Suddenly, with five minutes warning, Western Australia may be going it alone to meet Paris on behalf of Australia.
Not because an elected government decided that, but because of five people chosen by a state Minister. Who is in charge here? The West Australian EPA is a QUAGO (quasi-autonomous-and-governmental organisation) — paid by the government, but magically “independent” of it. They are annointed saints charged with protecting “the environment” but as far as I can tell, that does not include the dominant fauna nor the entire plant kingdom.
Paul Garvey, The Australian
Tens of billions of dollars in new resource projects will be at risk after Western Australia’s Environmental Protection Authority announced tough new measures around carbon dioxide emissions.
WA has only 10% of Australia’s population but generates more than a third of the national exports. Or it did. Watch this space…
The new regulations will affect planned projects such as Woodside Petroleum’s $US11 billion ($15.6bn) Scarborough gas project and its $US20.5bn Browse development, as well as existing projects such as the $US34bn Wheatstone LNG plant and the $US54bn Gorgon LNG plant.<\blockquote>
This will also affect Rio Tinto, BHP and Fortescue Metals as well.
Would you like unemployment with that?
Predictably Their Australian ABC promptly interviewed a green activist Piers Verstegen, Conservation Council [to say what the ABC would like to say, but it’s nicer if a guest says it].
He gets free advertising-time to say an “independent study” (that his team paid for) shows it will create 4,000 jobs out of thin air. If the ABC asked me, I’d point out that international studies (that I didn’t pay for) showed that for every new green job at least two jobs were destroyed … In Spain two jobs were lost, in the UK it was four, and in Italy — five. At best, if 4,000 green jobs are created then the we hope we only lose 8,000 jobs — it could be so much worse.
Verstegen has some plan to plant trees and manage forests to replace our $171b resources industry. Good luck with that. …
Not only will money and jobs be at risk, but it’s hard to see how cutting CO2 helps plants that benefit from it — which is all plants on Earth apart from fungus, holoparasites and the Venus Fly Trap.
WA is the driest state on the driest continent (apart from Antarctica on a technicality). WA is the definition of An Arid Region and arid regions of the world are 11% greener, mostly thanks to CO2. What’s the EPA protecting plants from — photosynthesis?
Power devolves from the people to the leftist bureaucrats:
Given that Western Australian emissions of CO2 will change global temperatures by 0.0 degrees C, saving no plants and stopping no droughts, this has got nothing to do with science or economics. If this is not political it’s witchcraft. …
Does it mean that all resource projects have to get EPA approval, so the EPA are de facto Kingmakers?
Read it all. Amazing what a bit of faulty modeling in the hands of political activists can lead to.