What a fascinating disconnect from reality. Fortunately, the doctor is in for some reality therapy! 
Sunday, Australia will implement their carbon tax at A$23 per tonne of carbon. But, the author of the article, Patrick Moriarty, worries it just might not be enough to effect the desired change. Sure, he states Australia’s goal “to cut Australian greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 5% below 2000 levels by 2020, and by a further 80% by 2050.” But, that isn’t the desired outcome, simple their vision towards the desired outcome.
The author correctly notes, “….we’ve made no progress in reducing CO₂emissions since the first IPCC report more than two decades ago.”
Fossil fuels’ share in global electricity production is now much higher than it was in 1995. In Australia it rose from 90.5% in 1995 to 92.4% in 2011. We’re re-carbonising, not de-carbonising……..
Over the past three decades, global energy use (and CO₂ emissions) have risen in lockstep with global GDP.
So, the author understands that production is tied to CO2 emissions. He also notes that after 20 years, no progress has been made towards reducing anthropological CO2 emissions. Further, he notes the impossible progress which must be made by renewable energy to keep pace. The impossibility was noted here, yesterday and many times in the past.
Wind power is already meeting significant citizen and environmental opposition worldwide. Yet it must be scaled up a 100-fold to help meet future business-as-usual energy demands. Solar energy will need a 1000-fold expansion.
Of course, as one of the able commenters here (Dirk?) have noted, electricity is only 1/7th of the energy/fuel mix. So, the author sees some part of reality, but he doesn’t see the impossible part of reality. And, even if it was feasible, which it isn’t, the last 20 years demonstrate that the world will not pursue this Quixotic idea.
Sooner or later, reality interjects itself. Today, we’re seeing this happen. As I stated in a post earlier, I enjoy their tears.
Off to contemplate spheres on a plane…… bbl.
suyts space 
CO2 emissions are above Hansen’s “A” worst case line.
Temperatures are below his “C” best CO2 reduction / elimination senario.
Ergo, CO2 is not a problem, now everbody get back to work on real jobs.
“The author correctly notes, “….we’ve made no progress in reducing CO₂emissions since the first IPCC report more than two decades ago.”
Fossil fuels’ share in global electricity production is now much higher than it was in 1995. In Australia it rose from 90.5% in 1995 to 92.4% in 2011.
”
Moriarty is an idiot. Efficiency of fossil fuel power plants rises over time. So they produce more electricity for a given amount of fuel. By his metric, that is a bad thing. He should have his brain examined.
Lol, yes, he’s a moron. The problem these lunatics have, is they can’t just come out and say what they’re advocating. So, they take these elaborate mental walks.
I have been following this kerfluffle over on Joanne Nova’s blog, and this guy is full of it. Even before Gilliard did her best Obama imitation (and rammed this down the throat of the Aussies after promising not to), the alarmist scientist conclusion was that it would not reduce temperatures (except by a neglible .01 degrees). AND, a unilateral decision by a single nation to commit Hari Kari would not reduce WORLD emissions since other nations would step up their production.
Even acknowledging that, Gilliard still rammed it through. The only difference between Obama and Gilliard is that at least she is easier to look at (well maybe not for the females).
It’s hilarious. I think the tax has a good chance of lowering Australian CO2 emissions. I believe the U.S. emissions dropped in 2009. All Australia has to do is have a nice prolonged recession and they can get their emissions down where they want them.
It worked for the US! 😉
Lol, exactly. Anyone can go green….. all you need is a bit of poverty!!