A Country Without GA?
Thread Starter
A Country Without GA?
Put it down to old age and pessimism if you like but I fail to see any evidence that the Government and public service have any interest at all in fostering a thriving GA and recreational Aviation sector and I am beginning to think that the reverse is true - we are going to be sacrificed on the climate change altar to placate The Greens and Saint Greta and their followers. The policy document that will form the basis of our destruction is The White Paper.
I apologize for my bad taste and crudity and though nothing can compare with that atrocity, I suspect that the General Aviation equivalent of The Wannsee Conference has already occurred. As a child who lost all but two relatives in the holocaust, I am overly sensitive to choices of words especially what has NOT been said and exclusionary circumlocutions. The objective of the white paper and its terms of reference fill me with dread.
To explain, "maximise the aviation sector's contribution to achieving net zero carbon emissions, including ....." sounds exactly the same as " maximise the refugee sector's contribution to achieving food security" and you know what that meant. NOWHERE in the Objective or terms of reference of the white paper is there any reference to fostering Investment, jobs and the associated economic growth in a GA sector, let alone a recreational aviation sector. Nowhere. You cannot construe "support and regenerate" to mean "investment, jobs and growth either, because that initiative is already constrained by the requirement: "uptake and manufacturing of new, more efficient, transport technologies.".
I have kept these dark thoughts to myself until two things happened today; The first: the RAA CEO opined on delays in achieving a 760 KG MTOW: "
Folks ,CASA knows whats coming and is back pedaling.
Then there is the DAS latest Pollyanna press release that is so laced with qualifiers as to be meaningless, eg.: " That philosophy commits us to approaching our regulatory functions consultatively and collaboratively while taking into account relevant considerations such as cost.
It also requires us to communicate meaningfully with stakeholders, build trust and respect and fairly balance the need for consistency with flexibility. Here is a hint Pip: "YOU CANNOT DO THIS WHILE THREATENING TO CHARGE SOMEONE WITH A FELONY OR CAUSING THEIR BUSINESS TO HEMORRHAGE CASH.
Then there is Ben Morgans latest video on his interaction with he Department over the inputs to the White Paper. Industry seems to get perfunctory consideration. Ben, thats because the decision to cut GA down has already been taken. The folk in the Department already know.
As for Avmed and its reform, same thing. They will not budge in any useful way.
What we will get in the white paper is happy talk about drones while at the same time strangling whats left of GA.
Below is a link to the governments real strategy for GA - to keep the greens happy. Read it and weep:
https://stay-grounded.org/report-degrowth-of-aviation/
I apologize for my bad taste and crudity and though nothing can compare with that atrocity, I suspect that the General Aviation equivalent of The Wannsee Conference has already occurred. As a child who lost all but two relatives in the holocaust, I am overly sensitive to choices of words especially what has NOT been said and exclusionary circumlocutions. The objective of the white paper and its terms of reference fill me with dread.
To explain, "maximise the aviation sector's contribution to achieving net zero carbon emissions, including ....." sounds exactly the same as " maximise the refugee sector's contribution to achieving food security" and you know what that meant. NOWHERE in the Objective or terms of reference of the white paper is there any reference to fostering Investment, jobs and the associated economic growth in a GA sector, let alone a recreational aviation sector. Nowhere. You cannot construe "support and regenerate" to mean "investment, jobs and growth either, because that initiative is already constrained by the requirement: "uptake and manufacturing of new, more efficient, transport technologies.".
I have kept these dark thoughts to myself until two things happened today; The first: the RAA CEO opined on delays in achieving a 760 KG MTOW: "
We continue to work with CASA to push through our application to operate aircraft with an MTOW of 760 kgs. I will say that it is quite frustrating that our application was submitted in August last year, and here we are in April without an approval as yet. I wish to assure you all that I have escalated this matter to senior levels within CASA to get this sorted. Whilst I acknowledge that there are some tricky regulatory hurdles to navigate, at the end of the day this is for an additional 160 kgs of take-off weight, so it really shouldn’t be this hard. We’ll keep you all updated when things progress.
Then there is the DAS latest Pollyanna press release that is so laced with qualifiers as to be meaningless, eg.: " That philosophy commits us to approaching our regulatory functions consultatively and collaboratively while taking into account relevant considerations such as cost.
