[LINK] Renewable energy 'simply WON'T WORK'
janet at hawtin.net.au
Mon Nov 24 18:15:10 AEDT 2014
Things which would be handy in a context where we are trying to adapt to a
dramatically smaller power consumption, local production, exploration of
new technologies, reskilling, making diffferent tools.
- TAFE facilities with actual equipment for new skills doing applied
research and experimentation.
(Loss of workshop equipment and courses)
- Open constructive dialogue on what things people are trying eg through
(Cuts to ABC, discourse restricted to personalities, divisive, win lose
Focus on lies make people despair of effectiveness of democracy and
possibly want a mechanism for removing a politician which could be used to
make it hard for anyone to do anything constructive?)
- Financial shift to new technologies
(breaking RET, carbon tax)
no proactive commitment to climate adaptation mitigation science, cuts
to CSIRO, cuts to Universities.
- Good water supply so that local agriculture can feed the community.
(If fracking with toxins and radioactive elements poisons the ground
water for all livestock and communities what is left? Mining is the only
thing possible? That would impact China's agriculture here. Not sure what
the mix of goals is there.
- Feeding ourselves
Sale of agriculture assets to China which will want to export food to
China which would not reduce our carbon footprint and reduce local food for
Price pressure on local farmers from supermarkets.)
- Farming without hi carbon inputs and which does not reduce
(China will use what methods?
Changes to GMO free areas in WA, Steve Marsh v GMO)
- Tasmanias forests
(Changes to community's ability to act in defence of natural assets)
- Pty Ltd and banking
Limited liability in a context where coal at the barrier reef and
fracking and end of fish
shutting down people sending money to family limiting capacity for
people to help each other
Is the reason there is such interest in war on islam due to there being
alternative ideas about responsibility in banking in islam?
Perhaps our local army could be doing constructive adaptive engineering
(Army in Iraq spending $600k per shot of USA ammunition, spending
billions on USA planes and submarines)
- Wesfarmers and other retailers of all the things we buy are running
the big miles with importing goods.
Could they reconfigure to do low energy local production? Does it mean
changes in scale and distribution?
They could be a part of a change in skills and technology and local
production but it would mean a shift in a model which has monolithic
momentum using lots of carbon?
- Ability to make law which helps us reconfigure.
(China FTA and USA TPP block govt from acting if it impacts profits)
- Aboriginal communities in WA
(Which cities towns communities do we think *are* sustainable?)
Does PLI represent a monetary barrier or tax on community capacity,
Can we do better?
Legal, educational, communication, technology natural assets we need to
adapt to climate issues are being deconstructed.
Our multicultural commitment to each other and culture, infrastructure for
being informed skilled and collaborative is being deconstructed.
The government represents money not AU
It would appear through the above actions that the money is not being
invested in taking the nation forward constructively
and in many cases is proactively breaking and removing the country's
community's tools for change.
Money is restricted to extraction and militarising.
Fracking is happening in other places so I have to assume that the pattern
is not special to AU but it is the AU stuff I can see.
We need a plan B? How does that happen?
More information about the Link