Labor to go for net zero by 2050

The Guardian broke the story yesterday:

RenewEconomy also posted a story:

Labor set to reaffirm net zero emissions commitment, oppose funds for coal power

I’ll do a further post putting this in a broader context later, but would appreciate initial reactions.

The main thing is that since the elections Labor has said they would honour Australia’s commitment to the Paris Agreement. This is now being formalised. Any murmurings that might come out of the so-called ‘Otis group’ have to be seen in this context.

The AFR today points out that 73 countries have signed up to zero emissions by 2050, including the UK, Canada, France and Germany. All Autralian states have adopted it. The Business Couincil of Australia, AGL, Santos, BHP, Amcor, BP, Wesfarmers, Telstra and others agree.

Among those others, Shell is turning itself into an energy company, rather than a fossil fuel company.

Labor cannot now say that coal will be mining will continue for the “foreseeable future”, and the notion of stranded assets needs to be taken seriously.

If you scroll down the RenewEconomy link you will see comments from Adam Bandt. Albanese has said in relation to Zali Steggall’s bill, the only way to get climate action is to elect a Labor government. Bandt, as I expected, will emphasise what is wrong with Labor’s proposals, rather than why we should run with them and seek to improve them.

My initial reaction is that Bandt is strictly correct. If you fail to act on emissions reduction, you have to do more sooner to make up for the emissions you have put into the atmosphere. However, doing what is correct is probably not possible in the political and practical sense.

I would argue that Bandt should be calling for the world to focus on a safe climate, that is, aiming for 350 ppm, which is Greens’ policy, rather than a 50% shot at avoiding the worst of a dangerous climate, which is what the UNFCCC, the IPCC and most of the countries and other entities declaring a climate emergency are aiming for. I’ll just remind people here that Extinction Rebellion want zero emissions by 2025. Prof Mark Howden has made a distinction between a climate emergency and a climate crisis. He thinks we are in a climate crisis.

Questions have already been raised as to “What will it cost?” It will be interesting to see how Albanese handles this. Last night Penny Wong, talking to Patricia Karvelas, turned the question around to ask, What is the cost of the Morrison government’s approach which is effectively doing nothing? She cited a recent report which said doing nothing would cost 20 times as much doing what is necessary.

This morning Mark Butler was interviewed by Fran Kelly.

He pointed out that the ‘45% by 2030’ target stemmed from 2014. Labor coming into office in 2022 would have half the time to achieve that outcome, because the Coalition has done nothing.

He said Labor would be guided by the best science.

I think it is inevitable that Labor would initiate a major inquiry in office, whether it be through a revamped Climate Change Authority, or, more likely, a version of Steggall’s Climate Change Commission.

I would hope that Labor in government would seek advice from such a body on how we could achieve a safe climate, to give hope to the young, rather than accept that the best we can do is allow the already dangerous to become significantly worse.

Finally, Richard Dennis on Wednesday night said that Bill Shorten was actually correct in his response on climate costings. Shorten said it was a “silly question”. Much of Dennis’s talk was about how economics can only measure the measurable, which is often not the most important consideration. And pretending you can measure what will be happening in the economy decades ahead is ridiculous. What you can measure often doesn’t tell you much. Imagine making forecasts about the 21st century in the 1970s when microcomputers had not been invented, when no-one had heard of the internet etc etc.

He pointed out that you have to decide what you want to do, then set out to do it. There was no economic modelling informing the great reforms of the Hawke-Keating years.

The lecture was in the State Library. There was much comment about the impossibility of measuring the effect of having such an institution available.

It is clear that we have to act to achieve a sustainable society and economy within planetary boundaries within which the human race can flourish and achieve greater human well-being for all. We have to start from where we are. It seems to me that Albanese understands this and is going to give it his best shot. I would rather we ran with him and helped him to do the best he can, instead of picking him off from the sidelines.

57 thoughts on “Labor to go for net zero by 2050”

  1. Thanks, Brian…glimmers of hope. Queensland government is up for election in October this year, so I’m hoping the Federal view might trickle down to State.

    Fiscal cost always seems to daunt reform. But Wong, cited above asks: “What is the cost of the Morrison government’s approach which is effectively doing nothing?”
    Sometimes there are terrible vehicle accidents and many emergency service people attend. But the cost is not considered. So why is the cost of reducing emmissions so vulnerable to the accounts pen?

