Australian Political & Infrastructure Discussion Thread

[The United Colonies of Earth]

It would be cool, for sure, and likely needed to formalize standardization of practices and show China that creeping assholery won't be tolerated, and will be met by a joint response.

[Diahon]

It would be cool, for sure, and likely needed to formalize standardization of practices and show China that creeping assholery won't be tolerated, and will be met by a joint response.

i dunno

if the asean and apec have proven themselves wet papers before an aggressive china creeping over the south china sea and beyond, what more can yet another pacific organ do?

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

AGL has consistently been rated Australia's largest carbon emitter.
Operates two of the dirtiest coal power stations in the country - Loy Yang A and B - only second to Yallourn, owned by EnergyAustralia, who consistently comes out second below AGL and above Stanwell, QLD's state-owned power generation company (alongside Ergon and Energex who distribute it) that operates Tarong Power Station and Stanwell Power Station.

AGL sued Greenpeace Australia-Pacific for using its logo to highlight that specific fact about them. To be fair, they could have edited it to parody AGL's logo.
http://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/NGER/Pages/Published%20information/Data%20highlights/2018-19%20factsheets/Australia%27s-10-highest-greenhouse-gas-emitters-2018-19.aspx

EnergyAustralia has chosen to close down its Yallourn power station - the dirtiest in Australia - to build a battery by mid-2028.
Why can't they? I understand there'd be reasoning behind it, I'd just be interested in knowing why

The Latrobe Valley is a coal mining area after all.

[Australian rePublic]

The thing is claiming someone as "the worst polluter" coumts for nothing at all. In a world where the average person burns 100 lumps of coal per year in order to start a fire, rhe man who burns 101 lumps of coal is the "worst polluter". Also, if the average house hold has 4 members who burn 50 lumps of coal each, then the house with 5 members who each burn 40 lumps of coal becomes "the worst polluting household". Phrases such as "worst polluter" tell you nothing. They fail to take into account scale or industry. A courier will burn more petrol per hour at work than a child care centre, but a child care centre will burn more electricity. Now if that one child care centre had 50 staff last week, but this week, they had 60 staff, without a significant increase in the amount of electricity used, then they techically reduced the amount of electricity used per staff member, without actually doing anything to cut electricity use. A courier company, on the other hand, will have to increase its feul consumption with every employee, by very nature of its industry. Now, if the couroer company were to decrease the emissions from 100 litres per hour per employee to 96 litres per kilometre per hour per employee, yet if they increased the number of employees from 50 employees to 70 employees, then, technically, they pollute more than they used to, despite a tually reducing the pollution per employee hour. Now, if a courier company with 50 employees were to increase their feul usage from 50 litres per employee kilometre to 51 litres per employee kilometre, and they retained the same number of employees, yet they've halved their employees' working hours from 40 hours per week to 20 hours per week, then they've technically reduced their emissions, whilst in reality, they've actually increased emissions. This is why I don't like vague titles such as "Australia's worst polluter" or "Australia's second worst polluter". They tell you nothing. The world is not as simple as "hey, they produce xyz carbon emissions per year, making them the worst carbon emitter". That kind of oversimplification leads to unjust and unfair labelling.

As for China, sure they may have the man power to blow any military out of the water, but manpower counts for nothing unless the troops are both competent and committed to be able to fight, and to be honest, I don't think China's troops actually meet either criteria. They're too busy with indoctrination and artificially inflating their manpower, rather than selecting capable soldiers and training them well. I mean, what's the point of a million soldiers if most of them are unwilling and/or unable to fight?

