Australia’s Debt Costs to Surge Without Effort to Reach Net Zero.
At least that's the claim. Surge is an emotive word and without support from the article.
In that the statement is that the interest on the debt could increase by 100 basis points, knowing full well that the bulk of the public won't know that means a whopping 1%.
Whoopy bloody doo, what a buch of financial wankers.
Then they go on to state that "if Australia was the ONLY developed country without such a goal ( net zero ), the interest could blow out by 3%.
For a start, Australia does have a net zero target so the whole article is based on nothing.
Net zero itself is a fanciful statement.
It's not about zero carbon dioxide emissions, we'll never eliminate carbon dioxide as it's not possible unless we kill every living thing and prevent it all decaying.
And it's not about carbon, because carbon is a solid so that dosen't hang about in the atmosphere.
No, making a net zero statement is a motherhood statement to appease the masses who think that 'something should be done', but when you ask them what should be done they reply 'action against climate change'.
When you ask them what action do you think should be taken? They have nothing other than ban fossil fuels and transition to green energy.
Green energy will not do the job, unless you happen to like living with third-world power stability. Regular blackouts, unreliable supplies, sometimes nothing for days at a time particularly in winter.
Yesterday I drove past a large wind farm. It was a windy day but all the blades were turned to not be wind affected and nothing was being generated.
I couldn't see all the turbines but at least 50 were not generating. Since it was a cloudy day the solar panels weren't working too well either so no green energy yesterday.
Lucky the gas-fired generation was still working.
OK, here's the ironic thing about all the agitation around climate change.
If the geo-engineering, which started 2,000 years ago, hadn't modified the climate we would have the civilisation we have today and wouldn't be able to complain about climate change. We'd be deep into an ice age. Funny isn't it.
Yahoo Finance - Business finance, stock market, quotes, news wrote:
A failure to respond to climate change will lead Australia’s debt costs to spiral, according to government planners.
Officials forecast the country’s cost of capital would increase by 100 basis points in an adverse climate-change scenario without its strategy to reach a net-zero emissions target, they wrote in an analysis paper published this month. If Australia was the only developed country without such a goal, the extra cost could jump as much as 300 basis points, they said.
Why did I make that statement above about net zero being a fanciful statement?
Well, it turns out that net zero just means that you have done something or paid someone to offset your carbon dioxide emissions, not that you have reduced them in any way.
Many companies plant trees as their off set, this is a form of carbon dioxide sequestration not emission reduction, and the only way that works is if the trees are harvested and the timber used for building or furniture.
If the forests are left alone the trees will die, fall over and decompose. This releases all the carbon dioxide stored in the wood.
No net zero there only pushing the carbon dioxide out to another generation.