  2. True, Geoff.

    I’ve inserted a few sentences:

      The AFR today points out that 73 countries have signed up to zero emissions by 2050, including the UK, Canada, France and Germany. All Autralian states have adopted it. The Business Council of Australia, AGL, Santos, BHP, Amcor, BP, Wesfarmers, Telstra and others agree.

      Among those others, Shell is turning itself into an energy company, rather than a fossil fuel company.

      Labor cannot now say that coal will be mining will continue for the “foreseeable future”, and the notion of stranded assets needs to be taken seriously.

  3. Brian: Zero by the end of the next 30yrs is a move in the right direction but it would be good to know the progress planned along the way. (And better if progress was faster.)

  4. What’s the greens nett zero promise ?

    What are my reverse auction bids ?
    Can I get an opening bid of Thursday last week?

  5. Jumpy, it’s 2040 at the latest, but see also Climate Change and Energy:

      4. A safe climate will require a return to an atmospheric concentration of 350 parts per million or lower of greenhouse gases (and CO2 equivalents).

      5. Australia’s climate policy should be consistent with our commitment under the Paris Agreement to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, recognising that this is essential to reduce the risks and impacts of climate change.

    Greens’ policy is quite good, albeit something short of full bore climate emergency mode. I’d just like Adam Bandt to talk about their policy more, rather than firing off salvos about coal and stuff.

  6. I’m not sure that Paris is a good reference point. Recent reports suggest that we have already damaged the climate more than was thought. If that is true, (sorry, no refs) then something more ambitious would be preferred.

  7. Jumpy: Reverse auctions or renewable energy auctions are simply different words for what you and I would describe as competitive tendering for the supply of electricity or whatever. Most of the world’s building of renewable energy is driven by renewable energy auctions. The ACT for example has got to 100% renewables using these auctions.
    Unfortunately, every so often an economist sticks their head up and babbles on about putting a price on carbon. The problem with this approach is that people like Abbott can take away the carbon price and set investors up for losses.
    For some odd reason investors like the security that comes with contracts.

  8. Brian: “The call for technology before action is a specious distraction designed to paper over the plan to take no action.”
    We are talking about changes over a 30 yr period. That is the equivalent of someone specifying the tech that would be used to achieve NOW in 1990.
    Albo looked good on the subject on Insiders this morning.

  9. John, reverse auctions are what a simply subbie like me does on every potential job.
    You don’t think I know what the tender dynamics are ?
    I’ve got 4 reverse auction tenders to submit by Friday for h*****s sake !

    You think ACT is 100% renewable energy ?
    C,mon, your pulling our legs right ?

  10. Albo looked good on the subject on Insiders this morning.

    You’re kidding, it was a train wreck for Albo.
    Plibbers and Kennelly would have loved it.
    Albo had nothing.

  11. No need to apologise Corporal J.
    Pale grey suits you.

    Field Marshal A
    HQ well to the Rear
    Strategic Planning & Logistics
    Tunnelling and Wormholes

  12. ACT has ‘100 per cent renewable’ electricity from today. But what does that mean?

    That was 1 October 2019:

      The last stage of South Australia’s Hornsdale wind farm comes online today. With that, the ACT, more than 1,000 kilometres away, will “officially” be powered by 100 per cent renewable electricity.

      But that does not mean Canberra is some sort of commune running off the grid.

      Rather, for every watt of power the ACT consumes, it pays one back through its renewable investments around the country.

      Climate Council senior researcher Tim Baxter said ACT homes still consumed energy produced by coal and gas plants.

    • Jumpy, you have to close the tag for you by putting a / in immediately before the final “blockquote”. As in (/blockquote)

      The Insiders program is an example of what you get when four journalists don’t understand the ‘Safeguard Mechanism’. Journalists cannot hold people to account when they don’t know what they are talking about and simply quote the other party’s lines.

      Ethically it stinks.

    • Thanks Geoff, was looking for a link to that study. Prof Boer was on ABC RN Breaky this morning.

      I may have mentioned it before here, last year the local fire station refused to give me a hazard reduction burn permit in beginning of August last year. That was the first time since I live here in Mareeba for 10 year. Is it politically correct for me to use the word ‘unprecedented’ or not? Even up here in the ‘Wet Tropics’ it was unusually warm and dry as well as windy for winter.

    • Albanese is doing what the denialist LNP routinely do, pick a date far enough away then drag your feet. He can’t get elected on that claim simply because Morrison will claim at the last minute that he will do the same by 2040, also with the hidden intention of doing as little as possible till 2039.

