Macquarie Network ::: 2GB | 2CH | LIVENEWS | STREET CORNER | RUGBYLEAGUELIVE | WHAT CAREER | AMAZING AUSTRALIANS :::
Wednesday, 03 December 2008

Survey: Aussies bored with climate change

6/10/2008 9:53:00 PM.  | 
Australians are getting bored with climate change, and many still doubt whether it is actually happening, says a new survey.

Only 46 per cent of Australians said they would take action on climate change if they were in charge of making decisions for Australia, a dip from 55 per cent last year, according to the Ipsos-Eureka Social Research Institute's third annual climate change survey.

And almost one in 10 Australians (nine per cent) strongly agreed with the statement "I have serious doubts about whether climate change is occurring". A further 23 per cent agreed to some extent.

Ipsos-Eureka director of Sustainable Communities and Environment Unit Jasmine Hoye believes Australians are becoming more concerned with other environmental issues that they can have more direct control over.

"We believe the public is currently overwhelmed by other, more pressing environmental issues - namely water and river health - and sees climate change as something that is largely out of their control," she said.

"However, there is a desire among many Australians to know how they can personally make a difference regarding climate change."

Aside from river and water health, other environmental issues of most concern to Australians included illegal waste dumping, renewable energy, litter, smoky vehicles and packaging.

But there were no real standout actions being taken by Australians to personally reduce their greenhouse emissions, said Ms Hoye.

"Ipsos research has shown that recycling is a fairly generic activity that people tend to say they are doing to help the environment, and it is also something that many Australians were already doing before climate change came along," she said.

"Thus, one could be justified in thinking this is a fairly glib response.

"What really strikes me is that we still have so few Australians taking specific actions like substantially reducing their household energy use, driving and flying less, switching to green power, or even buying carbon offsets, especially given all of the media coverage on this critical issue," she added.

COMMENTS

Monday, 06 October 2008

I was thinking of this issue the other day while reading a report of how Atheists in the US were taking the President to court over national prayer day. The atheists claimed they were not able to live their atheist lives with this government sponsored prayer. I found the comment dumb but insightful .. after all, we aren't allowed to question global warming. Wikipedia editors are blocking those who wish to write that GW is debatable.

Posted by: Happy Fun Ball, Carramar/Sydney

 

Monday, 06 October 2008

I am so sick of this climate change junk. There is nothing little Australia can do about it even if it was true. Therefore I vow to do my best to add to climate change and produce as much carbon dioxide as I can. I will leave all the lights on and use my aircon's all year round and drive my V8 as rough as possible. I will let the climate change experts do the saving of the Earth for me. There a lot of people like me out there who are sick of this and think just like me! Kapisch? Mr Rudd

Posted by: peter realist, sydney

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

If Australian wants to reduce global warming they should change the base load power base to Nuclear. This is what is happening in most developed countries in the world. Or maybe I forgot, forgot Australia is not a developed country it is now a third world country thanks to State and Federal Labor? Piers Akermans recent column said it all. These global warming people need to find a new job.

Posted by: Andy Mac, HK

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Hoooray at last the public is waking up .Now its time to STOP John Brumby from taking water out of Eildon and sending it to Melbourne,when there is plenty of other alternatives for Melb.(It is on the sea you know).Of course Peter Garrett oked it.This water saving would help the Murray Darling heaps and heaps.But of course Brumby and a Rock singer would know more than anyone else,so they wont listen.(Big business will only get it anyway,because they can afford to buy it).

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

The Australian public are getting bored with "Climate Change".What message does that send to Rudd,Wong and Gaurnat. It is VERY CLEAR.Perhaps if the Govt dropped their idea.(ie stoped using it as a tax excuse),and concentrated on more pressing and to the point pollution issues.They themselves might just survive beyond 2010.....Ohh by the way oil is $87.00 a barrel Mr Rudd.(I realise the AU $ has dropped).If you really want to help the Aussie economy follow your election promise.LOWER PRICES.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Is it really the Australian public who are bored with it,from the comments i have seen we have allways been bored with it.Or is it the media who are getting bored with it

Posted by: D S, syd

Monday, 13 October 2008

Too late Pierce, they are already arresting land owners who try to prevent them from taking the pipe through their property in the country. Govt sending in police to take the land owner off their properties while they lay the pipe line.....so much for owning your land.

Posted by: susan lawe, gippsland

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Nuclear is the way to go Andy Mac. Together with other renewable energy schemes. At least we have the nuclear technology ready and proven and have heaps of uranium. We have sun, wind . Then when we find new technologies we can slowly faze out the old. So lets just work at it all the time rather then tax people or for ever talk about it. We need new energy not new tax.

Posted by: Happy Stein, Earlwood

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Climate change?? What a laugh! Why the government of Australia making the public feel responsible when it's the corporations who's making millions. I hadn't built those huge factories so why put the blame on me? How dare you political hypocrites try to turn the blame on us Aussies! And another thing, people in government should do a reality check, It's the tax payer who decides how much tax to pay NOT the government! Shame on you all for spending my hard earned dollars for selfish desires.

Posted by: Andrew Glagau, Wangaratta

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Krudd hasnt stopped flying since elected.Like GORE, He wishes everyone to cut back on emissions, whilst they consume moore to make up for our cut backs. Pierce, I brought p the issue about the fuel a few days ago, Some clowns say i have to take into account the $ rate..LOL. Here the fuel is same price today as it was when OIL was $ 147.00/barrel. -$60.00/barrel and all is the same? Our dollar must have been swapped for MUGABE's Dollars???? perhaps its credit crisis issue this time??

Posted by: Nick Again, Maryborough

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Climate change is not meant to be entertaining! We are having a mass species extinction. Bird losses are surely the canary in the mine! The planet is dying! People are more worried about the financial melt-down than our own planet. Ulimately the planet will survive, but the outcome won't be so good for all the species.

Posted by: Vivienne Ortega, Heidelberg Heights

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Vivienne, the Frogs are the canary in the Mine. The bird life is dissappearing because of the logging. The greenies decided it was better to continue logging for the benefit of the corrupt. Speaking of the greenies, they continuously tell us that we are loosing x amount of species each year. Consider we began with a limited number to begin with, how is it we still have ANYTHING left? Look to Indoneasia and Brasil, Malaya, they strip timber for the ministers benifit.

Posted by: Nick Again, Maryborough

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

So are BEES Nick,imagine what that is doing to our Flora.Chemicals, and a disease from o/s is wiping them out quickly.They are not choking on Carbon dioxide.These type of things are a far more imporant example of issues that exist.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Could it be more dis-interest born of lack of understanding and government(s) inaction, most people possibly having little ability to absorb technical information nor for/against spins, but in my own continuing personal search for information and appreciation if not total understanding I cam across " The presence of the greenhouse gases CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere over the last 450,000 years has been determined by examination of polar ice cores. In the four interglacial.......cont'd.

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

cont'd. "The presence of the greenhouse gases CO2 and CH4 in the atmosphere over the last 450,000 years has been determined by examination of polar ice cores. In the four interglacial warm periods prior to the present one the CO2 never rose above 300 parts per million and CH4 never went above 800 parts per billion. The current situation is that CO2 is approaching 400 ppm and CH4 is over 1700 ppb." and whilst aware of ice age cycles, I had not before seen something so concise.

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

cont'd.... and so Vivienne, whilst I agree "Climate change is not meant to be entertaining! " and the prospective impact on all species, us included is alarming if CO2/CH4 levels are trending as claimed, governments and scientists are failing us in not presenting the public with wholesome yet easily understood basic facts, government advisors in particular usually producing reports of thousands of pages of the typical mumbo jumbo that even pollies may find difficult to comprehend.

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Neville-Good on you for trying to take a rational look at this-but if my maths is correct the Co2 increase is a mere .001% and the CH4 is .000009%-is that right?. Next question can Science pinpoint the reason for this increase or are they just assuming that because of the Industrial revolution etc. that it is human activity that is responsible for the problem? Finally what is the percentage of Co2 and CH4 in the Greenhouse gas total?

Posted by: Desmond Harris, Beacon Hill

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Well the public knows the krudd served up on this mater was always wong. Hollomen are on overtime trying to save a face or two. So well may they save face but who will save the governments arse?

Posted by: Ready 4 the turnaround, Sydney

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Ready4..."Well the public knows the krudd served up on this mater was always wong." I am as guilty as any of using name slurs and have been an open book on climate change and still are on some aspects, and especially on what impact Australia can have % wise but would you rather not have a KISS approach, getting something understandable served up and so in being an avid unbeliever it would seem, what is it that has been served up that is incorrect and what is the basis for what you believe?

Posted by: Neville Simms, Sydney

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

whilst we continue to be bling to the fact we decide what is good via cost, we wont achieve anything. MIM, could have placed a sulpher reburn system for 400 odd mill, in the late 80's, dodged it fo the cost.Already we have companies wanting latitude in how they get charged dor emissions whilst we the public pick up for them. Planting trees sounds good until the temop rises 2-3 deg. then they reverse Photosynthesis, truely fubar ing us. emission cuts can be reached by being sensible without TAX

Posted by: Nick again, maryborough

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

All car manufacturers can detune an engine to achieve better mileage and less emissions ut markets say " more power".Our tankers Consume huge amounts of fuel, nuclear could replace it.Our coal burners for Nuclear and wind. All homes shold be built with Solar energy or wind power in mind. to say it takes x yrs to get it into plans is laughable. All Govt. buildings shold have motion sensor lights, as shold most homes. many a thing can be " changed" without rupturing the Public senslessly.

Posted by: Nick Again, maryborough

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

This will sound so selfish and probably wrong to many of the 'greenies' out there. To be totally honest if it came to me having a easy/good life and my economy forging ahead strongly or ruining my life and millions of other human lives in exchange for the benefit of some bird or bug or wild animal I will always choose myself/humans. In the end were all creatures striving to survive and theres a thing called the food chain. I rest my case.

Posted by: peter joker, sydney

 

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

I was really worried about the financial situation until I found out that the seas are dying. Then I learnt about the frogs, and was recently updated about the bees and then told about the mammal extinction. Then it got worse. I found out that I am a mammal. I decided to comfort eat a steak dinner and was told about the cows. I somehow felt dirty and decided to have a shower. But then I was told about the water and felt too guilty. I feel slightly better knowing we are all doomed.

Posted by: Peter Gallagher, Brisbane

Tuesday, 07 October 2008

Peter that is really quite good mate.It really shows just how paranoid we have all become.Somehow,I think we will all be here tomorrow to write again.

Posted by: Pierce B, Vic

 

Sunday, 12 October 2008

Going by the comments here, making our societies sustainable is obviously what they call a 'wicked' problem. Nick Again - you think that using legislation to put a value on carbon is not fair, but you say that buildings 'should' have this and that, but isn't that just doing the same thing, but to a different section of society? To Peter, I'll assume you're takin the piss a bit, but in the end our comfortable lifestyles (including basics such as air, water and stable temperatures as well con't...

Posted by: Geoff Longhurst, Sutherland

 

Sunday, 12 October 2008

con't... as well as the pigments in the letters that are painted on your keyboard all ultimately come from a natural part of the earth. The trick of living sustainably then is finding a way to not use up the limited resources we have, not producing so much waste that the earths systems can't deal with it and not interrupting earth's systems so much that they make life for both us and everything else on the planet impossible to thrive in. So, no it's not just us who have to think hard con't...

Posted by: Geoff Longhurst, Sutherland

 

Sunday, 12 October 2008

Cont'd...So, no it's not just us who have to think hard about this and make changes/choices, but it's something that all levels of society need to address. Its a real shame though that guilt, apathy and antagonism are some of the more common ways that we are engaged with this. Personally, I think it's an interesting and exciting time to be alive.

Posted by: Geoff Longhurst, Sutherland

 

Sunday, 12 October 2008

Dear Geoff. I hear ya. I have a problem with people acting like they care and trying to make money out of it (eg carbon trading). Secondly if our government goes ahead with this plan in this economic landscape we might aswel kiss our little Aussie behind's goodbye. This place will VERY quickly go into a depression and soon after STARVATION. Which leads to anachy and civil unrest. So lets save the world and in the same breath destroy eachother. Sounds like too much to lose for infinitesimal gains

Posted by: peter joker, sydney

 

Monday, 13 October 2008

Our government is focusing on greenhouse gases, but the reality of climate change is much more pervasive and human-caused than CO2 and methane! They will use this as an excuse for more charges and taxes! We do not need more and more people for economic growth! We could also fix our "skill shortages" within our own population! The real problem is we lack leaders in australia who can see the whole picture of land degregation and clearing due to too many people and livestock on the planet.

Posted by: Vivienne Ortega, Heidelberg Heights

 

Monday, 13 October 2008

I agree Vivienne Ortega, The planet is a certain size and can only accomodate a certain number of people. We can live smarter and fit more people tho. Im afraid to think it but it seems the only reason governments want more people is to have more SLAVES more workers to pay taxes and to help upkeep the rich peoples lifestyles. This is more of a problem than a natural hurricane or a natural flood.

Posted by: peter joker, sydney

 

Monday, 13 October 2008

Far from being bored with climate change, I am really interested in some of the incredibly innovative solutions some aussies are coming up with to tackle the problem. There is a project in WA involving large buoys positioned below water level, the wave motion drives a piston arrangement forcing seawater under pressure to turbines on land. 35% of baseload nationally can be provided with proximity of usable waves to population centres. We can be cutting edge with this stuff.

Posted by: darren carrow, brisbane

 

Tuesday, 14 October 2008

Darren, all these energy developments will only survive with backing from governments. Governments dont like spending money. If they dont have do to something they wont. Also people with vested interests elsewhere will do their utmost to stop such technologies. Coal companies, stations, petrol companies etc.. people with a lot of money and a voice. We can only hope for such technologies to thrive. Who killed the electric car...??

Posted by: peter joker, sydney

 
 

YOUR SAY