It also requires us to communicate meaningfully with stakeholders, build trust and respect and fairly balance the need for consistency with flexibility. Here is a hint Pip: "YOU CANNOT DO THIS WHILE THREATENING TO CHARGE SOMEONE WITH A FELONY OR CAUSING THEIR BUSINESS TO HEMORRHAGE CASH.
Then there is Ben Morgans latest video on his interaction with he Department over the inputs to the White Paper. Industry seems to get perfunctory consideration. Ben, thats because the decision to cut GA down has already been taken. The folk in the Department already know.
As for Avmed and its reform, same thing. They will not budge in any useful way.
What we will get in the white paper is happy talk about drones while at the same time strangling whats left of GA.
Below is a link to the governments real strategy for GA - to keep the greens happy. Read it and weep:
https://stay-grounded.org/report-degrowth-of-aviation/
The following users liked this post:
Top Answer
7th Apr 2023, 11:32
Thread Starter
Dr Dre, I'm sorry for you because you have swallowed a utopian world vision that has no basis in physical reality, let alone logic and ethics, let alone philosophy and natural philosophy (Physics, Chemistry). Translation: Your world vision can't and won't happen. Furthermore, there is an even chance unless the Greens are stopped in their tracks worldwide, that they are going to be responsible for the deaths of two hundred million plus people, and that is NOW, not ten or twenty years down the track. That final charge by the way, is collateral damage from your own stupidity; I'm leaving out the possibility of war and genocide.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
Not many votes in G&A I'm afraid...............
Remember that Albanese was the minister in charge who allowed developers to turn the airports into concrete jungles. He is mates with the big end of town which is mutually exclusive with GA tenants.
Personally I think that allowing RAAus to further encroach into GA territory and white ant flying schools is another nail in the coffin. If it wasn't for the fee-help gravy train there would be few left.
As for the white paper, well Tony Abbotts lot had one that was very promising and came to absolutely nothing so I wouldn't pay too much attention to that.
Personally I think that allowing RAAus to further encroach into GA territory and white ant flying schools is another nail in the coffin. If it wasn't for the fee-help gravy train there would be few left.
As for the white paper, well Tony Abbotts lot had one that was very promising and came to absolutely nothing so I wouldn't pay too much attention to that.
Between the lack of votes, and the push to be rid of internal combustion engines, and the aging GA fleet with its increasing accident rate, and the tempting land grab at airports, GA is indeed doomed. Private flying is already seen as socially unacceptable in some circles - not quite as bad as smoking, but give the Greens time, and what they don't do to kill it will be done by CASA.
Even the ultra-light/recreational flying movement will decline. Drones and surface transport are the future.
Aeromedical and the better-funded commercial pilot training establishments will survive for a while yet.
Even the ultra-light/recreational flying movement will decline. Drones and surface transport are the future.
Aeromedical and the better-funded commercial pilot training establishments will survive for a while yet.
Do you mean This White Paper ? https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/in...on-white-paper
GA as we know it has to end sometime; we can't keep driving around in 70's era piston aircraft forever, and as much as we value our memories and the good return we can make today out of owning those aircraft if your engineering is under control, technology and economics alone will mean the creation of new generations of aviation solutions to land-based problems, as was the case in any previous iteration.
Does it mean less flying hours for pilots ? Yes, drones will carry freight, and pax GA aircraft will have more seats.
Does it mean less work for engineers ? Yes, equipment is more reliable; ask avionics techs about that.
Does it mean less money for aircraft owners ? Do you mean drone owners
? Maybe. Maybe returns on the dollar will go up for owners of actual new-gen aircraft.
Will I be able to buy AVGAS drums for the boat ? What's AVGAS ?
Why doesn't China, People's Republic of, fall apart because it has no GA ? They've found other ways to get things done and some of those will find a home in Australia despite our low population/distances ratios.
Will commercial interests support GA at the expense of ignoring new technologies and opportunities ? As much chance as a new car manufacturer starting up and making new 70's era Ford Falcon's, instead of a range of new battery powered 4 or 5 seat city cars.
For decades it's been a good run, but there are legit reasons for it to turn into something else.
It's easy to look at Greta Thunberg and any of the dope smoke-marinated Greens and think they are to blame for this (why do 'progressives' always look like freak show employees ??), but they are passengers in this move as much as (most) pilots are.
I'd suggest that the real movers in this change will be the owners of the intended replacement technology and not the social progressives who coincidentally seem to have obtained unlimited funding from somewhere.
GA as we know it has to end sometime; we can't keep driving around in 70's era piston aircraft forever, and as much as we value our memories and the good return we can make today out of owning those aircraft if your engineering is under control, technology and economics alone will mean the creation of new generations of aviation solutions to land-based problems, as was the case in any previous iteration.
Does it mean less flying hours for pilots ? Yes, drones will carry freight, and pax GA aircraft will have more seats.
Does it mean less work for engineers ? Yes, equipment is more reliable; ask avionics techs about that.
Does it mean less money for aircraft owners ? Do you mean drone owners
? Maybe. Maybe returns on the dollar will go up for owners of actual new-gen aircraft.Will I be able to buy AVGAS drums for the boat ? What's AVGAS ?
Why doesn't China, People's Republic of, fall apart because it has no GA ? They've found other ways to get things done and some of those will find a home in Australia despite our low population/distances ratios.
Will commercial interests support GA at the expense of ignoring new technologies and opportunities ? As much chance as a new car manufacturer starting up and making new 70's era Ford Falcon's, instead of a range of new battery powered 4 or 5 seat city cars.
For decades it's been a good run, but there are legit reasons for it to turn into something else.
It's easy to look at Greta Thunberg and any of the dope smoke-marinated Greens and think they are to blame for this (why do 'progressives' always look like freak show employees ??), but they are passengers in this move as much as (most) pilots are.
I'd suggest that the real movers in this change will be the owners of the intended replacement technology and not the social progressives who coincidentally seem to have obtained unlimited funding from somewhere.
Last edited by The Wawa Zone; 7th Apr 2023 at 06:22.
A country with out GA is a country that has lost billions in infrastructure, business opportunities and employment for all the required
ops for that,. Training,, ChaRter, the Station outback utes, Maintenance airfield fuel etc, etc cf the US of A
Thanks to an unaccountable bloated corporatised bureaucracy CAsA it has cost the nation dearly.
The Lucky Country. Not with Aviation.
CAsA is a disgusting national embarrassment.
ops for that,. Training,, ChaRter, the Station outback utes, Maintenance airfield fuel etc, etc cf the US of A
Thanks to an unaccountable bloated corporatised bureaucracy CAsA it has cost the nation dearly.
The Lucky Country. Not with Aviation.
CAsA is a disgusting national embarrassment.
GA won’t end, but it will decease to a smaller size. It’s pretty much inevitable and not due to being regulated out of existence, it’ll be because the public (the market) aren’t as interested anymore.
From a private pilot perspective it’s been a changed environment over the last 20 years with the growth of cheap air travel. Thought of hiring a 172 and going for a weekend jolly with mates doesn’t really compare to a holiday in Bali for a cheaper price. There’s no exciting new tech to deal with GA aircraft still running off 70s era technology, when everyone has a device of almost unlimited computing power in their pocket.
You deride “climate activists”, but it’s undeniable the younger generations are more concerned about climate change and are attracted the latest tech, battery and electric powered craft. If GA businesses were smart they’d change their marketing to appeal to the changing market and invest in development of better electric aircraft.
Yet, as the first post shows, GA is dominated by those with a 50s mindset who just want to lecture everyone younger how stupid they are. Looking at some GA flying clubs it’s dominated with those types. Why would the new generation, the people existing GA operators have to appeal to to stay in business, have any desire to spend their hard earned money in their kind of environment? GA will wither on the vine in that case.
The old adage is always correct. Adapt, or perish.
From a private pilot perspective it’s been a changed environment over the last 20 years with the growth of cheap air travel. Thought of hiring a 172 and going for a weekend jolly with mates doesn’t really compare to a holiday in Bali for a cheaper price. There’s no exciting new tech to deal with GA aircraft still running off 70s era technology, when everyone has a device of almost unlimited computing power in their pocket.
You deride “climate activists”, but it’s undeniable the younger generations are more concerned about climate change and are attracted the latest tech, battery and electric powered craft. If GA businesses were smart they’d change their marketing to appeal to the changing market and invest in development of better electric aircraft.
