1 / 51

Why a carbon tax is not necessary

Why a carbon tax is not necessary. Natural Climate Change. What is the Truth?. Why is this issue important?. We want to show you * A Carbon tax will not reduce Global temperatures * It will actually increase emissions for 20 years

nayef
Download Presentation

Why a carbon tax is not necessary

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Why a carbon tax is not necessary Natural Climate Change What is the Truth?

  2. Why is this issue important? We want to show you * A Carbon tax will not reduce Global temperatures * It will actually increase emissions for 20 years * It is based on exaggerated and fraudulent science * It would assist a one world government being brought in * It will lessen our ability to reduce poverty and prevent millions of third world children starving But we think you should know the facts first so you can decide if you should support or oppose a carbon tax.

  3. What this debate is NOTabout It is not about Renewable energy – We agree we should work towards cost effective renewable energy.(quite separately from a carbon tax) It is not about Pollution – We agree we should work towards minimising toxic and life threatening pollutants in the environment.- (in fact CO2 is not a pollutant) It is not about saving the Planet – We agree we should give the planet much consideration.

  4. So is CO2 a pollutant? - NO! It is odourless, colourless and non toxic We all drink it in soft drinks and beer It is necessary for life (in simple terms photosynthesis converts CO2 into O2 and many forms of carbon in plants & these forms of carbon are the primary food of animals and humans) – Part of the life cycle designed by the one who made the universe.

  5. Is CO2 Plant Food? Here is what happens with more CO2 385 ppm 535 ppm 685 ppm 835 ppm

  6. Extra CO2 makes the earth greener with extra plant growth Higher Plant Growth per Extra CO2

  7. So what is the controversy? The Theory of Runaway Global Warming Some are concerned that adding more Greenhouse gases (GHG`s) like CO2 to our atmosphere will make the planet slightly warmer which will again produce more greenhouse gases (e.g. water vapour) which again makes the planet even warmer etc until the earths temperature becomes extremely hot.

  8. And what is the other view? That there is a limit to the greenhouse effect and once that limit is reached then adding further greenhouse gases does not make the planet any warmer. (In other words the earth has an in built temperature control system)

  9. Now to some facts to understand the Atmosphere and a carbon tax a little. Greenhouse gases are 1% of the Atmosphere. And they are • Water Vapour 95% • Carbon Dioxide 3.6 % • Methane & others 1.5% • Only 3.4% of the CO2 is human caused

  10. 1.5 % is caused by Australians (green area) The carbon tax will only reduce Australia`s CO2 by 6% (blue area) by 2050 So a 6% CO2 reduction in Australia will reduce greenhouse gases by a millionth - the equivalent of reducing a piece of string a kilometre long by one millimetre. Now zooming in on that small red section of Human caused CO2 emissions

  11. And how much will it cost you and me to reduce Greenhouse gases by one millionth? • In 2007 Kevin Rudd said it would cost $10 per person per year • But in 2008 Frontier Modelling said it would cost Australia • $50 Billion per year for 40 years ($2,000 Billion) • That’s $4,550 per taxpayer per year • Julia Gillard`s carbon tax plan will take till 2050 to reduce GHG`s by 6% when the carbon tax is $131 a tonne (six times the initial price) – at least $6,000 per household a year • And Everyone agrees that • will do nothing for the planet

  12. No one can say exactly, but a reasonable estimate would be 17 times a 6% CO2 reduction… or at least $100,000 per household per year So what will it cost us to reduce all of Australia`s emissions – The green amount

  13. And to put that amount of CO2 in context Every four months China alone increases its CO2 emissions by as much as Australia`s total amount So over 40 years we can add at least300more of these (red squares) while in the same 40 year period Australia reduces its emissions by the tiny blue amount

  14. Comparing carbon schemes No CO2 Tax $Billions better off & no job losses Abbotts costs Approx $85 Billion % CO2 increase Gillards cost ? (overseas permits alone) $650 Billion Year

  15. And is there a country which has been going in this direction ? Yes - Spain has been moving towards a renewable energy economy and now has 21% unemployment, whilst the real cost of power has risen 100%!

  16. So lets check Al Gore`s facts that he says supports this wonderful idea

  17. Al Gore says the Science is settled and 2,500 IPCC scientists agree CO2 causes climate change. Is this true? Not exactly – Of the 2,500 Scientists who have submitted papers to the IPCC, only 600 looked at the science involving CO2. Of that 600, only 308 were a part of the second review process.

  18. Of that 308, only 62 reviewed the last chapter which looked at what to attribute the cause of Climate change to. Of that 62 only 7 reviewers were independent; and Of the 7, 2 did not agree with the final statement saying they believed there was a 90% certainty CO2 caused climate change.

  19. So the major statement of the review saying what climate change can be attributed to.. was supported by just 5 independent scientists - a few less than 2,500 On the other hand there are over 31,000 independent US scientists who have signed a petition saying there is no conclusive evidence CO2 causes climate change. See www.petitionproject.org 5 independent scientists saying CO2 could be the cause 31,000 Scientists saying CO2 does not cause climate change

  20. What is the Earth’s normal temperature? Historical Evidence – The last 1,000 yrs

  21. Over the last 5,000 yrs there were three warm periods (green sections) where it was warmer than today and the Earth survived. Today’s Temp

  22. Conclusion : Climate change is natural, and warmer periods occur without human CO2 emissions being the cause.

  23. Evidence of the last 150 years From 1870 to 1915, fossil fuel use was fairly flat & temp went down From 1915 to 1940, Fossil fuel use was flat, & temp went up From 1940 to 1975, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went down From 1975 to 1998, Fossil fuel use went up, & temp went up The first 3 of those periods contradict the idea CO2 emissions makes the climate warmer