[Diahon]

that's entirely putting too much faith in hypothetical bestcase scenarios, when it's evident that the ccp has been shoring up every deficiency it could militarily as it prepares for an invasion of taiwan

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

The thing is claiming someone as "the worst polluter" coumts for nothing at all. In a world where the average person burns 100 lumps of coal per year in order to start a fire, rhe man who burns 101 lumps of coal is the "worst polluter". Also, if the average house hold has 4 members who burn 50 lumps of coal each, then the house with 5 members who each burn 40 lumps of coal becomes "the worst polluting household". Phrases such as "worst polluter" tell you nothing. They fail to take into account scale or industry. A courier will burn more petrol per hour at work than a child care centre, but a child care centre will burn more electricity. Now if that one child care centre had 50 staff last week, but this week, they had 60 staff, without a significant increase in the amount of electricity used, then they techically reduced the amount of electricity used per staff member, without actually doing anything to cut electricity use. A courier company, on the other hand, will have to increase its feul consumption with every employee, by very nature of its industry. Now, if the couroer company were to decrease the emissions from 100 litres per hour per employee to 96 litres per kilometre per hour per employee, yet if they increased the number of employees from 50 employees to 70 employees, then, technically, they pollute more than they used to, despite a tually reducing the pollution per employee hour. Now, if a courier company with 50 employees were to increase their feul usage from 50 litres per employee kilometre to 51 litres per employee kilometre, and they retained the same number of employees, yet they've halved their employees' working hours from 40 hours per week to 20 hours per week, then they've technically reduced their emissions, whilst in reality, they've actually increased emissions. This is why I don't like vague titles such as "Australia's worst polluter" or "Australia's second worst polluter". They tell you nothing. The world is not as simple as "hey, they produce xyz carbon emissions per year, making them the worst carbon emitter". That kind of oversimplification leads to unjust and unfair labelling.

Regardless, it shows brown coal is dirty. I know it powers homes and creates jobs for ppl in the Latrobe Valley (even if very few).
If you use Google Maps a lot like I do, you find that the Latrobe Valley, in one case, had a motor inn named the "Coal Valley motor inn".
So it's obviously central to that region.

AGL is also listed as a company that is out of line with the Paris Agreement,
and out of time to act.
So that's why I find divestment a good way to take climate action. I know everyone might not want to, or be able to,
but for those that can and want to, it's a good option, since it tells your bank/superfund:
"I don't want my money/retirement savings going towards companies or projects bringing the planet
closer to runaway climate change".

i'm just saying.

Note: I really think Australia-related discussion on climate change should be
reserved for its own discussion.

[Dresderstan]

France doesn't seem all that thrilled with AUKUS, but then they got shorted out of all that money.

Personally, I'd add Canada and New Zealand and make Five Eyes a genuine start for a Pacific version of NATO.

So basically an Anglo-Alliance?

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

On another note, how's the sydney lockdown going?

Long, drawn-out and boring?

[Arvenia]

France doesn't seem all that thrilled with AUKUS, but then they got shorted out of all that money.

Personally, I'd add Canada and New Zealand and make Five Eyes a genuine start for a Pacific version of NATO.

Maybe add Japan.

[Perikuresu]

Note: I really think Australia-related discussion on climate change should be
reserved for its own discussion.

Looks like it is, but in the end it'll devolve into pointless Liberal-National bashing and then die

[Arvenia]

Note: I really think Australia-related discussion on climate change should be
reserved for its own discussion.

Looks like it is, but in the end it'll devolve into pointless Liberal-National bashing and then die

Just like all the other threads in this forum. This whole site has like died down recently.

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

Looks like it is, but in the end it'll devolve into pointless Liberal-National bashing and then die

Just like all the other threads in this forum. This whole site has like died down recently.

General's generally - just a very *general* observation - where the most warnings get handed out, since it's the realm of public opinion,
and things can get heated when on a topic involving politics.

Also, there was a riot outside the CFMEU office in Melbourne today, unless I read something wrong

[Mathuvan Union]

Note: I really think Australia-related discussion on climate change should be
reserved for its own discussion.

Looks like it is, but in the end it'll devolve into pointless Liberal-National bashing and then die

Worse when then they lost their shit over Gillard’s carbon tax.

