THE PSYCHOLOGIST : Greenies lose one in NSW

Greenies lose one in NSW

The Greenies really pushed this one. They had wins in various courts before this final loss. One argument that initially got some credit was that you had to consider emissions OVERSEAS. Emissions in other countries had to be considered by Australian courts. Apparently Australia must be held responsible for what other countries do if they burn coal sourced from Australia.

The conservative NSW government has been rather bold in giving this approval. Farmers are a traditional base of support for conservative parties and lots of farmers have joined the Greenie protests. Farmers don't like coal mines messing up their nice green landscapes either.

Coal and gas projects that could release more than 1 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases have been given the green light by the NSW government in the two years since a Land and Environment Court ruling, which upheld the government's Rocky Hill coal mine refusal in part because of climate impacts.

The billion tonnes of greenhouse emissions would be generated by third parties like overseas power plants burning the coal and gas produced over the life of six projects approved since February 2019. The 1 billion tonne figure is nearly double Australia's entire annual greenhouse gas output.

Activist group Lock the Gate Alliance say NSW's project approval agency, the Independent Planning Commission, has been compromised by changes that were imposed by Planning Minister Rob Stokes after the Court rejected the Rocky Hill proposal.

Following that ruling, Mr Stokes issued a statement of expectations in May last year. It followed the commission imposing extra conditions on the Wambo coal mine, and rejecting a proposed coal mine in the Bylong Valley.

Mr Stokes' statement of expectations said the commission should make final determinations within 12 weeks of receiving a project for assessment, and that one of its guiding principles is to adhere to government policy when assessing proposals.

In the Rocky Hill case the Land and Environment Court found scope 3 emissions must be considered - that is greenhouse gases generated when third parties, such as power stations, burn gas or coal for energy.

Lock the Gate NSW spokesperson Georgina Woods said after the commission rejected the Bylong coal project Mr Stokes "kneecapped" the authority. Since then, the IPC had "failed in its obligation" under planning laws to consider scope 3 emissions in its approval of four coal projects and the Narrabri coal seam gas project, she said.

"Long-standing regulation stipulates that the consent authority, in this case the IPC, must consider whether a project should come with conditions that ensure greenhouse gas emissions - including downstream or scope 3 emissions - are minimised to the greatest extent practicable," Ms Woods said.

Mr Stokes said the IPC was reformed following an "extensive review" by the NSW Productivity Commission, and that it was required to consider scope 3 emissions impacts. He accused Lock the Gate of "only telling one side of the story".

"All environmental impacts of projects including greenhouse gas emissions both here and abroad must be considered by the IPC in making a decision," Mr Stokes said. "The IPC [recently] approved more than $1.5 billion in renewable energy projects."

Local farmers last week lodged a legal challenge to the commission's approval of the Narrabri gas project in north-west NSW. The Mullaley Gas and Pipeline Accord, represented by the Environmental Defenders Office, will argue in the NSW Land and Environment Court the IPC wrongly found that it could not address scope 3 emissions from the gasfield.

'Rural hardship': Farmers take Narrabri CSG approval to court

There are three coal projects under consideration by the IPC which would create an additional 450 million tonnes of carbon emissions over the course of their life.

Lock the Gate said communities impacted by resources projects must be permitted to lodge merits appeals in the the Land and Environment Court.

A merits review is when a third party can reconsider the evidence presented to, and final decision of, an authority like the IPC. Under current laws merits appeal rights are revoked when the Planning Minister directs the IPC to hold a public hearing.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/a-billion-tonnes-in-mining-emissions-approved-despite-landmark-case-20201230-p56qu6.html

No comments:

Background

The essence of conservatism is caution. The essence of Leftism is anger

This blog is written solely by John Ray, who has a Ph.D. degree in psychology and 200+ papers published in the academic journals of the social sciences. It does occasionally comment on issues in psychology but is mainly aimed at giving a conservative psychologist's view on a broad range of topics. There are very few conservative psychologists.

The blog originated in Australia and many (but not most) posts discuss Australian matters. Australians have an unusually good awareness of events outside their own country. Australian newspapers feature news from Britain and the USA not as an afterthought but as a major part of their coverage. So Australians do tend to have a truly Western heart, which is the reason behind the old name for this blog. So events in Australia, Britain and the USA all feature frequently here, plus occasional coverage of other places, particularly Israel.

A primer in American politics for non-Americans:

SCOTUS is the Supreme Court of the United States, the highest court in the land

The "GOP" stands for "Grand Old Party" and refers to the Republican party. The GOP is at present center/Right, while the Democrats have been undergoing a steady drift Leftwards and now have policies similar to mainstream European Leftist parties.

The ideological identity of both parties has however been very fluid -- almost reversing itself over time. In the mid 19th century, the GOP was the party of big government and concern for minorities while the Democrats advertised themselves as "The party of the white man" -- an orientation that lasted into the mid 20th century in the South. The Democrats are still obsessed with race but have now flipped into support for discrimination AGAINST whites.