Yet, as the first post shows, GA is dominated by those with a 50s mindset who just want to lecture everyone younger how stupid they are. Looking at some GA flying clubs it’s dominated with those types. Why would the new generation, the people existing GA operators have to appeal to to stay in business, have any desire to spend their hard earned money in their kind of environment? GA will wither on the vine in that case.
The old adage is always correct. Adapt, or perish.
Last edited by dr dre; 7th Apr 2023 at 09:07.
The following users liked this post:
Aero clubs will play a smaller role, we have seen a large chunk either fall over, or go social only in the last decade, largely due financial, and staffing challenges. I see Rockhampton Aero Club has now axed the flight training part due to issues getting a HOFO, an issue that is widespread among smaller operators.
Not many left that offer full scale training departments. RVAC, Redcliffe, WA, PAC, NQAC. Some of those still offer the best training experience in my book, some of the best people I fly with to this day have all come from those clubs.
Not many left that offer full scale training departments. RVAC, Redcliffe, WA, PAC, NQAC. Some of those still offer the best training experience in my book, some of the best people I fly with to this day have all come from those clubs.
GA is dominated by those with a 50s mindset who just want to lecture everyone younger how stupid they are.
The following 4 users liked this post by tossbag:
100%, they are as dumb as dog****, the younger generation that is. Climate change will be finished as the 'in' protest thing as soon as they realise there's no mobile phones, therefore tik tok, facebook, insta etc without fossil fuels. Climate has been changing for 1000's of years right? Electric aircraft are manufactured with zero carbon right? And there's no emissions right? Oh, but there's batteries....... It's not an exaggeration anymore to say, western society is finished.
Dude, explain to me how electric aviation is emission free, explain to me how you're going to manufacture ANYTHING without fossil fuels. Explain to me how insignificant clowns on planet Earth are going to 'change the climate.' The 'younger generation' cannot define what a woman is, they say 'believe the science' except when it's regarding gender. The state of GA is a small pimple on the arse of what really matters now. It's quite possible our young will be heading off to war in the couple of years, it probably won't be the ones who can't figure out what a woman is on the frontline, you know, the real frontline not the one politicians invented with a bull**** crisis.
Newsflash, the younger generation are flying, they don't need old fools to show them the wonders of flight or introduce them to it.
Newsflash, the younger generation are flying, they don't need old fools to show them the wonders of flight or introduce them to it.
The following 4 users liked this post by tossbag:
The following users liked this post:
Explain to me how electric aviation is emission free?
Explain to me how you're going to manufacture anything without fossil fuels? You'll have the electricity alright, but that's useless without raw materials.
I'm glad you picked the most important points in the post to address. And I seriously doubt they do.
Explain to me how you're going to manufacture anything without fossil fuels? You'll have the electricity alright, but that's useless without raw materials.
And most understand the difference between gender and sex.
The following users liked this post:
Explain to me how electric aviation is emission free?
Explain to me how you're going to manufacture anything without fossil fuels? You'll have the electricity alright, but that's useless without raw materials.
I'm glad you picked the most important points in the post to address. And I seriously doubt they do.
Explain to me how you're going to manufacture anything without fossil fuels? You'll have the electricity alright, but that's useless without raw materials.
I'm glad you picked the most important points in the post to address. And I seriously doubt they do.
There. A response equal to your posts.
The following users liked this post:
Thread Starter
Dr Dre, I'm sorry for you because you have swallowed a utopian world vision that has no basis in physical reality, let alone logic and ethics, let alone philosophy and natural philosophy (Physics, Chemistry). Translation: Your world vision can't and won't happen. Furthermore, there is an even chance unless the Greens are stopped in their tracks worldwide, that they are going to be responsible for the deaths of two hundred million plus people, and that is NOW, not ten or twenty years down the track. That final charge by the way, is collateral damage from your own stupidity; I'm leaving out the possibility of war and genocide.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
Last edited by Sunfish; 7th Apr 2023 at 11:50.
