It feels like everywhere you turn politics is mixing with sports. Is it too much to ask that sports celebrities be good at the game they are playing?
When you get down into the details of their grandstanding it never stacks up. Just play the game and do your team proud, Australia already hears enough of the politics.
Transcript
The Australian netball team rejected an offer of sponsorship from Gina Rinehart’s Hancock Prospecting because they refused to wear their logo. Who is this company our netballers rejected? Hancock Prospecting grew into one of Australia’s largest companies on the strength of their Roy Hill iron ore mine. Iron ore is still their largest product—Hancock mines coal as well. Since the Greens seem to be ignorant of metallurgy, let me educate you lot: the only way to make steel is using coal to heat iron ore. The Greens talk about green steel as an alternative—it’s not. Green steel is so brittle it’s unusable. There’s no realistic chance of green steel ever being used to replace coal-fired steel. Green steel does have a role as a photo opportunity to sustain the green steel lie designed to destroy the coal and steel industries for whatever visible reason the Greens advocate.
Australian netballers rejected steel. Senator McKim’s motion is rejecting steel. I hope that all those who feel as Senator McKim does go home tonight and rip out their steel stoves, turn off their steel fridges, throw away their steel microwaves, their cutlery, their knives, their saucepans—you get the idea. How will Senator McKim and his steel haters get home? Not in a car or even an electric vehicle. Those are made from steel and other products made with coal and hydrocarbon fuels. These other products include aluminium, glass, fibreglass and plastic. They can’t travel in a train, bus, cycle or scooter—more steel, more oil. Walking home is, of course, an option—just avoid steel-capped work boots or any boots made with steel tools. The hypocrisy in this motion is breathtaking!
Hancock Prospecting enjoys strong relations with the local Aboriginal communities, who benefited over the last seven years from mining royalties totalling $300 million. We have one flag, we are one community, we are one nation—coal-powered and steel-built thanks to miners.
The Earth simply doesn’t have enough of the rare earth materials used in batteries and net-zero products to reach net-zero.
That’s even when you take into account the materials gained from strip mining the ocean floor and covering the surrounding ecosystem in silt.
One Nation supports real environmental protection, not the environmental destruction the UN net-zero is pushing.
Transcript
Unreliable, weather-dependent solar and wind power has put a price tag on our oceans. The phrase ‘blue economy’ is used to soften the ugly truth that, to achieve Australia’s transition to net zero, the world’s oceans must be strip-mined for rare-earth minerals. Batteries, solar panels and wind turbines are produced in China, in part using materials that companies, mostly Chinese, mine from the sea floor. Polymetallic nodules needed for solar panels, wind turbines and batteries lay along active volcanic rifts mostly found on the seabed. Giant vacuums suck up the seabed ecosystem to bury and choke the surrounding area in a thick layer of silt. Animals, eggs, sediment, plants—everything is taken off the seabed.
A Greenpeace research fellow, distressed with what was being done, said:
In all cases, seabed mining will, by its very nature, destroy species and habitats within the mining zones. There is no justification for a ‘gold rush’ to mine the seabed …
International waters, particularly in the Pacific, contain more value than the combined mineral wealth of Earth’s continents.
The Pacific is ground zero for this green rush, with China holding the majority of licences that the United Nations International Seabed Authority handed out. The UN International Seabed Authority supports undersea mining because it aligns with the UN’s 2030 so-called—and bogus— Sustainable Development Goals. The former head of the Office of Environmental Management and Mineral Resources at the UN International Seabed Authority is on record saying that the UN International Seabed Authority is ‘not fit to regulate any activity in international waters’ in part due to a perceived conflict of interest with mining giants. Corporations are in control, and, on behalf of those corporations, climate warriors are destroying everything they touch. Explain that to our children. We are one community, we are one nation, and we want our oceans protected from crazy climate warriors.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/LGjGLEdifSo/hqdefault.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2022-12-01 09:17:552022-12-01 09:18:05Net-Zero means strip mining the sea floor for rare earths
Labor’s much-hyped goal of net zero and electric vehicles for 2050 will run out of charge between 2025 and 2030, when lithium supplies are predicted to dry up.
No-one is looking at the harm these electric vehicles cause out of sight in the Third World or asking why they still have a social licence, given that most of them source raw materials on the back of child slave labour either.
You can have your electric vehicles, I’ll keep my turbo-diesel and tow my trailer as far as I like.
Transcript
As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia I speak to the Treasury Laws Amendment (Electric Car Discount) Bill 2022. The history of climate change and related energy bills is replete with terrible governance, shoddy governance, deceitful governance. There have been genuine errors made, there have been decisions taken on greed and self-interest, contradicting the science, and now we have inappropriate market manipulation from a cynical, meddling government. This bill is designed to force the uptake of electric vehicles. What hubris, what deceit—and who pays? As always, the people are paying.
How can the Albanese government ignore the critical shortage of minerals essential to producing this many electric vehicles? Lithium has been a global arms race fought between electric vehicles and Labor’s other loves: batteries, solar panels and wind turbines. There’s not enough lithium on earth for one of these follies, let alone all four. Stuart Crow, chair of Lake Resources, said:
There simply isn’t going to be enough lithium on the face of the planet, regardless of who expands and who delivers, it just won’t be there.
So what’s the government’s plan to handle the lithium shortage in the electronics industry as net zero sucks up supply of cobalt, lithium and copper? Demand inflation will force these resources up in price over the next few years. How’s the government going to explain to citizens why their phones, laptops and household goods have been made unaffordable from so-called sustainable, green technologies? By the way, have you noticed how United Nations World Economic Forum sustainability programs can exist only with subsidies, meaning they’re not sustainable?
Back to the point, the engineering boundaries are real, and wishy-washy responses about finding new solutions don’t work when the best solution, lithium, is being wasted on the vanity of net zero. Labor’s much-hyped goal of net zero for 2050 will run out of charge between 2025 and 2030, when lithium supplies are predicted to dry up. This shortage is already manifested in mineral prices. In 2020 lithium was $6,000 per tonne. Today, what is it? I’ll tell you: it’s sitting around $78,000 per time, 13 times higher. Everything this precious resource is being wasted on will be sitting in landfill before 2050. I say it again: everything this precious resource is being wasted on will be sitting in landfill, buried before 2050. Every wind turbine, every solar panel, every big battery, every home battery—all of it rotting while the earth and its oceans are torn apart to feed the monstrous dream of net zero through the strip mining of the seabed for rare earth minerals that are necessary for the production of these follies.
Even electric vehicle manufacturers admit to being in trouble. The World Economic Forum, whose policies seem to find their way into Australian legislation, thinks we need five billion electric vehicles to achieve net zero. That’s not five billion through to 2050; that is five billion every five to 10 years for ever. No wonder you’re looking startled; this is news to most people in this room. The reason electric vehicles are so damn expensive is that, in manufacturing electric vehicles, they are resource and energy hogs. They are resource guzzlers with a huge environmental footprint, far greater than petrol and diesel cars. These price hikes, which have already started, are set to push almost all purely electric vehicles beyond the luxury car threshold required to qualify for Labor’s amendment to the Fringe Benefits Tax Assessment Act.
After the amendment moved by the Greens and Senator Pocock goes through, in 2025 hybrids will no longer be included in the bill. Price inflation will ensure not much else will be either. When President Biden gave a $7,000 subsidy, the first thing that happened? Car manufacturers put up their prices by $7,000. Subsidies make things dearer, not cheaper. They shift the price label but not the affordability. Perhaps some cheaper EVs that are made in China and that may or may not still be working in 2030 will benefit.
Labor could, of course, raise the threshold, but at what point do we say that big business is being given a subsidy from working Australians to buy luxury vehicles? Our European friends are a decade ahead of us in this madness. They’ve dismissed policies like this as expensive, wasteful and counterproductive. Their conclusion is that government interference benefits rich companies at the expense of natural market competition. It’s why German finance minister Christian Lindner said:
We simply cannot afford misguided subsidies anymore. These cars have so far been subsidised over their lifetime with up to 20,000 euros, even for top earners. That’s too much. We can save billions there, which we can use more sensibly.
Germans are saying this.
This bill for luxury foreign electric vehicles is designed to fix a number on Labor’s spreadsheet of carbon dioxide output. It’s not to assist a transition to electric vehicles for the general public. The fastest rise in product quality occurred when electric vehicles were forced to compete on merit against their oil and gas hydrocarbon fuelled betters. It was only then, when the customer was king, that their price came down. Their quality went up and their range increased slightly. When European governments handed the electric vehicle market billions in subsidies, car manufacturers grew fat and lazy. They took the money, slacked off on development and raised their prices knowing that public money would cover the difference. This is transferring wealth from taxpayers to electric vehicle manufacturers.
Labor’s bill is more of the same failed economics that fundamentally misunderstands what drives success. Given the price dynamics at play, if anything this bill penalises full electric vehicles and preferences hybrids. At the same time hybrids begin to win the consumer war, this government’s net-zero policies are pushing up the price of fuel and leaving every car owner worse off. We’re quickly reaching a point where car ownership will become a rare privilege that won’t impact at all anyone in this chamber, yet it will make the lives of everyday Australians an intolerable misery. As Norway, the world’s premier electric vehicle buyer, has stated, they want to reduce individual car ownership and see their population walk or catch public transport. The United Nations World Economic Forum EV policy is not about having different cars; it’s about no cars—no cars. Good luck telling Australian tradies that, but that’s what will happen.
These EVs have no resale value because they tend to be sold when the batteries are cooked. If we’re talking about sustainability, electric vehicles are on a swift path to landfill, unlike conventional cars that have many lives and many owners. To get electricity consumption down in order to improve range, EVs are made of composite materials, aluminium and plastics. Most of the steel in the subframe is needed to hold the extra weight of the battery. Recycling is, of course, possible, although with the price of electricity in Australia, thanks to weather-dependent solar and wind driving up power prices, our recycling industry is struggling. Think about this: much like used plastics, glass, solar panels and wind turbines, EVs will not be recycled beyond their copper wires and the little steel that has been used. If electric vehicles are a less desirable product at a terrible price heading towards extinction, what are their alleged climate virtues? Let’s consider that: this virtue is not based on science; it’s not a calculation of their cradle-to-grave life cycle. It’s a self-declaration. Electric vehicles identify as net zero, and so this government treats them as such.
