This has seemed to make the Cult of Climastrology rather upset
Government to take ‘technology over taxation’ approach to climate change
Scott Morrison has described a report he may adopt a technology investment target to avoid signing up to a commitment of zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050 as speculation, but confirmed his government will take a “technology over taxation†approach to climate change.
On Tuesday, Morrison told reporters in Melbourne the report in the Australian was “very speculativeâ€, but said it was true that emissions reductions were achieved through technology, not “meetingsâ€.
The Australian suggested Morrison favoured a technology investment target as a way to help Australia resist an international push for a more explicit commitment to reduce emissions to net zero by mid-century at the next major UN climate summit in Glasgow in November. (snip)
At a press conference on Tuesday, Morrison reiterated that Australia would not make commitments without “having thoroughly looked at what is the impact on jobs … on electricity prices … [and] on rural and regional Australiaâ€.
Asked if an investment target would create tension with those who want a net zero emissions commitment, Morrison said “currently no one can tell me that going down that path won’t cost jobs, won’t put up your electricity pricesâ€. (snip)
“You want to get global emissions down? … You need technology that can be accessed and put in place, not just here in Australia, but all around the world. Meetings won’t achieve that, technology does. And I can tell you taxes won’t achieve it either.â€
See, not taxing and feeing people heavily, along with not implementing all sorts of government controls on people, private entities, the energy sector, and the economy make Warmists upset. For some reason they have allowed themselves to be convinced that the government taking lots of their own money and dictating their lives is a good thing.
Now, what if they could come up with technology that helps achieve the goals of the CoC in reducing “carbon pollution”? Better solar, better wind power, better batteries, and so forth. If we could replace coal, which I’ve never been a fan of, cheaply and without covering square miles of land with solar panels? If the cost of solar could not only be drastically reduced for individual homeowners, but its energy capture could be drastically increased? I’m not concerned with the CO2 output of things like coal and gas, but the actual pollutants they leave in the air and water.
But, again, Warmists do not like this approach, because it isn’t authoritarian government. They never seem to get that the negative parts of the policies they push will hit their own lives.
“They never seem to get that the negative parts of the policies they push will hit their own lives.”
Oh, they do, but they are certain that it will hit the “others”, (ones how have more money, cars, better house, better job than they do) harder and then every one will finally be equal(ly poor and in extreme poverty.
Our esteemed host wrote:
It seems to be an ever-more-common failure: people who think that they are just plain smarter than the rest of us also think that they need to run our lives for us.