Australia Has ‘Been At Net Zero For A Long Time’: Ian Plimer
Geologist Ian Plimer argues Australia is already at net zero because the nation’s wealth of vegetation sequesters more carbon dioxide than the output of the population.
“We’ve been at net zero for a long time because we’re a very, very big country with very few people, we’ve got a huge amount of grasslands and forests,” he told Sky News Australia.
“If we look at the amount of carbon dioxide that we emit every year in this country, it’s about 417 million tonnes.
“Those grasslands and forests suck up 940 million tonnes per annum, so we’re already there, and then when you put the continental shelf of Australia around it, and that’s only 2.5 million square kilometers, we actually sequester five times as much carbon dioxide as we emit.”
Mr. Plimer said Australia’s emissions situation wasn’t being recognized because it doesn’t “fit the narrative”.
“In this country, we do emit a lot of carbon dioxide per person, it’s about 20 tonnes per person per annum, and that’s because we do the heavy lifting for the rest of the world,” he said.
“If you do the sums, for our 7.6 million square kilometers in this country, we absorb more than we emit.”
According to the Department of Industry, Australia’s emissions in 2020 were 499 million tonnes, a 5 percent decrease in 2019.
Read more at Sky News
PSI Editor’s Note: Professor Ian Plimer will be interviewed on the Sky Dragon Slaying Show on TNT Radio Live this Saturday 7 pm-9 pm EST.
Trackback from your site.
Just Me
| #
Unfortunately, we live in an age were facts don’t matter and it doesn’t matter that facts don’t matter.
Australia like Canada will be sacrificed to the religion of climate change.
Reply
Tom Anderson
| #
Ian Plimer’s typically clear and admirable statement, like most skeptical effort to diminish the climate threat, does admit that CO2 is a problem. There are substantial data and extensive analysis, principally in physics, that this minor trace gas poses absolutely no problem. It is time to react more affirmatively and treat the CAGWH as routine, not atypical fake science.
As Wilson Cy recently noted on these pages about the negatives of scholarly employment cultivating never validated ideas and dogma, as compared to observing fact-based and mathematically confirmed scientific studies,
“Computer models have predicted increasing climate disasters due to human activities. They have been proven wrong or inaccurate time and time again, but ignored in fake science to preserve the illusion of computer “science”. A computer forecasting model is little more than a machine extrapolation from a set of assumptions about interacting variables with initial conditions. Since models never accurately specify reality, they are merely extrapolations of errors.”
I recommend two papers which over a decade ago eviscerated the CAGWH. One is by Gerlich, & Tscheuschner, “Falsification of the atmospheric CO2 greenhouse effects within the frame of physics. “ International J. of modern physics B, v. 23, No.3 (2009), 275-364., and a mopping up of the remainder in a riposte to alarmist criticism of Gerlich and Tscheuschner by Kramm, & Diugi, “Scrutinizing the atmospheric greenhouse effect and its climatic impact,” Natural Science, 17 Oct. 2011, v. 3, pp. 971-998. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ns.2011.32124.
The warming conjecture collapsed over 10 years ago scrutinized under the standard of a hard science – standard physical principles and especially the laws of thermodynamics. It would help to invest more time reading genuine scientific research like this, publicizing it, and expanding its reach.
Reply
VOWG
| #
The will never be anything such as nete zero as long as there is a living breathing human/mammal on the planet. Throw in the occasional volcano. The stupid is strong out there. Of course they constantly ignore the fact that CO2 is not a climate driver.
Reply
Chris*
| #
Australia is also surrounded by millions of square kilometres of oceans. The phytoplankton which produces 60% of the world’s oxygen also takes up any CO2 produced by bushfires.
Reply
Jerry Krause
| #
Hi Chris*,
You wrote: “The phytoplankton which produces 60% of the world’s oxygen also takes up any CO2 produced by bushfires.” Why did you stop with 60%; why not nearly 100% elemental oxygen??? I am not trying to be critical because I believe you are correct about the 60%; but I question where the other 40% of the free elemental oxygen came from when I am not aware of any other planets and their satellites of our solar system which appear to have much water or ANY LIVING phytoplankton. Venus has lots of carbon dioxide, a little atmospheric water but no known forms of life. Hopefully, you see my point without my needing to review more details of what we have learned via SCIENCE about our solar system.
Have a good day, Jerry
Reply
Chris*
| #
To be more concise, free oxygen only enters the atmosphere by photosynthesis. As you know our atmosphere is 78% N, 21% O which is non negotiable for life on Earth, 1% Argon and 1% made up of everything else, eg H, He, the noble gases, SO2, NOx , CO2, CH4, OH, etc .
The miracle is liquid water, which currently appears to exist only on Earth. All O in our atmosphere comes from the water molecule when photosynthesis takes place.
People assume only trees take up CO2, it’s also the weeds in your garden and your green growing lawn, the algae in the lake and the hundreds of acres of green growing wheat.
