The Evidence for AGW: CO2 Levels are rising because of Fossil Fuels

It isn’t too much of a stretch to imagine given the amount of CO2 we put into the atmosphere through the burning of fossil fuels (almost 30 billion tonnes), that this may have a causal link to the amount of CO2 that remains in the atmosphere; so let’s explore the empirical evidence that demonstrates that the rising CO2 levels is from Fossil Fuels.

Firstly, it is important to note that the carbon atom has several different isotopes (eg – different number of neutrons). For instance, Carbon 12 has six neutrons, whilst carbon 13 has seven.

As plants have a lower C13 to C12 ratio than the atmosphere, if rising atmospheric CO2 were from fossil fuels, the ratio of C13 to C12 in the atmosphere should fall as the fossil fuels are burnt.

And indeed, this isotope ratio falling trend is exactly what is observed:
This is directly measured evidence that demonstrates that fossil fuels are the source of the rising CO2 in the atmosphere.

Marimo “Moss” Balls


Has anyone seen these? These are “Marimo Balls”, a semi-popular aquarium addition.

The Balls are generally found in the northern hemisphere, but it seems demand and environmental factors are inhibiting their ability to flourish as they once did.

Essentially they formed as bits of algae (specifically, Chlorophyta) clumps together and natural movemenst shape them in to the balls you see here – they are only known to form naturally in Japan, Iceland, Scotland, and Estonia.

Here’s one getting played with by a King Lobster:


My Own Changing Climate

From what I notice in the Media, the use of “Climate Change” is a basic term that is often misrepresented and misused in a vague context; — especially by the media advocates of global warming, which definitely doesn’t help the cause. This certainly doesn’t leave the “Climate Change Skeptics” out, because I often hear it thrown about in the wrong context.

I believe the appropriate term that should be used when talking about the theory behind man-made climatic change should be Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), or when specifically speaking about Global Warming, AGW. — Something both sides of the debate seldom do.

For myself, what was most compelling was the fact that Agriculture uses Co2 to artificially create the greenhouse effect to help in growing plants. We know this isn’t correlation, but causative by the increases of Co2 in these glasshouses. For me, explaining it with this very simple analogy – that many people can witness, and relate to – is the easiest way to demonstrate that Co2 can, in fact, cause heating.

Globally, we had levels of around 230ppm, and it has been steadily increasing. Greenhouses use in excess of the estimated 330ppm currently in Earth’s atmosphere, using upwards of 380-1000ppm. I found interesting, at these levels, some plant life actually increase mass by up to 50%. Continue reading →

The impact of an NBN on an ETS

Is there more to the National Broad Band (NBN ) than than just all the hoopla over high speed movie downloads?? I suspect that maybe there is. Check out Smart Grids Australia “…. Smart Wired Consortium a broad based, home connectivity industry body, with members including FOXTEL and Telstra Smart Community, amongst others, have warned that Australian homes run the risk of missing out on the optic fibre revolution, and calling for agreed technology standards for new and existing homes. The Consortium is launching a new Code of Practice and a number of related Handbooks on home technology. The Code of Practice sets out the basic standards homes will need to ensure they get reliable and guaranteed entertainment, security, energy management , communication and automation services, and has been developed as an open, independent platform. A couple odf the policy statements give a bit a clue. Continue reading →

Action vs an ETS

So, for the last few months there has been much debate over the implementation of an (Emissions Trading Scheme) ETS. With the Labor Government recently shelving the issue till 2013, there has been a lot of backlash about the program’s delay. BUT – The problem with this whilst many people believe that action needs to be taken on Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) – The majority of the public are unaware of the what an ETS would actually entail, and it’s consequences – And apparently, so is the current government.

The title of this blog was Action versus an ETS, so why is it that I am fighting for what I call ‘Action’ over something that hasn’t been created yet?

The ETS has some set points of creation about it – and even on those issues alone, it is not in the interest of being environmentally responsible.

Regardless of the Labor Government, and Greens’ hype about how Australia must ‘Act Now’ – A more apt call for action should be about moving forward with practical solutions that directly affect the way we live. We shouldn’t have to fork out more money as Taxes to supplement the Buying of Carbon Credits.

Now, I will make my personal stance on AGW clear – I acknowledge that Climate Change is factual. I however, am skeptical that current change in climate is significantly caused by Human interference. But, more on that later – because the science being used to push for the ETS doesn’t even stack up if the ETS is brought in, and that’s a whole other Post.

What does an ETS comprise of?

The ETS is essentially, an economy based on the trading of “permits” to facility what would become the companies’ legal ability pollute. These permits are sold by Carbon Traders. These traders capture Carbon, and thereby offset the emmissions of the entity purchasing the created “Carbon Credits”.

Australia’s ETS has been deemed to operate under a ‘Cap and Trade’ scheme, in which an overall cap is determined, and any extra emissions is then traded on the Carbon Market. The Cap & Trade scheme also includes all companies – Coal-Fired Energy Companies being one of, if not – the largest creators of Carbon Emissions, will be a large BUYER of these Carbon Credits. “So?” You may ask.

The problem is that it is widely acknowledged, but under reported that prices for all goods and services will rise – significantly, especially for the transport and energy sectors. To “solve this” the Labor Government has said they will provide Cash & Offsets. This makes the additional cost of doing business now a Taxpayer issue, as well as the consumers’ issue.

Let’s take a look at Victoria quickly on this. One company uses 25% of all the power consumption in the state. That’s right, One. Who’s going to be subsidising those costs? The taxpayer. But what about the costs that aren’t subsidised? That’s right, the consumer. Both the same person.

I will point out here, that currently – there is widespread fraud in the Chicago Carbon Exchange. Numerous companies have been found to have issued Carbon Certificates on false information. For instance, they sell a Certificate for 1,000 tonnes of carbon emissions – But don’t plant trees with the money. Thus, the carbon use by the buying entities is not offset – at all.

So, what’s my push?

We already have many government rebates that have been started, and failed. The Federal Government enacted schemes that would have been excellent if managed better – The Home Insulation Scheme, Green Loans, and the Solar Hot Water Rebate – all great. The problem was execution.

Solar Powered Hot Water Systems was a great boost to small, local businesses. It boosted Australian Manufacturing, and it was a push for Australian Engineering in those relevant fields. Having this technology in every applicable household would significantly reduce the Load on the Electrical Grid and on our wallets. And to think – this was stopped because it was “too successful”! It should have been made Mandatory for all new dwellings, to ensure the sector which was significantly grown, could continue to prosper!

Green Loans allowed individuals access to interest free loans of up to AUD$10,000 over 4 years for particular environmental products and services. Solar Panels installed under this program would produce around 20% of an Average homes’ power use; for those with the money to spend – Investing 10,000 of their own would have seen 40% of their power usage essentially pre-paid for the next 25 years (General Warranty and expected Life period).

And.. well, the Home Insulation Scheme – … Oh god. Where do I begin. There are many things that could have been altered to make this scheme successful, and safer. Numerous rorts, etc.

There are always alternative Energy Sources, numerous ways we can reduce emissions – and if the current government was at all as serious as it says it was about the Environment, we’d have more Nuclear Power Plants to reduce those emissions. We’ve come a far way from Chernobyl; Power Plants are far safer now, and more efficient too.

Revisiting these plans, with refinements in execution would do far more good for Australia than investing millions of dollars into “creating” an economy on which to trade “permits to pollute.

It is only through actually acting on Environmental Issues, not implementing crafty ways of taxing Australians – can we change our emissions output, without having to live in caves.

The Shocking Rort by NSW Labor

When Federal Labor announced their Emissions Trading Scheme, Electricity Companies took it upon themselves to start charging consumers more based on the cost of building new infrastructure and were part of the proposed Carbon Tax.

Since then, Labor has been beaten back by Federal liberal and the public about the impact of a Carbon Tax on all facets of life for “Working Families”.

Now that Kevin Rudd has been disposed of by the ALP, Labor has been retracting on it’s “greatest moral challenge” and attempting to make the ETS a matter for a Public Forum.

NSW Labor however, have stripped $11bn from Electrical infrastructure; which is now being used as the excused to FURTHER pump up the price of Globe Juice.

Change needs to happen.
Sooner the better.