      I spoke personally with Albanese a number of times before Rudd was elected, and discovered then that Albanese is a “being there” go with the flow type personality. He has no scientific convictions, no philosophy, and is purely a rhetorician, so taking him seriously is to set Australia up for 30 years of frustrating “adjustments” and endless smoothies of excuses with that target forever “coming soon”.

      The person who can deliver on such a claim will be laying down a plan demonstrating how every house and factory will have x kwhr of solar power and a min x of battery storage, how industry will be required mobilise to produce thermal roof systems, how banks will be required to finance systems, how the building industry will install insulation……… yes, instal insulation under direction ……… , etc, etc. Its not like the haven’t had the time to develop a detailed plan. Albanese is a phoney, and a worst case “leader”. Well perhaps worst case is not quite true, Abbott was the worst case, but Albanese is his non sociopathic equivalent.

      I said all of the above without reading the Guardian article, now having read it I should put the whole comment in caps. Summary of the whole thing is Weasel Words, just another schmoozing con.

    • BilB, the main thing is that Albanese has committed to following the science, and is seeing the greening of the economy as an opportunity for new industry, for addressing inequality and a buggered up industrial system etc etc.

      Mark Butler and his office are doing the more detailed work on CC. Albo has made a broad commitment, which has surprised me coming so early in the political cycle. Before the next election in 2020 we will have and ALP party conference (this December) and a new IPCC report in 2021. It is actually better to leave detailed policy development until then.

      Apart from Mark Butler, who is a senior minister, Pat Conroy as assistant shadow minister for CC and for International Development and the Pacific has impressed me.

      Terri Butler, who is shadow environment minister, is smart, grew up in NQ, knows the Qld regions, is totally committed to CC, and defers completely to Mark Butler on the matter.

      Penny Wong has experience in this area and is totally committed.

      Same with Tony Burke, who has experience in environment, water and agriculture. He is currently industrial relations, leader of the opposition in the house, a leader of the ‘right’ faction and part of Albo’s inner circle.

      There is work going on within Labor on green new deal type thinking and a just transition out of coal.

      Albo’s job in the end is to look after the politics and get Labor elected.

      I don’t think anyone needs to worry about Fitzgibbon or the Otis group.

      By contrast, ScoMo is hostage to the denialists and Coalsheviks in his own party and more particularly the Nationals. He can’t just steal Labor’s policies, but they can steal his on technology, where he is mainly just talking about it and pretending to be responsible for what is being done by others. He’s good at that.

      Meanwhile last December the Greens said they were going to work on an Australian Green New Deal.

      Overall, I think the damage from Abbott and his successors means that we won’t be world leaders in the foreseeable future, but if we vote Labor into office we can aspire to being respectable middle-of-the-pack internationally.

      Bear in mind that Labor also aspires to bipartisanship, which is why they favoured the NEG as a third or fourth best option. They would need two terms in power to establish climate action the way Medicare is now established – essentially untouchable by an incoming government. Zali Steggall’s Climate Change Commission, or similar, must become part of the furniture.

      What I would like to do is move the discourse and aspiration from an unacceptable chance of avoiding the worst (1.5°C) to the possibility of a safe climate (350ppm and heading lower).

    • Brian: What really counts is what the parties commit to for the next term of government. 30 years into the future is too slow and too far into the future.
      Keep in mind that 1990 is 30 yrs ago. The tech and politics has changed enormously then.

    • John, the anticipated change in technology, science and circumstances is why Labor prefers to set the program it will take to the election closer to that time.

      In the long-read post Climate emergency – ecological sustainability within planetary boundaries, and a safe climate scroll down to the section on Paul Gilding and Jorgen Randers on climate emergency.

      Gilding says it’s the scale and intensity with which you attack the problem that matters rather than numerical time targets. He says inter alia:

        It is not a major project or a key policy initiative like the Apollo Program or even the New Deal. It is a comprehensive, economy-wide approach that, if done correctly, represents the only realistic way we can overcome the climate emergency.

      However, you do need to know where you are headed. Gilding and Randers back in 2009 were heading for atmospheric CO2 concentrations of 350ppm.

      Albo is trying to get elected, and in doing so indicating that he’s aiming for where 70+ other nations are aiming.

      If he didn’t nominate net zero 2050 people would make it up for him, say he’s irrevocably committed to coal.

    • Brian: “he’s irrevocably committed to coal.”
      I am sure I am not the only one who finds Albo’s climate action fuzzy.
      We will see where he stands closer to the election but I suspect that Albo’s statements will make it easier for the Greens to win urban seats like the one Albo holds.

