB, or the ‘Thumbs Down’ button will have to be made redundant.
10
OFF TOPIC
‘POLUTION’ CREEP
Whilst trolling (troll having two meanings, I was being a troll in a good way) the Department of Climate Change [DCC] website today I came accross, what I consider to be a RORT.
ALL our emissions, from 1990 onwards had changed, (DCC’s AEGIS system was updated yesterday, to include year 2009), not by much – only about $10 million worth a year, but nevertheless the DCC figures for CO2-e emissions had changed from only TWO DAYS ago.
How can our emissions for 1990 change now, it is ‘Tablets of Stone’ stuff according to Kyoto.
I think Combet needs a ‘Please Explain’ letter.
10
Well the July character seemed to disappear after I did some simple maths on someone really being 6th generation farmer in Australia and figured out their original family must have settled in something like 1860. I think that character had to then be trashed. The tone of conversation has improved quite a bit since then with most things staying on topic (as I wonder off-topic here).
I do wonder why trolls turn up and then disappear. Obviously they do it for fun, but what a weird way to get your kicks. I can understand the occasional frothing-at-the-mouth drive by comment, but to return day after day – well, that’s just plain weird.
10
@Rereke Whakaaro: #17
“That was the motive behind my question on a previous thread: “Why are Why would BHP Billiton, AGL Energy, Incitec Pivot, and Newcrest, et al, supporting this”?”
Best I can do Rereke !
AGL is rated ‘Neutral’ (by Macquarie Research) for the effects of a Carbon Tax. (don’t ask me why – but Macquarie are smart cookies)
BHP has less exposure than Myer, on a no compensation basis, and would probably be ‘well in proft’ with a CPRS style, sector based, compensation package. (Marius Klophead wouldn’t do anything that wasn’t to his advantage)
Newcrest, well, they took over Lihir Gold when I believe Garnaut was Chairman (or something similar) and maybe they have some ‘insider’ information.
Incitec Pivot, Now they make EXPLOSIVES, which might just be in big demand if Gillard pushes this ‘Carbon Tax’ any further.
The first two points are factual, the third is ‘tongue in cheek’ and the fourth, Is just on my ‘Wish List’.
10
TF – A METAPHOR MAGPIE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQ4JQKd3l1k&feature=player_embedded
According to Flannery, “Climate change is a SILENT KILLER…It’s making our world less stable and less safe…”
His approach to (climate) science communication/eco-chat is NOT to “communicate” any real science, but to do the reverse – to use cliches and expressions appropriated from elsewhere to confuse the issues. Eg: Smoking used to be the “silent killer”, now it’s climate change.
A classic ARGUMENTUM AD POPULUM technique – deliberately exploiting sentiments and emotions of the masses and avoiding matters intellectual. Greg – “carbon pollution” – Combet, etc, are also fond this form of spin. Hilter was too.
According to an internet review by Tom Coyle, what surprises in TF’s new book, Here on Earth, are “the factual errors, inconsistent logic and an imbalance between rhetoric and content … The delivery is seriously destabilised by a problem with form versus substance and a seeming inability to maintain a distinction between Flannery’s metaphors and his science.”
Coyle noted that “inaccuracies and confused theories make up too much” of his book, disappointing readers seeking “something practical and wise”. His “preference for form over substance, flourish over fact” may “prove to be an effective approach for those he is attempting to convince, but it is a risky strategy”.
Is a “stable world/climate” possible on this dynamic planet? It isn’t, but there are plenty of Flannasonicans out there who are fearful about ANY natural change and eager to embrace his version of an earthly Heaven.
James Lovelock is one of TF’s “great heroes”. His concept of Gaia, the “Earth as a living thing” with a goal—“the regulation of surface conditions so as always to be as favourable as possible for contemporary life” – continues to have many critics.
What amazes many is Lovelock’s—and now Flannery’s—claim that the “hypothesis describes co-operation at the highest level—the sum of unconscious co-operation of all life that has given form to our living Earth”, which “possesses many of the qualities of a living thing”.
Dawkins, incidentally, described the notion of purposeful “homeostatic regulation” of the Earth’s atmosphere as part of “pop-ecology literature”, or pseudoscience. QED
Alice (in Flannisonica)
10
@Alice Thermopolis: #45
Flannasonicans ? is that another word for ‘Ants’ Alice ?
I beleive Timmy Boy used the analogy last week, I wonder if he wanted to be the ‘Queen’.
If so he would have to fight Bob Brown for it. (being a Queen I mean)
10
THOUGHT FOR THE NIGHT
Did anyone see JULIA on TV Tuesday.
Her Earlobes were about 3cm long. (weird)
The Pinnoccio theory is correct – just the anatomy was wrong.
Keep an eye on the lobes guys.
10
TOTALLY OFF TOPIC
(But a Classic example of Nepotism)
Therese Rein (Kevin Rudds Mrs) the $1.4 BILLION queen of Welfare to Work.
Does anyone believe in a hard days work anymore?
READ MORE:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/therese-rein-the-14bn-queen-of-british-welfare/story-e6frg8zx-1226042492969
10
I wish people would stop knocking Mrs Flannery’s little boy Tim. After all, he is an Australian “boy makes good” story. How many other less than eminent small mammal fondlers do you know, who have progressed to the dizzy heights of national Climate Change Guru, without any relevent qualifications whatsoever and without being held responsible for his “predictions”. What’s more, he is amassing a fortune on the way. I think you’re all jealous.
10
I wish somebody would fund some university or think-tank initiatives on “new ways to weaken or eliminate eco-crazy zealots and initiatives in Government and the media”
10
I guess it would be helpful to maintain a steady supply of welfare recipients to keep Therese’s government contracts coming in.
How’s this for a new initiative:
Save the Climate! Don’t work! You’re just polluting if you do! Go on welfare and buy dope instead! Besides, it’s more fun!!
10
Off topic but this is the latest development in a long line of stupid ideas brought on by our green wooly activists. The Alab Laboratory in Berlin has found that the energy saving light bulbs pushed down our throat to save electricity do not only contain mercury but also produce a number of highly toxic chemicals when turned on. One of the most prominent of those gasses is Phenol, a substance that is on Greenpeace’s list to be banned completely from our living environment. Even Manfred Santen of the German branch of Greenpeace warns against the use of these lamps. It could be harmful to the child’s health if a number of these lamps are in use in a the child’s bedroom, he states.
Currently warnings are being considered to be put on these light bulbs as: Do not leave these lights on for a prolonged period”; “Not to be used near your head” Only to be used in well ventilated areas” etc.
Curtesy of:
http://climategate.nl/2011/04/21/doe-nu-uw-spaarlamp-uit/#more-8631
Also see:
http://news.google.nl/news/more?q=energiesparlampen&hl=de&biw=1003&bih=567&rlz=1R2GCNV_nl&tbas=0&wrapid=tlif130337723723441&um=1&ie=UTF-8&ncl=dL5D5oudz_q3P7MvigSM0L6UaK_QM&ei=Y_WvTZ6sK5CVOuCr-fMI&sa=X&oi=news_result&ct=more-results&resnum=1&ved=0CCYQqgIwAA
10
more dumb propaganda…
http://www.gpb.org/news/2011/04/21/carbon-in-love
10
on the other hand, would not have seen this reported a year ago
http://www.indiancarsbikes.in/green-technology/princeton-physicist-tells-congress-co2-increase-good-35344/
10
TrueNews: @47
Perhaps a remedial tax is in order?
10
Hey you climate squares out there, it’s time for you to get hip
10
It appears that the proponents of the AGW theory has done the full circle to medieval paganism. Time to reinstall the heliocentric view and strike out the pagans.
A modern renaissance led by Galileo. Bring on the inquisition!
10
Macha # 53
Thanks for that link to Dr Happer’s statement to the US Congress. 7 minutes well spent! I’ll be bookmarking that one and sending the link to as many people as I can.
10
Why the confusion about just who Flummery is working for? Surely it’s axiomatic, he works for the same entity that all snake-oil salesmen work for – himself.
10
a small matter, but want to get this off my chest…
andrew bolt has a thread, linked below, about the P.M. in Japan and the hypocrisy of our selling coal. some comments mentioned how the Australian article he linked to had removed the line “”I’m very confident in the future of our coal exports as well as we move to clean energy future.”
first, here is an ABC Radio Australia piece:
21 April: ABC Radio Australia: Prime Minister Gillard in Japan
Reporter: Sabra Lane
Gillard: “Over the next few years Australia will become Japan’s most important supplier of liquefied natural gas, as we are already with coal and iron ore.
“Japan can certainly continue to rely on Australia at a time when you have never needed these resources more.”
Earlier, Ms Gillard told reporters she had confidence about the future of Australian coal and LNG exports despite Australia’s move to a “clean energy future”…
http://www.radioaustralia.net.au/asiapac/stories/201104/s3198484.htm
the Bolt thread, see comments for mentions the line has been cut:
21 April: Andrew Bolt Blog: If the rest of the world is with us, we wouldn’t sell so much coal
(excerpted from the Australian link below): But this morning, speaking ahead her lunch with a range of senior business executives, Ms Gillard said she had no fears about the future for Australian exports.
“I am very confident that there is a strong future for our LNG industry as we also move to a clean energy future,” she said.
”I’m very confident in the future of our coal exports as well as we move to clean energy future.”…
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/if_the_rest_of_the_world_is_with_us_we_wouldnt_sell_so_much_coal/
the Australian piece UPDATED? the headline itself is misleading because the writer himself tells us the P.M. didn’t mention carbon trading or taxes at the lunch and Radio Australia has her “earlier” telling only reporters the story about coal and our “clean energy future”. so why is the Australian running this headline at all, and why remove the line about coal?
21 April: Australian: Gillard reassures Japanese business leaders on carbon price during Tokyo trip
UPDATED Matthew Franklin in Tokyo
Speaking at a JABCC lunch, attended by the heads of major companies including Nippon Steel and Mitsubishi, Ms Gillard did not directly mention carbon trading or taxes…
Earlier, Ms Gillard told reporters she had confidence about the future of Australian coal and LNG exports despite Australia’s move to a “clean energy future”…
(comment by Rocket scientist of Garran ACT) “I’m very confident in the future of our coal exports as well as we move to clean energy future.” Somebody should tell her that carbon dioxide mostly comes from burning coal. The emperor of Japan would know that.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/gillard-to-reassure-japanese-business-leaders-on-carbon-price-during-tokyo-trip/story-fn59niix-1226042904435
10
Look at this PROPAGANDA from this lying scumbag “climate institute” !!!
Total BS about the carbon DIOXIDE (Plant Food) tax only going to cost Australians the cost of a sausage sandwich!!!!!
http://www.news.com.au/money/carbon-price-plan-will-cost-families-a-sasuage-sandwich-says-climate-institute/story-e6frfmci-1226043193869
BOLLOCKS!!!
Here is their contact:-
info@climateinstitute.org.au
10
I think July stormed off in disgust a few weeks ago when someone misread his thirty thousand trees annually as three hundred thousand and someone else misread his correction as referring to the number of hectares he farms, and a chain of nonsensical calculations arising from this original misreading and an admonition from Jo left him bewildered and alienated.
MattB is made of sterner stuff though and is probably just away sweeping out some of the spare rooms of B Hall preparing for the Tasmanian climate refugees which will be billeted on him when the rising seas sweep over their tiny island.
10
“gnome”,
Do you mean these Climate Refugees………
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/04/15/the-un-disappears-50-million-climate-refugees-then-botches-the-disappearing-attempt/
10
Yep- that’s them. 50 million missing Tasmanians- what a disaster! Remember, you might not believe it but MattB will be disfellowshipped from the church of global warming if his belief wavers.
10
pat@60
Not sure whether Gillard can’t help being a lawyer, whose stock in trade is lying and it is one of those bad habits she can’t break or is she really just incredibly stupid. Combet who is not a lawyer has no alternative excuse for his also grossly stupid carbon tax position.
10
Gnome @ 62, Pretty bright analysis about July although perhaps you misread the fact that MattB has lots of family in Tasmania (I’m just guessing)
10
Christine Milne is the Patron Saint of the Church of Global Warming, and just so happens to be senator from Tasmania.
I’m pretty sure she has established the guidelines for excommunication from this Church, I don’t know if 50 million people who did not disappear off the face of the Earth who we directed point blank to do so would be considered “doubters” or not but but if they are Christine might have to dilute the standards for Church banishment a bit
10
In Tim Flannery’s case wouldn’t it be correctly called “flatulence” I can’t for the life of me think what else it would be.cheers
10
Every country has their own share of particularly prominent and particularly kooky climate kooks, on a population basis, I think the USA has a greater percentage of kooky climate kooks than Australia.
Germany, however, definitely leads the field in this area. No country on Earth has more kooky climate kooks than Germany on a population basis.
10
should have said the comment below matthew franklin’s gillard/japan piece in the australian proves the line was in the original article and later excised.
10
Not so. Tim Flannery is a sociopath and misanthrope who hates everything human and hominoid. He blamed the extinction of sabre-toothed cat in Australia and its relatives in the American continents on the appearance of hominids and everything on Earth has been going downhill since then.
Tim Flannery is an Australian version of Paul Ehrlich in an Indiana Jones hat and he stinks.
10
Having some German heritage I should take exception Brian But you are correct so I can’t CHEERS
10
I remember the furore over Sydney radio broadcasters taking ‘cash for comment’ and commenting about products and services as if in an impartial way, when in reality they were paid ‘advertorials’.
Strange that I don’t see a furore over the commercialisation of someone who is helping direct the policies of a nation.
10
I wonder whether Panasonic has got it abit wrong with their strategy and timing.
The lastest big topic with some opinion writers seems to be how the Greens have got it wrong. There have many articles along the lines of the following :
http://www.tnr.com/article/politics/87140/environmental-green-movement-al-gore-nesbit
It will be interesting to see how far this goes.
10