Humans only live on 12% of the Earths surface , 17% is uninhabited eg hot deserts, cold deserts, polar regions , high mountain ranges, uninhabited islands and the rest is oceans. These climate experts think they know every thing, they don’t even begin to try to get their heads around the biogeochemical reactions that support life. We are really just scratching the surface as to how our planet and the life it supports works. .
Reply
Chris*
| #
Oh! PS Jerry. There is no water on Venus, it’s too damn hot. Likewise they keep hoping to find water on Mars .
Mars’ atmosphere is 94.5% CO2, day time temperature 35C, night time temperature -80C. So much for CO2 holding heat, and any water would be solid ice.
Reply
MattH
| #
Hi Chris* .
A very lucid reply to Jerry ,thank you.
Does the term ‘biogeochemical’ include electrical?
Jerry set me some homework on electricity so I have been researching why the earth surface is negatively charged except under thunderstorms, the difference in behaviour and cause between positive lightning and negative lightning, and sprites.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sprite_(lightning)
Charles has briefly explained to us the essential electromagnetic functions in microbiology .
Cheers. Matt
Reply
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Matt,
An atom has a negative charge because the electrons surround the positive nucleus. The Earth has a negative charge because as water absorbs heat splits into hydroxyl and hydrogen ions. These ions combine with other water molecules to form a liquid crystal with a negatively charge shell containing hydroxyl ions surrounding hydronium ions. It is the energy absorbed by water that gives the Earth’s surface a negative charge.
Herb
MattH
| #
Hi Herb. Thank you for the comment. We were taught that negatively charged air off the ocean gave people a good mood years ago.
I have read that with heat and compression the inner earth is positively charged and exterior therefor negative.
As the bottom of thunder storms are negatively charged that repells the negative charge deeper into the earth to be displaced by positive charge.
Positive lightning can zap earth up to 25 miles away from thunderstorm. Top of storm to negative charged earth.
I just keep my mind open at this stage. Sprites and elves are curious. I have read that jetstreams spiral laterally which would give them an electrical co0mponent. Absorb everything. Believe nothing.
I am trying to find an understanding between corona mass ejections and weather.
Cheers Matt.
Herb Rose
| #
Hi Matt,
I’m not sure of the reasoning behind heat and pressure produce a separation of charges. If that were the case wouldn’t the greater mass of solids of the continents produce a more negative charge on the land than on the ocean?
I thought that lightning is where the electrons on the Earth’s surface flows up to the clouds not down to the Earth. The reason a lightning bolt strikes several locations is because once the air is ionized and can conduct electricity electrons from further away can arc directly to the ionized air avoiding the resistance of traveling in the ground.
Herb
MattH
| #
Hi Herb. A positively charged inner earth is one hypothesis I have read.
They say they do not understand what sprites are doing. What we are seeing is the connection between earth, lightning, sprites, the ionosphere and coronal mass ejections. (sun Activity generally) . In other words the earth ‘wired’ to the sun.
Absorb everything.(hypothesis) Believe nothing. At this stage. Everything is in search of equilibrium but chaos will not allow it.
How’s the garden?
I pluck the hearts out of my red cabbages and four or five hearts grow in place of the one heart. I pluck off a number of outer single leaves for soups and salads. I got three years growth out of one cabbage. Best source of vitamin K and like all reds, grapes, blueberries etc., polyphenols and natural quercetin, an ionophore.
Cheers Matt.
Herb Rosr
| #
Hi Matt,
Here’s a theory for you. As water absorbs heat it splits into ions that form liquid crystals with negatively charged outer shell.This negative charge is repelled by the surface of the Earth causing the water crystals to rise because of the negative charge on the surface. Since protons do not move this repelling causes the electrons under the cloud to become a positive charge.
When the crystals melt the stored electric energy neutralizes causing lightning between clouds. The electrons on the Earth surge back under the clouds causing lightning between the Earth and the clouds.
Its been a cold spring and summer up here (we’ve only had one heat wave (3 days over 90F)) so everything is a couple of weeks delayed. My cabbage are small, my winter squash plants are small, and the tomatoes and pepper plants are small. (The tomato seeds I got had Fusarium wilt so I don’t expect much from them. The beets, onions, potatoes, beans, and corn look ok but haven’t come in yet. I do have lots of zucchini (My neighbors see me coming with them and hide.
With gardening every ear you win with some things and lose with other things.
Herb
kaiwanshou
| #
Apparently, the planet is as green as ever, and the global temp is dropping, so where’s the panic? The panic is from those who made big $s on the Global Warming Futures, and their scam is being revealed by the planet itself!
Reply
Alcheminister
| #
I dunno about the global temp actually dropping, nor do I necessarily consider that a good thing, more stable (that is, if they’d stop messing around with the atmosphere), a bit more equal (say, warmer by the poles, cooler, wetter in certain dry areas, etc) and a bit hotter atmosphere would be great.
But some of that has actually been happening, apparently. For instance, here in South Africa, areas that are typically really dry and hot have had very good rain/
Reply
VOWG
| #
At some point in time temperatures will drop as the have off and on for millions of years. Everyone currently alive on this planet will be dead in 110 years and even those that replace us will not see an ice age.
Reply