    • I’m sorry, Brian, but you are deluded about Albonese. Here we are 20 years later still talking about “getting started” and what our goals should be. Albo was dragging his feet on this 15 years ago, now its “I’ve got a plan”. 7 years ago Labor had Greg Combet, now they’ve got Mark Butler, in another 7 years they will have some other switched on guy who actually knows how to use a calculator rather than a thesaurus, and be talking about the “urgency”. When “Albo” is organising street protests and labor has mobs storming the parliament demanding action and Morrison’s removal, then I might take Albonese seriously. But 2022 Morrison will cast another bunch of lies, Clive Palmer will run another sly YouTube campaign loaded with outrageous claims that can never be full filled, and Australia’s brainless army of baby boomer retirees will find another excuse that their super fund is under threat and vote LNP.

      I got a major serve of all of that at a 70’th birthday party yesterday. The only good thing was there some clear thinking young people there and one brilliant girl with an electrically sharp mind who would create a real stir if parachuted in to the Parliament. She declared Liberal but talked Progressive. But there were some radio people and a stunning digital marketing lady there who really talked the issues well. Still the failed “why not Nuclear”, and “what we should do is use gas” all came out to hang on the line.

      The problem is that Labor change there position every election cycle, they’re not consistent and from what I read they really don’t understand technology, engineering, the power of innovation, and they don’t have the ability to communicate with those who do. Labor? Big fail.

    • How does modern nuclear energy fail the Global Warming test ?

      Lead time. It can’t be up and running soon enough to save humanity.

    • Nuclear energy due its huge list of negatives should only be used for roles that can’t be achieved by other means, deep space explorers, mars rovers, and powering bulk and container shipping. As simple as that.

      Powering bulk shipping also powers cities with ports. While ships are in port, where a port has 10 ships docked that port has 1 gigawatt of power generation available to it where each ship has a 100 megawatt micro reactor.

      Nuclear powering of shipping eliminates all of the overland nuclear material transport issues.

      The nuclear power section of a bulk carrier can attached to many bulk hulls in its service life, just as they do with marine diesel power sections.

    • If it weren’t for green opposition scare campaigns they’d be up and running by now.
      Be good if they’d admit they were wrong for once.

      Anyway, that’s all the crumbs of reality I’ll waste on admitted racist troll zoot today.

    • BilB, that’s a good start, I’m glad you’re not allergic to nuclear.

      What, according to your best information, is the difference in energy market share between nuclear and solar/wind ?

      Forget about hydro, the greens have opposed that every time, till it’s built then they champion hydro.

    • BilB, Labor is not right now saying they have a plan. They have specifically said that they don’t but will develop one closer to the 2022 election.

      Unfortunately I agree with most of the rest of your comment. Our democracy is not in good shape. Over the years the Coalition has trashed trust in the system, and shown that they will use any means possible to hold power, and allow the elites to continue doing what they are doing now. That includes letting Palmer do as he will.

    • If it weren’t for green opposition scare campaigns they’d be up and running by now.

      No, the technology wasn’t developed soon enough. If you’re serious and not just looking for a stoush, Professor Quiggin has covered the topic often and in depth.

    • Jumpy, apart from everything else, zoot is right, nukes take too long, and also it’s too expensive.

      Maybe small nukes as they have in ships if the Chinese develop the technology and make enough of them to become cheap.

      However, we’ll all be cooked before that happens.

    • While I’m here, I was astonished to find that nuclear powered submarines still run on steam engines. The reactors merely supply the heat to create the steam. How steampunk!

    • Anyone else mentioned “allergic” other than our self proclaimed messiah?

      What does he mean??

      Or is he about to “”pause momentarily the spiraling circle jerk hive mind”” again?

    • Brian, firstly China doesn’t develop much at all, it copies and manufactures.
      If the go ahead from ALP/green were to happen then Australia could 100% CO2 free electricity in 10-15 years.

      That’s quicker that Albos 2050 by a long shot.
      Nuclear is the safest energy there is, if we care about science.

    • My cardiologist has great praise for the cardiologists he learned from in China and he has adopted their techniques. Apparently they’re among the world leaders in the treatment of heart disease.

    • Molten salt solar is just steam engine technology.
      Nuclear use of molten salt is quite efficient and doesn’t cook thousands of endangered birds and bats.

      If we’re to go “ War Footing “ on global warming then the greens need to get the stick our of their arses about nuclear energy. Call themselves environmentalists ?

    • You need to get the stick out of your arse about wind and solar.

      oh, and the greens.

