Not when it's to protect the living world.

people like me or Greta Thunberg "zealots", it makes us human.

Read my pinned post if you're interested in understanding.

I am so fucking sick of hearing cosplaying environmentalists smugly state that ecocidal industries like LNG are inevitable for the foreseeable future. Ceding the living world to the bastards destroying it isn't a sensible adult position. And wanting to safeguard the living world and humanity doesn't

You call me a Zealot but don't reflect on your own ceding of power to the multinational corporations destroying the climate. You think giving into them, accepting their right to destroy the living world, is somehow the sensible adult position. So many of you are cosplaying here as environmentalists.

I'm all for a windfall profits tax after wind down arrangements have been established. But setting up a permanent levy will effectively undermine any effective climate policy. It also sends a disinforming message to the community that the climate damage is worth the cash.

We all need to pinch ourselves to remind us that the revenue to facilitate the transition doesn't need to (and shouldn't) come from the climate destroying behaviour we're trying to end.

You can't start at tax without creating a fatal CoI. Tax needs to be worked out in the context of a broader wind down strategy. If you look at Norway and Qatar their "exemplary" tax policies have locked in government and community support for continuing extraction.

winding down extraction because it creates a fatal conflict of interest for govts. Tax arrangements need to be developed in the context of a broader wind down plan. If you start at tax you lock in extraction. And we have real world evidence to support this conclusion from Norway and Qatar.

That was probably me. And it won't lock in dependence, I've never claimed that. What it will do is lock in government and community support for the industry as has happened in Norway and Qatar thus undermining the possibility of effective climate policy. Tax cannot be the primary vehicle to manage

Taxing LNG exports outside of a wind down plan will lock in extraction for at least a decade as govts and the public become addicted to the new revenue. And the climate damage from that can't be justified by any possible financial return. So it would be counterproductive as climate policy.

WA Labor is indistinguishable from the fossil gas industry.

Yeah I have my own real world niche that's working out as well as can be expected.

Luckily I have another arrow in my quiver 😉.

Certainly feels that way. True also IRL in the "climate" NGOs and "independent" media. Looks the bastards have won for now.

And here's the thing, if "think tanks" and journalists don't explain this to ordinary people then how the fuck are they supposed to figure it out?

Gas destroys the climate and biosphere more than any financial return can justify. That's not a joke either.

And it's most of the "climate movement" including all the NGOs thinking like this. It's doing my head in. No wonder I'm getting testy on here.

Yet ending even LNG exports isn't part of this "tax the gas" push which is really just a minor variation on Scott's "get the gas". In fact it will have the opposite effect as govts and the public become addicted to the new revenue stream as has happened in Norway. It's doing my head in.

Will we be able to buy new coral reefs and forests with the export tax money? Because we'll lose those ecosystems and more if we keep mining the gas. Sorry not sorry to be analytical about this.

Earth beyond six of nine planetary boundaries Transgression of planetary boundaries by human activities have now brought humanity well beyond a “safe operating space.”

" ... six of the nine boundaries are transgressed, suggesting that Earth is now well outside of the safe operating space for humanity."

But, by all means, let's all bitch about what Wind Farms 'look' like.

Those who've willfully gotten us here should be dutifully charged & sentenced to hell.

I know you know the answer. Just wish more people did.

The really important issue is how we divide up the cash from continuing fossil carbon mining. With a decent public share our governments can just buy new ecosystems like coral reefs to replace the ones destroyed by heating....... that's right isn't it?

Muting

I just understand climate policy.

You're arguing in support of a policy that takes us 180 degrees in the wrong direction while claiming that people aren't prepared to accept stronger climate policy when every recent poll I've seen says they are. Why are so many of you so desperate to fail?

One of us has.

I criticise every post I see that fatally misses the point on climate policy. If God posted a foolish climate policy take I'd call them out for it. You're free to block me.

Tax is the wrong angle for leaving fossil carbon in the ground. Take off the money goggles all of you please.

You do realise Equinor hasn't left a single molecule of fossil carbon in the ground because of Norway's tax system? How much more climate damage do you want? How much more do you think our ecosystems can take?