No-one is looking at the harm these electric vehicles cause out of sight in the Third World or asking why they still have a social licence, given that most of them source raw materials on the back of child slave labour—child slave labour. What is the environmental cost of the Third World mining operations to build a car that sits in an Australian dealership with a green virtue sticker on the side? That’s completely irrelevant as far as this government is concerned. Why else would Labor throw good money after bad behind Congo cobalt? Labor are turning a blind eye to the 40,000 children in the Congo mining the cobalt for EVs—after this bill, 45,000. Leading electric vehicle manufacturers claim to be free of child slave labour, yet their supply contracts for cobalt are with companies with child slave labour in their supply chains—deceit.
We like to think that our civilisation has advanced, yet these net-zero technologies, more than any other, are indulging in the cheap, largely unregulated labour of our poor neighbours and their children. When it’s not children down mines clawing at the ground with their bare hands, it’s the toxic mining practices for rare earths that make coalmines look like an oasis. This is the truth behind the green sticker. Electric vehicles need mining, and the Greens hate mining—or so they tell us. Greens and teals demand coal stay in the ground. How can anyone make more EVs without using coal to smelt the steel and the aluminium, process the plastics from coal and oil and make the glass? How can we make more electric vehicles without oil in the bearings? It seems the government and the Greens and teals cheer squads are determined to find out. It’s impossible.
Added to the list of disasters waiting to happen is the effect of this many electric vehicles on the national electricity grid. Now we’re talking about something that’s hurting everyone. All it takes is three or so electric vehicles on an average suburban street to charge at the same time, and the powerlines melt down or shut off. Weather-dependent power like solar and wind cannot charge this many electric vehicles—full stop, that’s it. I’m sure this bill will lead to government departments buying another off-market round of electric vehicles to zip around Canberra. What it will not do is save the planet. What it will not do is make electric vehicles more affordable. What it will not do is ease the cost of living. What it will not do is create a better, more competitive product. And who will pay? As always, the people will pay for this government’s stupidity and deceit.
Even if they are miraculously delivered in this fit of madness, as a product electric vehicles have serious unresolved issues, like their tendency to spontaneously combust. Australia’s firefighters have complained that they do not have the ability to put out lithium-ion battery fires in electric vehicles. So what happens when our underground car parks are packed full of these things and one starts off a chain reaction? What happens if they catch fire beneath apartment blocks, inside shopping centres, in tunnels? The ventilation of buildings and car parks is not designed to handle the safety issue, the hazard and risk issue of the scars, and there will be serious accidents in tight residential areas. If there’s a fire, the water used to fight that fire is 10 times the amount for a conventional car fire. Firefighters are terrified of this. Even worse, that water becomes toxic as a result of contact with a toxic battery fire and must be captured and treated. Allowing firefighting water to run off site is an environmental contamination. EV does not stand for electric vehicle; EV stands for environmental vandalism. This bill states that its purpose is, ‘To encourage a greater uptake of electric cars by Australian road users to reduce Australia’s carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector by making cars more affordable’. Let me be straight: this is a big-business perk to help the richest people in this country improve their environmental virtue-signalling and their social credit status on paper. It is nothing more. Labor is offering another incentive to the rich, urban, professional teal voters to come on over to Labor and to keep their buddies in government, the Greens, with them.
Yet underneath it all, the Australian people are left to pick up the bill for Labor’s empty virtue-signalling and economic stupidity. This government needs to stop sucking up to the teals and start governing for Australia, and replace policies from the United Nations and World Economic Forum alliance, that began in 2018, with policies instead that serve Australia.
I want to mention a couple of points from Judith Sloan, the economist and journalist. At a time when United Nations and World Economic Forum policies drive goals of converting our transport fleet to electricity and hugely increasing demand for electricity, our bureaucrats push United Nations and World Economic Forum policies to kill reliable, baseload coal power and replace it with expensive, intermittent, unreliable wind and solar. And here’s what Judith Sloan said:
It is surely ironic it was Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen who explicitly outlined the numerical challenge in front of transforming the NEM in such a short time frame. He has told us we will need 22,000 solar panels every day and 40 wind turbines every month for the next eight years. There will also be a requirement for at least 10,000km of additional transmission lines.
At the same time, we’ll see 11,000 megawatts of coal-fired generation coming off capacity. This is insane. And who will pay? It’s the people who will pay. We need sensible government—honest governance. We have one flag. We are one community. We are one nation. And we stand for affordable, clean, secure mobility for all Australians.
The cost of everything is going up, but the Albanese Labor government is pouring more fuel on the fire by tipping billions into policies that will make electricity prices even higher. With more wind and solar in the grid than ever before power bills have never been higher. Time to give up on this pipe dream.
Transcript
President the Albanese Government’s behaviour goes well beyond a broken election promise to give cost-of-living relief. The Government is actively making inflation worse.