[Australian rePublic]

I still think our biggest domestic loss of freedoms is due to how much of a nanny state we are and how much worse it's becoming

[Arvenia]

I still think our biggest domestic loss of freedoms is due to how much of a nanny state we are and how much worse it's becoming

What do you mean?

[Zapato]

oi, oi, what's this about an asian nato?

SEATO 2?

[Perikuresu]

I still think our biggest domestic loss of freedoms is due to how much of a nanny state we are and how much worse it's becoming

What do you mean?

He's referring to the erosion of our rights, which is pretty clear now considering the recent law that passed.
Liberals am I right?

[Mathuvan Union]

I still think our biggest domestic loss of freedoms is due to how much of a nanny state we are and how much worse it's becoming

I don’t know how Scomo’s still in office by this point.
Can’t wait until the election next year, even though the libs will probably win.

[Arvenia]

What do you mean?

He's referring to the erosion of our rights, which is pretty clear now considering the recent law that passed.
Liberals am I right?

What law?

[Perikuresu]

He's referring to the erosion of our rights, which is pretty clear now considering the recent law that passed.
Liberals am I right?

What law?

Police can now literally hack into our devices

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

I still think our biggest domestic loss of freedoms is due to how much of a nanny state we are and how much worse it's becoming

https://www.michaelwest.com.au/manal-al-sharif-australias-new-surveillance-laws-remind-me-of-home/
https://www.michaelwest.com.au/human-rights-violations-now-enshrined-in-legislation-in-australia/
I'm not so much concerned with how much of a nanny state we are, note, I've heard the explanation before, don't need to go over it again, yes, it's an inconvenience, but I'm more concerned, like Perikeresu is, about the state of civil rights in this country - ASIO can now hack into your device if they suspect a crime is being committed, or is "likely to be" committed. If I don't pay my parking fee on time, which is annoying in and of itself, if I graffitied art of a train onto a bus stop (which I don't, but I would if the council paid me to, or if I had any artistic talent beyond powerpoint ), police could easily hack into my account.

They can add data, delete data, and alter it as well. This applies just the same to social media. They could easily pretend to be me, altering evidence. Imagine what that could do in the hands of Peter Dutton, so petty, yet so menacing, that he'll sue someone on Twitter for tweeting something about him he didn't like. Porter, who prosecutes whistleblowers in secret courts for exposing corporate espionage (i.e. us bugging Timorese offices to screw them over on a deal over the Timor Sea's gas reserves to benefit gas companies like Woodside), and, accepting anonymous donations to fund his legal case against the ABC.

But it's more concerning that the US can talk to ASIO about this. Imagine how it could've gone down if a certain Julian Assange....I've said too much. I blame the US more than I do Scott Morrison or Peter Dutton. Mainly because of their unparalleled power, in being able to operate a mass surveillance program (which should have never happened), influence on Australian foreign policy (if you don't count ASPI, which advises the government on foreign policy, and is funded by arms manufacturers like Lockheed Martin and BAE Systems). I just wish we could not have our governments spy on us and forcibly infiltrate our devices on the flimsiest of pretexts. Now, as usual, I don't deny there are good intentions behind it, but they're always the same old intentions - used to justify incredibly broad legislation that encroaches on the civil rights of you, me and every last Australian. I haven't even got to the hundred-odd counterterrorism laws passed since 9/11.

It's why I really, really wish now New Zealand created the pavlova, just for the bragging rights,
because Australia is pretty much completely subservient to the US.

[Perikuresu]

I have someone going on tonight, what's the bs with Christian Porter?
Liberals am I right?

[Shrillland]

Reckon I should start a new thread around climate change?

We have one already.

[Perikuresu]

Reckon I should start a new thread around climate change?

We have one already.

He's talking about a thread made just for Australia's involvement in (worsening) Climate Change.

[Amorosa-Coonarra Coasts]

Earthquake in Victoria today. Repeat, earthquake in VIctoria today. Homes in Melbourne damaged.
A