The following 17 users liked this post by Sunfish:
short flights long nights
Dr Dre, I'm sorry for you because you have swallowed a utopian world vision that has no basis in physical reality, let alone logic and ethics, let alone philosophy and natural philosophy (Physics, Chemistry). Translation: Your world vision can't and won't happen. Furthermore, there is an even chance unless the Greens are stopped in their tracks worldwide, that they are going to be responsible for the deaths of two hundred million plus people, and that is NOW, not ten or twenty years down the track. That final charge by the way, is collateral damage from your own stupidity; I'm leaving out the possibility of war and genocide.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
We start with climate science, which contains the massive conceit that the changes wrought by human activity actually matter on a planetary scale compared to the tectonic shifts in climate that happen anyway on a regular basis. We are one meteor away from another great extinction. One volcanic eruption from a new ice age. AGainst the forces of nature, our activities are but a tiny pin prick. Whatever we do, short of turning the planet into irradiated magma, will appear as a tiny, possibly undetectable, blip in the fossil record a million years from now.
You next conceit is that what happens in Australia, and Europe and America possibly matters in a world of Seven plus billion people mostly living a subsistence existence in Africa and Asia. The bulk of those folk want a standard of living that mirrors the better parts of ours. You think they will forgo electricity, petrochemicals, iron, steel and cement and sacrifice the possibility of an improved standard of living for their children just to limit global warming? Think again. You think you can make them? Think again.
The latter begs the question about exactly who is supposed to make the sacrifices to lifestyle necessary to achieve your utopian dream. The answer is of course: "Not you". You imagine a future where you and like minded souls walk to work or ride electric scooters around Balmain or Northcote - you live a privileged "sustainable" lifestyle based on levels of infrastructure that are unattainable for the rest of Australia let alone in Asia and Africa. So we folk in regional Australia are expected to do without IC engine cars, gas and oil for energy, watch our productive farmland being "reclaimed into national parks for your enjoyment. Meanwhile you expect us to provide you with a never ending stream of (organic) vegetarian food and fibre. Think again. To put that another way, we don't have (renewable) electric powered combine harvesters or tractors that would enable us to grow more than a fraction of what we grow now for the world.
That's where the two hundred million dead are going to arise from right NOW. Your stupid policies of limiting investment in coal, oil and gas are already driving up prices of food and that means the poorest of us are going to starve to death right NOW. Look at what happened in Sri Lanka when the idiot (green) government banned the importation of artificial fertiliser - their food and export crops collapsed and with it their already shaky economy.
But wait there is more. Our civilisation is built on electricity, steel, cement and artificial fertilisers primarily produced from natural gas (Ammonia synthesis). You got any meaningful way to produce those products at the mega levels we need every day without burning fossil fuels? Nope.
But! But! Technology you say. Well lets start by increasing copper mining and smelting by some 7000% to produce enough for a grid and electric vehicles - care to think what that will do to the environment? Have you done the calculations on what would be required in infrastructure terms to replace say half the IC engine vehicles in Australia, let alone the rest of the world? Didnt think so. But "renewables" - dont make me laugh, and we are going to build "wind farms in Bass Straight"? Ever been there? Not going to happen. i wont even dwell on the current engineering problems associated with delivering a small insignificant fraction of what you want. And for good measure GA and RAA exists because it is the lowest cost form of time sensitive transport for Australia and it even has a place in Europe and America whose terrestrial transport infrastrcture is already way better than ours but that is not going to stop you and Gretas acolytes in Canberra.
You have been sold an impossible dream, unfortunately what you will get unless people come to their senses, is what is possible and you may not like it - shivering, cold, hungry and jobless as you will be.
The following 3 users liked this post by SOPS:
Boy cock girl cock eieio.
There. A response equal to your posts.
There. A response equal to your posts.
Good job
The following 4 users liked this post by tossbag:
Sunny, thank you for making your (and my) point. But it won't make any difference until the inevitable happens. I'm just glad I'm of an age where it won't make much difference to me. The idiots that push this rubbish will have to deal with it in all their glory, as you say, they will be doing it cold, hungry and jobless.
The following users liked this post:
I will say there are some companies in Australia going down the electric path. Small and limited now, but technology is improving and the field is expanding:
ADELAIDE FIRM TO UNVEIL AUSTRALIA’S FIRST COMMERCIAL ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT
“This thing is amazing:” Flying school uses electric plane for pilot training
Electric aviation the new frontier in tackling transport carbon emissions
GA in this country is going to have to change the way they do things and adapt the industry to attract new customers. Because, as it’s obvious to see now, it is not going to survive for long on the current path. Telling potential customers they’re fools is not going to work.