The inflation rate is 8% and will remain at 8% into the future, on the back of increases to energy prices. Electricity, gas, diesel and petrol are all inputs into every corner of our economy.
Forcing energy prices up to appease the sky god of warming will force up input costs right across our economy and lead to more inflation.
Weather-dependent solar and wind power will never provide baseload power. Doubling down on more solar and wind, before the added cost of changing out every wind turbine and solar panel with new ones before we even get to 2050 will lead to more inflation.
Taxpayers pay for these things twice: once in taxpayer subsidies to wind and solar and through higher inflation. Energy inflation.
Not only do we have a lack of wage rises, we have a lack of wages. Businesses are closing all over Australia as inflation wreaks havoc in the productive economy and energy costs drive manufacturing overseas.
This Government has no answers. We have just seen a child care bill that gives handouts to millionaires but fails to create a single job.
Failing to use government policy to create jobs while allowing 220,000 new migrants into Australia every year will create a pool of unemployed, resulting in reduced market power for labour. That can only mean lower wages, even before losing 8% a year off their pay packet through inflation.
One Nation believe the way to break the inflation cycle is a comprehensive root and branch review of the taxation system, to return bracket creep to wage earners while forcing big business, especially foreign corporations to pay their fair share.
Queensland Labor’s Health Department still mandates COVID injections for health professionals. Injection mandates must be abolished now. Let anyone who wants to work, work.
We are one community, one nation and Labor are a threat to breadwinner jobs.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/fnM1HJ-REX0/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-11-23 18:19:002022-11-23 18:19:05Albanese pouring fuel on the cost of living fire
If Climate Change talk-fest COP doesn’t want to come to Australia that’s their loss. We’ll keep our abundant protein-rich red meat, delicious range of seafood, cheap and reliable coal-fired power, huge gas reserves and efficient petrol and diesel cars. Let COP eat their bugs in the dark while they wait for their electric vehicles to charge.
Transcript
Great news, Vanuatu still exists.
Experts told us it would now be underwater due to global warming and rising sea levels. Just like Al Gore forecast Mount Kilimanjaro would have no snow by 2016.
How many islands has Vanuatu lost due to rising sea levels? None. Mount Kilimanjaro is still topped with icy white powder.
Maybe that’s why it’s now called climate change instead of global warming?
I thank the Australian Greens for this breaking news that Vanuatu’s climate minister would only back Australia’s bid to host the 2026 Conference Of Parties, COP, if Australia doesn’t commit to any new coal or gas projects.
With that headline the solution is clear.
Australia must immediately fund and build as many coal and gas projects as humanly possible so there’s no chance we’ll have to host the expensive UN-WEF talk fest for climate elites, the 2026 COP.
What is the COP?
The UN’s Conference Of Parties involves millionaires, billionaires and politicians bouncing around the world in fuel-guzzling private jets to luxurious locations.
Gorging themselves on prime beef while preaching to we lowly peasants to reduce our carbon dioxide footprint, stop flying, stop driving and stop eating red meat.
If the 2026 COP was hosted in Australia, taxpayers would be forking out for the UN’s globalist elite talk fest.
We’d be paying for them to tell us to destroy our energy grid and commit economic suicide to appease the sun gods.
If COP doesn’t want to come to Australia that’s their loss. We’ll keep our abundant protein-rich red meat, delicious range of seafood, cheap and reliable coal-fired power, huge gas reserves and efficient petrol and diesel cars.
Let COP eat their bugs in the dark while waiting for their electric vehicles to charge.
We have one flag. We are one community. We are one nation.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/00H50W31Bgo/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-11-23 16:32:072022-11-23 16:32:13Climate talk-fest not coming to Australia is a win!
I remember when greenies hugged trees. Now greenies chop down trees and hug manufactured wind turbines made of concrete, steel, fibreglass and gearbox oil. 40 million tonnes of wind turbine blades destined for landfill by 2050. Wind power isn’t renewable.
Transcript
There’s nothing more galling than the sight of a 100 metre wind turbine slumped over. A smouldering aluminium & concrete corpse testament to wind power’s stupidity.
Even if a wind turbine fibreglass blade makes it through a 12 year operating life, the blade is still a global waste catastrophe.
Every year, Europe already adds 2 million blades filling landfills.
At the same time that we declared plastic straws an environmental sin, our beautiful planet has 40 million tonnes of wind turbine blades destined for landfill by 2050.
Every blade of every wind turbine installed to 2030 will be in a landfill by 2050.
So-called renewables need to be renewed every 10-15 years.
We’re not building our net-zero, nature-dependent generation once. We’re doing it twice over. Or three times. With all the waste this will bring.
This is environmental vandalism, killing the environment in the name of saving it.
I remember when greenies hugged trees. Now greenies hug manufactured goods composed of concrete, steel, fibreglass and gearbox oil. Greenies are resource hogs.
Recycling wind turbine blades is not impossible. It just takes a huge amount of energy for which coal is the optimum fuel. That’s why, without affordable coal energy, wind turbine blades and solar panels are dumped not recycled.