Was Pope Urban VIII the first Warmist? Below we see him refusing to look through Galileo's telescope. People tend to refuse to consider evidence— if what they might discover contradicts what they believe.

Global warming

Calibrated in whole degrees. Larger graph here

Climate scientist Lennart Bengtsson said. “The warming we have had the last 100 years is so small that if we didn’t have meteorologists and climatologists to measure it we wouldn’t have noticed it at all.”

The term "Fascism" is mostly used by the Left as a brainless term of abuse. But when they do make a serious attempt to define it, they produce very complex and elaborate definitions -- e.g. here and here. In fact, Fascism is simply extreme socialism plus nationalism. But great gyrations are needed to avoid mentioning the first part of that recipe, of course.

Two examples of Leftist racism below (much more here and here):

Beatrice Webb, a founder of the London School of Economics and the Fabian Society, and married to a Labour MP, mused in 1922 on whether when English children were "dying from lack of milk", one should extend "the charitable impulse" to Russian and Chinese children who, if saved this year, might anyway die next. Besides, she continued, there was "the larger question of whether those races are desirable inhabitants" and "obviously" one wouldn't "spend one's available income" on "a Central African negro".

Hugh Dalton, offered the Colonial Office during Attlee's 1945-51 Labour government, turned it down because "I had a horrid vision of pullulating, poverty stricken, diseased nigger communities, for whom one can do nothing in the short run and who, the more one tries to help them, are querulous and ungrateful."

Defensible and indefensible usages of the term "racism"

The book, The authoritarian personality, authored by T.W. Adorno et al. in 1950, has been massively popular among psychologists. It claims that a set of ideas that were popular in the "Progressive"-dominated America of the prewar era were "authoritarian". Leftist regimes always are authoritarian so that claim was not a big problem. What was quite amazing however is that Adorno et al. identified such ideas as "conservative". They were in fact simply popular ideas of the day but ones that had been most heavily promoted by the Left right up until the then-recent WWII. See here for details of prewar "Progressive" thinking.

R.I.P. Augusto Pinochet. Pinochet deposed a law-defying Marxist President at the express and desperate invitation of the Chilean parliament. He pioneered the free-market reforms which Reagan and Thatcher later unleashed to world-changing effect. That he used far-Leftist methods to suppress far-Leftist violence is reasonable if not ideal. The Leftist view that they should have a monopoly of violence and that others should follow the law is a total absurdity which shows only that their hate overcomes their reason

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a war criminal. Both British and American codebreakers had cracked the Japanese naval code so FDR knew what was coming at Pearl Harbor. But for his own political reasons he warned no-one there. So responsibility for the civilian and military deaths at Pearl Harbor lies with FDR as well as with the Japanese. The huge firepower available at Pearl Harbor, both aboard ship and on land, could have largely neutered the attack. Can you imagine 8 battleships and various lesser craft firing all their AA batteries as the Japanese came in? The Japanese naval airforce would have been annihilated and the war would have been over before it began.

FDR prolonged the Depression. He certainly didn't cure it.

WWII did NOT end the Great Depression. It just concealed it. It in fact made living standards worse

Joe McCarthy was eventually proved right after the fall of the Soviet Union. To accuse anyone of McCarthyism is to accuse them of accuracy!

The KKK was intimately associated with the Democratic party. They ATTACKED Republicans!

People who mention differences in black vs. white IQ are these days almost universally howled down and subjected to the most extreme abuse. I am a psychometrician, however, so I feel obliged to defend the scientific truth of the matter:

The average African adult has about the same IQ as an average white 11-year-old and African Americans (who are partly white in ancestry) average out at a mental age of 14. The American Psychological Association is generally Left-leaning but it is the world's most prestigious body of academic psychologists. And even they have had to concede that sort of gap (one SD) in black vs. white average IQ. 11-year olds can do a lot of things but they also have their limits and there are times when such limits need to be allowed for.

America's uncivil war was caused by trade protectionism. The slavery issue was just camouflage, as Abraham Lincoln himself admitted. See also here

Did William Zantzinger kill poor Hattie Carroll?

Did Bismarck predict where WWI would start or was it just a "free" translation by Churchill?

Leftist psychologists have an amusingly simplistic conception of military organizations and military men. They seem to base it on occasions they have seen troops marching together on parade rather than any real knowledge of military men and the military life. They think that military men are "rigid" -- automatons who are unable to adjust to new challenges or think for themselves. What is incomprehensible to them is that being kadaver gehorsam (to use the extreme Prussian term for following orders) actually requires great flexibility -- enough flexibility to put your own ideas and wishes aside and do something very difficult. Ask any soldier if all commands are easy to obey.

A good article on Leftist hate

The real history of social Darwinism

Some personal memoirs

Memoir highlights

THE PSYCHOLOGIST

Greenies lose one in NSW

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive