‘Both sides' of the climate change debate? How bad we think it is, and how bad it really is

Over the past couple of weeks things have been happening on the climate change front but, unfortunately, little is changing in parliament, where the government’s direct action policy has continued to be an utter failure and a Queensland LNP MP suggested in his first speech in the House of Representatives that schools should teach both sides of the climate change debate in school – to prevent them being “brainwashed with extreme left or right ideologies”.

‘All efforts at the moment are assuming if
we reduce emissions by 45% by 2030 we
can limit warming to 1.5C. That might now
be rather too optimistic.’

Last week came news that BHP was going to spend US$400m over five years on a “climate investment program to develop technologies to reduce emissions from its own operations as well as those generated from the use of its resources”.

Its CEO, Andrew Mackenzie, stated in a speech in London, “Society’s combustion of fossil fuels and industrial processes like steelmaking and agriculture have released greenhouse gases at rates much faster than at any other time in the geological past.”

Read the story from The Guardian by Greg Jericho - “‘Both sides' of the climate change debate? How bad we think it is, and how bad it really is.”