German wind farms kill 100,000 birds a year and unlike those killed in cities, these birds tend to be endangered species due to the location of turbines.
New model turbines are approaching 240 metres in height with blades close to 120 metres.
That will need a big hole to bury.
This is not ‘free’ energy and it certainly is not ‘renewable’.
Governments should not ‘force’ a technological transition. If wind technology was any good it would not be reliant on subsidies of $500,000 per turbine per year.
Real transitions – those that serve to benefit our community – happen naturally through market forces because they have natural economic or social advantages that meet people’s real needs.
We are one community, we are one nation and the United Nations & World Economic Forum’s net-zero is environmental vandalism.
Every time there’s a drought, flood or cold day you’ll hear climate alarmists claim it’s all because of climate change. Well this study says there is no positive trend in the severity or frequency of natural disasters. That puts a bit of a hole in the “climate emergency”.
Senator ROBERTS: My question is to Minister Watt. You said in your opening statement:
There can be no doubt that the severity and regularity of these natural disasters is a result of climate change …
I’ve got a media report that I’m happy to table—I’ve got 10 copies—and a study which I will table that found there is no positive trend of extreme weather events as a result of climate change. Given this scientific study’s finding that there is no increase in severe weather events because of climate change, there appears to be some doubt about your statement. Have you misled the committee with your opening statement?
Senator ROBERTS: An Italian European Physical Journal Plus—a team led by Gianluca Alimonti from the Italian National Institute for Nuclear Physics and the University of Milan extended the analysis to include natural disasters, floods and droughts.
Senator Watt: Senator Roberts, I think we’re all very well used to you questioning the science of climate change—more usually in the Environment and Communications committee, but it’s good to see that you’re consistent and apply the same approach across different committees. No scientific expert has ever been able to convince you that climate change is real, and I doubt that I will have the ability to do that either. To give you one example, I accompanied the Prime Minister to visit a dairy farm in northern Tasmania after the recent floods. I won’t give the gentleman’s full name for his privacy, but it was a dairy farmer called Michael. Without any prompting from any politician, he recognised the increasing number of floods and natural disasters that they were having was due to climate change. But we all know—
Senator ROBERTS: So a dairy farmer named Michael trumps a scientific study? I want to know: on what basis did you make your statement and claim? What source—specific locations, specific publications—
Senator Watt: I’m not going to play your game. We know that no evidence will ever convince you that climate change is real. I have seen you ask the head of the CSIRO. I’ve seen you ask any number of scientists who present evidence of that. There are countless IPCC reports, comprising of advice from the best experts in the world—
Senator ROBERTS: Not one of those IPCC reports contains evidence. That’s a fact.
Senator Watt: and you reject all of them. So it doesn’t really matter what I say to you. You will continue with your climate conspiracies. There’s nothing I can do to help you.
Senator ROBERTS: I note your use of a label. Whenever people use a label like ‘denier’ or ‘conspiracy theorist’, it indicates they don’t have the data. You’ve just confessed that you don’t have the data. If you did, you’d be able to give me the specific location.
Senator Watt: I refer you to any number of IPCC reports, which you continuously choose to ignore and reject. I invite you to go and speak to any farm body—
Senator ROBERTS: Have you read the IPCC reports? I have. There is no specific location of any evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut. I ask you to verify and validate your statement. Give me the specific location.
Senator Watt: I would be happy, on notice, to provide you with any number of scientific reports that back up what I’m saying. I will repeat that I could provide you with an infinite number of reports and you will never believe them. Everyone knows that. I’m okay. You don’t accept that climate change is real—that’s your right. But what I’m interested in doing is working with the farmers who are actually paying the price for climate denialism. I’m interested in working with the farm bodies that have been waiting for a government that believes that climate change is real and is prepared to put promises in place. I don’t have the exact figures to hand, but ABARES has provided reports that show that, due to climate changes over the last 20 or so years, the average farm profit or productivity—it’s one or the other—has fallen in the order of 25 to 30 per cent. They’re on later, and you can ask them about that as well. Do you know what? You won’t believe them either. I accept you just don’t believe the evidence. That’s okay, but I’m not going to get held back.
Senator ROBERTS: It’s not up to you to tell me what I will or will not believe.
Senator ROBERTS: What is up to both of us and every single senator and member of parliament is to come here with the empirical evidence proving that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate and needs to be cut. You have never done that. None of your imputed sources have done that. I want, in each the references you provide, the specific location of the data on which you rely and the specific location of the framework that proves that carbon dioxide from human activity affects climate. Science is not just about data; it is about data within a framework that logically proves cause and effect. I want that from you. For each of those references, I expect that from you. Otherwise, they’re not valid.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/IDtuNEAKNR8/hqdefault.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-11-08 08:48:362023-01-10 13:29:39Are weather events more severe because of climate change?
Government wants to cut red meat production so you’ll have to “eat zee bugs”. Like lots of globalist claims however, demonizing red meat falls over as soon as you look at the facts.
Why on earth does the government want to tax cow farts?
Transcript
Australian beef and, best of all, Queensland beef are here to stay as Australia’s main source of protein. A recent CSIRO paper published in the journal Animal, found that pasture fed beef returned 1,597 times more human edible protein than it consumed. What a wonderful way to produce natural, nutritious and affordable protein to feed our world.
The CSIRO, though, couldn’t help themselves of course and went on to denigrate the cattle industry for its methane production. This fearmongering fails on the most basic of tests: the biogenic carbon cycle. Methane in the atmosphere combines with oxygen to produce water and carbon dioxide which are then reabsorbed into pastures through photosynthesis, encouraging plant growth. For those who swallow the United Nations’ climate rubbish and think that nature’s trace atmospheric gas, essential to life on earth, needs to be sequestered: it is being sequestered!
There’s no environmental harm from cattle methane production. Cattle can be raised in a sustainable manner that not only protects but improves soil health. The war on red meat doesn’t have a leg to stand on! I call on Meat & Livestock Australia to dump its Red Meat 2030 plan—a plan designed to create a false scarcity of red meat in order to double meat prices and increase profits for a lucky few large beef producers. Red Meat 2030 will end grazing in lower rainfall areas, which will then be returned to nature in a process called ‘rewilding’. This land is where affordable meat is grown. Meat will become an elitist food; everyday Australians will be forced to source protein from food-like substances grown in labs or concocted on a process line from bugs, nuts and chemicals—lots of chemicals! Pick up a pack of fake meat and check the ingredients.
Meat & Livestock Australia must stop pandering to the climate change fraud and globalist elites. We are one community, we are one nation and climate change delusion is a danger to people’s cost of living and to our very food supply and security.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/8mJfG0wSNhk/hqdefault.jpg360480Sheenagh Langdonhttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSheenagh Langdon2022-11-01 15:20:452022-11-01 15:20:50Demonisation of beef doesn’t have a leg to stand on
I always speak up for what is right. Again today I will speak up for what is right. The Climate Change Bill 2022 seeks to exploit fear based on fraudulent science to enshrine in legislation the subjugation of everyday Australians.
It’s time to vote against a world where hunger and poverty will increase by design as a means of control.
Transcript
So it has come to this, Madame President.
The globalists’ 50 year ‘long march through the institutions’ has come to this.
50 years of bribery, coercion and censorship of the few remaining honest scientists has come to this.
And 50 years of inciting hatred and violence against anyone who opposes the climate change agenda of ‘fear-based control’ has come to this.
Our scientists, crony corporations, political parties and mouthpiece media have failed Australia.
As a servant to the people of Queensland I have never failed to speak up for what is right and I will speak up for what is right again today.
The Climate Change Bill 2022 seeks to use fear based on fraudulent science to enshrine in legislation the ‘subjugation of everyday Australians’.
On many occasions now I have sought to alert Australians to the nightmare being planned for them.
Those many speeches, motions and bills have made little headway in mainstream media due to dodgy journalists protecting the interests of their advertisers and billionaire owners.
The public have been deceived into thinking climate change is a product of human activity and this bill is necessary to save Australia.
The truth is Australia will need to be saved from this bill.
This is not conjecture, look at the ‘net zero’ chaos overseas resulting from the scientific fraud underlying net zero. Here is just some of that.
Greening the world and growing food
According to the NASA Goddard Space Centre one quarter of the increase in carbon dioxide in the last 30 years has been absorbed into plant life, leading to an increase in forest cover.[i]
This is a demonstration of the fertilizer effect of CO2[ii].
Removing CO2 from the atmosphere will reduce the health of native forests and vegetation.
Reducing CO2 will reduce crop yields, remove food from the tables of the world’s hungry, and require the increased use of chemical fertilizers that are made from … natural gas.
An irony lost on the proponents of this bill.
The world is finding out, as Sri Lanka has found, the trade-off here is between plant food and starvation. It is that simple.
Forestation levels around the world have been rising since the 1980s because of the increase in CO2.[iii]
Let me be clear for the disinformation media. Our continent is gaining trees, meaning the density of vegetation is improving thanks to CO2.
We are losing extent – much of that chopped down as part of green energy construction – building wind turbines, solar plants, access roads and transmission easements to take unreliable energy from where these things are being built, to where the power is needed.
13,000 hectares of native vegetation is planned for destruction just in North Queensland alone[v].
I remember when greenies hugged trees, now they chop them down.
Forests are being chopped down for biomass, also known as wood chips.
Apparently wood chips are renewable energy now[vi], spruiked on the BBC back in 2018 when the Drax coal plant was converted to burn trees imported from America in the name of reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.[vii]
Burning trees produces more C02 than coal[viii], but warmers never let the facts get in the way of the feels.
One Nation has always supported preserving our old-growth forests because One Nation supports real environmentalism.
Ocean Health
According to NASA one half of the increase in carbon dioxide over the last 30 years has been absorbed in the ocean carbon cycle.[ix]
Carbon is sequestrated in silt and in biological sinks. Sea grasses, mangroves, tidal swamps and wetlands all sequester carbon and thrive.[x]
Providing habitat for fish breeding.
Carbon is also an ingredient in phytoplankton, the start of the marine food chain.