  24. Evidence of the last decade But since 1998 the global temperature has been static

  25. Conclusion: CO2 increases rarely correlate with the Earths temperature rising. Any correlation is therefore coincidental

  26. Evidence of Ocean Temperatures The recent trend is a cooling, the opposite to what is predicted.

  27. The Evidence of the Arctic Ice Cap 2007 was the year with the least Arctic ice (since satellite records began in 1979). There are anecdotal records of similar ice levels in the 1930`s and early 1900`s from ships …… nothing unusual

  28. Evidence of Sea Levels Renowned oceanographic expert Nils-Axel Mörner has studied sea level and its effects on coastal areas for some 45 years. He writes this summary of all the different sea level indicators. He can be reached at morner@pog.nu. EVALUATION OF RELIABILITY FOR DIFFERENT PROPOSED SEA LEVEL RATES Values of 0.0 mm/year (as suggested by observational facts) to a maximum of 0.7 mm/year seem probable. Values ranging from 1.3 to 3.4 mm/year are considered to be untenable overestimates. Values in the order of 1 mm/year represent minor centennial rises (and falls). This agrees with estimates of a possible sea level rise by year 2100 of 5 ±15 cm (Mörner 2004) and 10 ±10 cm (INQUA 2000), but differs significantly from the value proposed by IPCC of 37 ±19 cm (IPCC 2007).

  29. And looking at their Predictions on a bigger scale

  30. The Evidence of Verifiable Scientific Research Now for one really important piece of evidence... In 2007 a Hungarian scientist Dr Ferenc Miskolczi published a peer reviewed paper and it has not been refuted. He has also worked out new laws about the atmosphere. He has shown from both atmospheric recordings and by theory that the greenhouse effect is saturated and extra CO2 will not effect the Earths temperature. Fellow Hungarian Scientist and IPCC reviewer Dr Miklos Zagoni now champions his work.

  31. The end result is that he found the greenhouse effect is dominated by the amount of upward surface heat In other words Whatever heat Leaves the surface of the earth Two thirds goes into space And one third heats the atmosphere (the greenhouse effect) g = 0.333 And this value is the same for the earliest Atmospheric measurements as for the latest so the greenhouse effect is constant and not increasing (confirmed by NASA measurements). Earth`s surface

  32. In other words the Earth`s temperature is dominated by the amount of heat from the Sun But extra greenhouse gases like CO2 will not significantly change the Earth`s greenhouse effect.

  33. This figure of 0.33 for g (the Greenhouse effect) is backed up by two other scientists Kiehl and Ramanathan in their book Jeffrey Kiehl Victor Ramanathan

  34. And just to give you the full story, on the next page is the list of Scientists who have found the opposite results to Miskolczi and can demonstrate CO2 is going to cause the Earth to overheat and make the sea levels rise 6 metres or more.

  35. And now some of the Fraudulent Science Leading IPCC Scientists including Michael Mann have tried to show the Worlds temperatures did not have a warm period before 1450 AD. Mann produced a graph called the Hockey stick. It was used by the IPCC many times. Stephen McIntyre checked the data and verified the warm period. Mann`s graph is fraudulent. Michael Mann Stephen McIntyre

  36. NZ Climate records were “fudged” (Checked by the NZ climate science coalition) The Original (Raw) Temp data The “manipulated” data Note: the graph trend is flat But this one has a big temp rise to make us think there has been recent warming

  37. This graph found by Steve McIntyre shows the deleted part of the temperature data (in red) that IPCC scientist Phil Jones made the following comment about.(He deleted the red data and added different data to “hide the decline”) “I’ve just completed Mike’s Nature trickof adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years (ie from 1981 onwards) and from 1961 for Keith’s to hide the decline.”– Phil Jones Proxy temperatures sourced from tree rings

  38. Darwin`s Doctored Temperatures The red line (below) shows the (fraudulently?) adjusted temperature graph used by the IPCC turning a cooling graph into a warming graph This is Darwin`s (NT) raw Temp records without adjustments

  39. But back to the carbon tax Has anyone found what sort of price rises will occur in the first few years of a carbon tax? Yes household costs will be around $1000 per year higher While Power has already been going up (because of the renewable energy targets), it will increase 10% initially but much higher as the carbon price goes higher. Gas prices will be similar – 9% initially and higher as the carbon price increases.

  40. And in terms of Australia`s costs it will be $9 billion per year initially of which we have to pay $4 billion to overseas countries for carbon credits But remember this is for a carbon tax of $23 a tonne Which only reduces CO2 by 6% in 2050 when it is $131 a tonne That is when we are paying $57 Billion a year to overseas countries for permission to emit CO2

  41. Nobuo Tanaka, executive director of the International Energy agency has said that by 2030, to meet international emissions targets, a carbon price of $225 a tonne would be required. That’s 10 times higher than what Julia Gillard is starting the carbon price at. BUT…. Nobuo Tanaka

  42. And should reducing Carbon emissions become enforced by any laws It will lead to higher food prices world wide So more children in developing countries will starve as a consequence. Food riots in 2008

  43. Should reducing Carbon emissions become enforced by any international laws It will require a UN Green police force and they will not be answerable to Australian laws In other words we will be governed by an international bunch of non elected bureaucrats

  44. So you have some choices Ignore this issue and let someone else worry about it. 5 Years after the carbon tax begins

  45. Or play your part and maybe educate your contacts with this powerpoint The fight is not just against the carbon tax It is that scientific evidence has been ignored or falsified, It is that logical arguments have been ignored It is that international bodies will be allowed to dictate to us how our lives will be run

More Related