    • Brian

      I was struck by your comment at 12.38pm that Mr Albanese is simply aiming for something that 70+ other nations are aiming for.

      It’s well overdue that this South Pacific minnow ceased its chest thumping braggadocio. We are NOT world leaders in renewables, rooftop solar, battery storage, reduction of agricultural carbon emissions, or reduction of emissions by transport. (Yet politicians of several stripes claim we are….)

      We want to be world beaters in tennis, swimming, and probably are in Australian Rules football.

      The other is pathetically ignorant boasting. Just a few days ago I heard Fran Kelly asking an interviewee how Austealia could be world leaders in technology…. Does she understand anything about how scientific, engineering, innovation works these days? It’s not like winning the lottery one day Fran. Experience, observation and commonsense indicates it takes decades excellent and highly technical education, excellence in well-funded research institutes and in many private firms, ….. that’s not Australia, Fran.

      That’s Germany, USA, Japan, China, France and several other European nations and co-operative efforts.

    • John D, re your comment, there is nothing clearer than Albo’s attitude to coal. There is nothing fuzzy about it.

      Firstly, he says he wants to reach net zero by 2050. Net zero is not the same as zero, but you would have to think there is minimal room for coal burnt here.

      He says that while other countries burn coal and want to buy ours we will supply it. He says he won’t be surprised if that is still happening in 2050.

      David Speers tried to force him into saying that he would welcome the situation if they do not want to buy our coal then. Albo declined to answer the question in the terms put, because it would have resulted in delivering a quote that could be taken out of context and used to say that Albo wants to get rid of coal mining jobs.

      Speers is just another ‘gotcha’ journalist, and is actually doing the work of Albo’s political opponents.

      I think Albo is basically ignoring the Greens. I haven’t been to any meetings since Bandt got the job, but the early vibes are that he will please the core Green voters but won’t extend their reach.

      Albo is safe in his seat while he is there. After that, who knows?

    • “John, the anticipated change in technology, science and circumstances is why Labor prefers to set the program it will take to the election closer to that time.”

      Brian, I expect that technological options may change and improve over time, and that will change the actions taken.
      However, for now, a solid commitment to the end goal will do me.
      ‘Not reasonable to gaze so far into the “how” but a determined pathway to an end goal towards certainty will be a welcome start.

    • Ambi, there are some areas of technology where we are up there with the best. I believe we supply about half the world’s mining technology.

      We are also good at aluminum boats. The US Navy buys multi-hull boats from us although the Jones Law prohibits them being used in American waters.

      CSL is a world leader in blood products, although if they build new facilities that is probably more likely to happen in Switzerland than in Australia.

      An Adelaide company had the contract for the signage in the London Olympics. Ramsey is the biggest private hospital owner in Europe.

      Cochlear is a world leader as is Resmed for sleep apnea masks.

      My young son says Brisbane is one of the best places in the world for computer software development. Lockheed does some of its development work here.

      I believe we generate a lot of biotech startups, but most of them have to link up with global firms to market their stuff.

      Queensland has a defense industries roadmap and a motor vehicle building cluster. Rheinmetall are part of both.

      There is also an Advanced manufacturing 10-year roadmap which gives out grants all over Qld, mostly 1-4 employee shows to begin with, but some grow.

      Does it amount to a hill of beans? I don’t know, but in the recent State of the states report manufacturing employment in Qld went up.

      The CM and the ABC take zero interest, preferring bad news.

    • Geoff, thanks for that. I’d prefer it if Albo could be brave, go for a genuine climate crisis proposal to bring emissions down to 350ppm ASAP, offering the young a chance of a safe climate.

      Realistically I don’t think that is going to happen, in part because even scientists who know better sign up to the 1.5°C schtick, which is at best the border between dangerous and very dangerous climate change.

      Realistically it’s probably a suicide mission.

    • FYI all: Mayoral candidates in Cairns are shaping up for a climate debate this Thursday 5th March at JCU Cairns.
      Here’s the flyer:

      I’m expecting a no-winner result. One of then tilted at One Nation last State election. Another is the reigning mayor who recently kicked a councillor our of a regular meeting for demanding an answer to a question.
      Happily, Prf Jon Nott will be there and may be able to keep the debate productive…

    • Geoff, I’ll be interested to see how it goes.

      Jumpy upthread you said:

      Brian, firstly China doesn’t develop much at all, it copies and manufactures.

      That is out of date, I suspect. Australian universities now have more co-operative research with Chinese instos than any other country including the US.

      China has a clear break in 5G, or so it seems.

      I wear a fitbit – Korean technology, which sometimes has fits. Mark tells me the Chinese stuff works better, and is cheaper.

    • Jumpy steam per se is old tech, but well understood. The problem with steam historically is the means used to generate the heat needed to cause the phase change in water. Coal has been used for centuries but is no longer favoured.
      That nuclear converts its heat to steam does not mean that nuclear fails.

    • GeofH, Jumpy is just doing his usual mouth foaming denialist thing. His concentrated solar dead bat comment is related to the failed tower solar concept which was a bad idea from the outset, not parabolic dish solar.

      Read up on the Desertec initiative from the German DLR which came to a grinding halt due to the Arab Spring and its consequences (which I argue was a Putin initiative).

      The fact is that concentrated dish solar uses the same turbines that Nuclear does, and the same thermo nuclear energy type, in this case that big open core reactor that keeps us all warm from a safe distance, the Sun.

      The reality is that concentrated solar is about 13% efficient, way below current PV at 21% efficient. Even so the concentrated solar is an important part of the complete solution as it has the capacity to provide night time energy because of its thermal energy storage feature.

      But understand that these technologies are Grid Energy solutions and Utility Investment structured, as against the Distributed Energy solution which is by its nature Distributed Investment ie the end user pays for his own system. Distributed Energy production is far more robust particularly when connected to Micro Grid networks. These systems use gas as a non solar backup, but the gas is produced from our community waste, paper, cardboard, green bin waste, etc. which when converted syngas can be on converted to methane gas also called natural gas.

      That is how you get to 100% renewables rapidly.

    • Thanks Brian,

      15 – 20 years ago I heard that the proportion of Australian secondary students were leaving school with “strong maths” subjects was steadily falling, which was having a knock-on effect in uni maths majors/engineering/computer science. I believe these deficiencies have worsened, if anything.

      I believe a thorough renovation of the country’s capabilities would begin at Year 7.

      At the upper end, stronger uni courses, job opportunities, strengthened basic research; not letting manufacturing/techno jobs dribble away overseas. “Globalism” is giving some small Aussie tech firms unprecedented opportunities while weakening other, former strengths.

      We commonly buy “cheap Chinese sh*t” of low quality – I mean consumer goods, handyman tools etc – produced under poor working conditions and in high emission, air polluting factories.

      We could do better.

      I know there’s lots of hot air about “promoting STEM”.
      Results on the ground?
      Not so sure.

      Certainly the ABC coverage of tech, science, engineering, manufacturing and innovation is woeful!!

      They could do better.

    • Ambi, I have lost contact with the school system. However, my young son says that as a “software engineer”, as he calls himself, there is no problem about getting a decent job if you are competent. Employers finding competent staff is a problem, and a lot of his workmates come from o/seas.

      On “cheap Chinese sh*t” , I can’t make an overall comment, except two examples.

      One is that for garden hose connectors, tap timers, hoses etc. I only buy Gardena, which is German. The rest will ten s to fall apart before the guarantee period, and you find you’ve lost the invoice.

      Second, I had the soles of my walkers replaced, upon which they almost immediately fell off again. He replaced them for nothing, and they same thing happened.

      My wife took them to a different shoe man in a different shopping centre. He uses exclusively German glue, and the soles are sticking on better than new.

    • Come now, BilB.

      “Maritime scientific study” has all sorrs of applications.

      Algae growth, CO2 absorption, fish stocks, sea lane navigation, whale counting and whale harvesting to replensish sushi research facilities, ocean yachting, searching for submerged airliners, ocean influences on weather and climate, undersea oil extraction; the ancient beginnings of single celled organisms, etc.

      What’s not to admire? ?

    • So you didn’t read the article, Amdi, else you skipped over

      “According to the US Naval War College, the Xiang Yang Hong 01 was commissioned in 2016 for, among other things, “comprehensive observation in the field of military oceanography”.”

      Ignoring these clues isn’t adviseable.

      I suggest you get up early and watch the Chinese news in the morning. In the period I was watching it, before the island takeovers in Philippine waters they were daily flaunting images of their military and naval might, including showing, charging fleets of ships, beech landings, ground war fare, air warfare, and the launching of nuclear missiles with handy animations showing the detonation process. I don’t see the Chinese government as being frivolous and fun loving.

      Try a little thought experiment on how the average Australian nest egg will look when all property becomes 49 year leasehold under an emboldened Chinese govt regime. What was that? President for life Trump would come to Australia’s rescue? LOL

    Comments are closed.