The more CO2 that is produced from all sources and then absorbed in the ocean carbon cycle, the more phytoplankton is produced, leading to an increase in marine life.
Increasing populations of fish support the continued harvesting of seafood as a cheap source of protein. Something oddly opposed over there in Greensland.
The marine carbon cycle also absorbs nitrogen and phosphates coming from natural and man-made sources.
Phytoplankton absorb these elements as part of their growth cycle, producing oxygen in the process. The less carbon dioxide available to be absorbed, the less oxygenation occurs and the less healthy our oceans become.
Coral is calcium carbonate CaCO3. Some of the carbon sequestrated in the ocean has helped coral growth, probably contributing to the record coral cover across the Great Barrier Reef announced just a few weeks ago.
That is an inconvenient truth if ever I heard one.
Greening the earth mitigates increasing temperatures[xi]
A new study reported on the NASA website shows increased vegetation during the current “Greening Earth period” – their words not mine – has a strong cooling effect on the land due to increased efficiency of water vapor transfer to the atmosphere.
Without this the world would be hotter.
Increasing CO2 – plant food – fertilizers our forests, increasing transpiration, leading to more water vapour transfer, which in turn cools the earth.
Increased temperature causes increased evaporation from the oceans and that water vapour transfer also cools the earth.[xii]
We have a beautiful, self-correcting ecosystem that has maintained the earth in a liveable temperature range for millennia.
This bill is based on self-interest, arrogance and hubris, risking a natural ecosystem that will protect us from any variability in atmospheric gasses.
And always has.
Renewable power is a fairy-tale.
Madame President wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could get all our energy from the ‘Sun and wind’ for free.
That is the extent of the thought process in many Green and Teal voters.
Missing the obvious problem – Solar panels, wind turbines, transmission lines through the middle of nowhere, battery backups and access roads are not free.
The direct loss of natural habitat from wind and solar is significantly greater than any other form of power.
Three megawatts of wind or solar generation is needed to replace one megawatt of coal, hydro or nuclear.
To explain that with an example, the NSW Government’s own webpage on wind power mentions their 850MW of wind turbines generate just 1941GW of power annually.[xiii]
850MW running 24/7, if it were a coal or nuclear plant of that sized, will generate 7440GW/h per annum. The actual wind turbine output of 1941GW/h represents just 26% of rated capacity. What a joke these things are.
Solar is worse.
Battery backup
The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) recently assessed the battery requirement for net zero grid stability at 60GW/h.[xiv]
Power going into a battery loses 20% in resistance, meaning 72GW/h of generation will be needed to produce 60GW/h of output.
Batteries cost about $1.5m per MW/h, meaning batteries for short term grid stability will require an investment in excess of $100bn every 10 years which is as long as they last.
This is just the start. Germany experienced an 8% reduction in output from wind and solar in the first half of 2021 owing to poor weather.[xv]
No battery can keep the lights on during a sustained period of bad weather, such as Australia has had these last two years.
Blackouts will be normal.
Nuclear is the only way to do net zero
Other countries who descended into renewable hell ahead of us are being forced to rethink to save their economies.
South Korea has given up and announced a move away from wind and solar to nuclear.[xvi]
Germany will extend their last three nuclear power plants until baseload power can be restored from gas.[xvii]
Last week the UK government announced a huge new 3200MW nuclear power plant[xviii].
Nuclear power plants across the world will grow 26% through to 2050.[xix]
Green energy Madame President is very well named, it has become glow in the dark green!
Australia can supply the world with reliable, safe coal for a lifetime, instead the world is going nuclear simply because wind and solar can’t supply reliable baseload power, and coal has been demonised.
Australia will be forced to make this same hard decision if the Climate Change Bill passes.
Insane power bills will destroy the Australia we know
Last week in the UK the household energy cap increased from $2160 to $6020. Just in one year. How can people afford that.[xx]
A glance at the graph of UK GDP shows citizens of the UK are less wealthy now than they were in 2007.[xxii]
The correlation of GDP stagnation with the retirement of cheap baseload power and the switch to wind and solar is undeniable.
German households are so desperate for heating, firewood is being horded and woodchips are back in commercial use.
Seriously, what’s next – candles?
Despite $250bn spent on solar and wind so far, and $250bn still to come, Germany is planning for blackouts next winter.
10% of German industry is threatened with closure and 40% are under financial pressure.[xxiii]
No wonder Prime Minister Albanese is holding a jobs summit concurrent with the Climate Change Bill.
Here is One Nation’s submission to the jobs summit.
Stop destroying cheap, reliable, coal power.
The mouthpiece media are blaming the war in Ukraine for the gas shortage in Europe, deliberating avoiding the real question-
Which is how did energy-independent nations lose their energy independence, and become reliant on Russian gas in the first place?[xxiv]
Wind and solar did that.
Is this empirical proof wind and solar are unable to sustain baseload power or is it stupidity in shutting down baseload power before replacements were built?
The answer is both.
With unrealistic and unnecessary timelines now embedded in the Climate Change Bill, Australia is about to walk the same path that has brought the rest of the world, especially the UK and Germany nothing but misery.
Cost
Wind and solar is only cost-effective to build and operate if the cost is offset with taxpayer subsidies.
Australian subsidies for wind and solar currently total $13bn every year.[xxv]
Reuters reported last week Australia will need about 40 times the total generation capacity of today’s national electricity market to achieve net zero.
This includes 1,900 GW of solar and 174 GW of wind.[xxvi]
Not megawatts, gigawatts. How is that even possible.
As a comparison Liddell coal plant is 2GW and at full capacity can supply 5% of our current energy needs.
Charging electric vehicles is a large part of this huge increase in power generation needed to reach net zero.
The $20bn cost of re-wiring the national energy grid to allow for the charging of electric cars[xxvii] dwarfs the national electricity market, which is only $11bn.[xxviii]
What will that do to power prices?
There is no costing in the Climate Change Bill because the costings are coming out at insane amounts of money.
I have an amendment to this bill standing in my name to introduce a cost benefit analysis for every government decision taken. Surely that is just prudent economic management.
Blackouts
Last week AEMO announced its latest 10-year outlook for the national electricity market, which warned of reliability “gaps” affecting New South Wales from 2025 and affecting Victoria, Queensland and South Australia from 2030.[xxix]
Gaps in this context means structural blackouts – not enough generation to meet demand.
We know today there will be catastrophic blackouts in 2025 and even worse blackouts in 2030.
What is the Government’s plan to stop the blackouts coming from coal plant closures?
There is no plan because the Climate Change Bill is not about increasing energy output, it is about forcing a reduction in energy consumption.
The Climate Change Bill is about control
The only way to achieve long term stability under net zero is to use smart meters to restrict energy use.
The South Australian Government has also announced the rollout-out of smart meters[xxxi]
Smart meters allow the energy operator to go in and turn off any appliance in your home that is connected to the fuse box.
Air conditioners, hot water service, one or all of your light and power circuits can be switched off.
This is not intended as an emergency measure, it will be normal lie under net zero.
Big Brother will reach into your home and decide for you what appliances you can use and when.
That is terrifying in what used to be a free country.
To the Greens and Teal supporters who voted on the basis of feelings not facts can I say this.
You have been deceived.
The experience from countries ahead of us on the net zero slippery slope has been the destruction of small and medium business, the decimation of the middle class and intrusive government control.
You will have less and the elites behind this scam will have more.
We a paying for our own enslavement.
It is time to vote against creating a world where native vegetation, crop yields, the marine environment – the entire biosphere is being damaged through reducing carbon dioxide.
It is time to vote against a world where hunger and poverty will increase by design as a means of control – neo serfdom.
Have some decency.
Vote no to the Climate Change Bill 2022.
We have one flag, we are one community, we are One Nation and we are proud carbon-based life forms.
https://img.youtube.com/vi/DLUJNnIsubE/0.jpg360480Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-09-08 10:11:512022-10-11 14:38:25So it’s come to this – Globalist push on Climate Change
Senator Roberts calls on the Senate to reject the Climate Change Bills 2022 due to the complete lack of cost-benefit analysis.
He says, “Carbon dioxide emissions reduction is the biggest change to Australian lives Parliament has ever considered.”
“Despite the target’s huge impact, absolutely nothing in the Climate Change Bill says how it will be achieved, what the cost to Australia will be or what measurable impact reducing Australia’s carbon dioxide production will have on global temperature.”
“Politicians don’t accept this kind of blank cheque and ignorant attitude to the flow-on effects of legislation in any other policy, and shouldn’t on energy.”
Emissions reduction policies are expected to significantly impact energy, transport and agriculture.
“Grids that have tried to rely on wind and solar to provide their needs have either been left in the dark or have skyrocketing energy prices. Instead of learning from international wind and solar disasters like Texas and Germany, Australian climate alarmists want us to follow their road to ruin.”
“Adding emissions reduction to the National Energy Objectives will compromise the existing objectives of price, quality, safety, reliability and security of supply of energy.”
“A government funded study has already sounded the alarm on the forced and premature uptake of electric vehicles, finding that uptake could increase electricity demand by 30-100% on Australia’s already struggling power grid.”
“Under an emissions target, taxpayer money will be spent telling farmers to lockup their land for carbon dioxide credits, essentially a scam plagued with integrity issues and currently under government review. Australia’s farmers can grow enough to feed and clothe the world, yet won’t be able to under this target.”
Senator Roberts’ submission to the Climate Change Bills inquiry outlines the lack of due diligence and ideological, rather than evidence based, attitudes that have driven climate policy.
“Not a single politician can say what specific measurable impact these emissions reduction policies will have on any aspect of climate or weather.” “Until the true, full costs of an emissions target are given to Australia, this Bill must not pass.”
https://i0.wp.com/www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/annie-spratt-iceberg-unsplash.jpg?fit=7764%2C5179&ssl=151797764Senator Malcolm Robertshttps://www.malcolmrobertsqld.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/One-Nation-Logo1-300x150.pngSenator Malcolm Roberts2022-08-31 09:33:582022-08-31 09:52:37Media Release: CLIMATE CHANGE BILL A ROAD TO RUIN
