Australia 2020 Summit - Initial Report

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/docs/2020_Summit_initial_report.pdf

The (initial) report from the Australia 2020 summit has been released.

It says this:

“By 2020 Australia will be making a major contribution to a comprehensive global response to climate change, including working with our partners on clean energy. Australia will have dramatically reduced our emissions, and communities, regions and business will be actively assisted to adopt the unavoidable consequences of climate change.”

But how will those emissions of greenhouse gases be “dramatically reduced”? There is essentially nothing in the report indicating that much thought has been given at all to how those emissions will be reduced on an appropriate chronological scale.

What’s more, astonishingly, there is no mention - no mention at all - of nuclear energy in the report. There is no “nuclear energy is good”, no “nuclear energy is bad”, no “no, we must not waste our resources with nuclear energy”, no “we should look into the nuclear energy option” - absolutely nothing!

What exactly have these delegates been doing, for goodness sake?

Those anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions aren’t going to mitigate themselves.

Now I’m concerned about Australia’s future.

I feel sorry for those who have to sort through all these submissions to the Australia 2020 summit - hopefully all submissions will not be considered equally, and some of these won’t be considered at all. Hopefully the summit attendees are wiser than that.

It makes me a little sad to remember that these people vote.

Solving our energy problems:
(The laws of thermodynamics are optional…)

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4574&count=1

Until the issues of water use and energy production are solved in a truly sustainable manner, any ideas of “needing” population growth are essentially suicidal on a national scale. Nuclear power is NOT and never will be the solution to climate change, all it will give us is a half-life and a new pay per dose alternative to petrol/coal products. The genetic degradation amongst humans alone is enough reason to steer clear of this obvious disaster. Renewable energy and even free energy devices are the real way of the future - their main obstacle to success is not technological impossibility but the vested interests of the current energy industry doing all it can to prevent their inevitable demise, even if it means the inevitable demise of us all. If mankind has split the atom, we can certainly find any number of other ways to produce power cleanly as well. Just look at what Nikola Tesla and his type invented - if people were free to investigate this kind of research again and produce it on a large scale, our problems would be quickly solved. Human ingenuity will not fail us, corporate business acumen already has and continues to do so.

I hope that I have not endangered myself by writing what I already have, but to say nothing and let the machine grind on almost certainly threatens the life of everyone on Earth - I have no choice but to speak up.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=562&count=1

There is one avenue of energy production that has not been explored; yet I believe that it offers the best long-term solution.

I ask that my suggestion be considered on evidence; not on beliefs (no matter how well established.)

I propose that the best means of producing energy is to create it.

There is no evidence to support the popular belief that “energy cannot be created.” In fact the evidence demonstrates that energy can be created! Energy exists! If energy cannot be created, how can it exist? Obviously, energy can and has been created.

The advantages to creating energy are: 1. Consumption of resources will be greatly reduced. 2. Pollution will be greatly reduced. 3. Man’s input to Climate Change will be greatly reduced. 4. The environment, human beings and other living things will be healthier.

The disadvantages to creating energy are: 1. It contradicts a long held belief. (There is likely to be opposition from those who hold the belief that “Energy cannot be created.”) 2. Reduction of revenue from fuels. (Revenue can be made on the sale of the technology required to create energy.)

I believe that we need to develop an energy technology based on creating energy. Energy technologies based on burning or otherwise consuming resources are unsafe and unstainable. These technologies are limited by their resources. (How much of the planet can we cover with solar panels before we affect the environment?) We need an energy technology that does not consume resources or pollute the world in which we have to live. I believe that I can significantly contribute with this. Please contact me.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=2982&count=1

Alternative ideas are on the internet freely, but no one has the money to develop them, eg. perpetual car by Leonardo Da Vinci that runs entirely on springs, hurts no environment and costs nothing to run. There are tonnes of examples.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=2496&count=1

Hydrogen is a zero emmission technology, it runs on just water

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4114&count=1

Greenhouse Gases- Boom 2008 An Australian has just invented a power station where he is currently looking for backers. This power station could make coal and oil power stations obsolete throughout the world. The USA has 15000 fuel power stations alone - this could be a major world export for Australia.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=2261&count=1

Prizes for research into antibody therapies, open source [Linux] software, anti gravity and constant free energy technologies.

Reform the written alphabet to 42 phonetic letters and use for written spelling.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4020&count=1

We now have technology of a “free-power” generator that would supply the irrigation needs to each farmer without him having to pay for power and pump from our burdeoned rivers.

The Earth turns one turn approximately in 24 hours and this is analogue function. It is true to say that Earth turns one turn per day but digitally we cannot measure her absolutely in time. The growth of technology has outstripped population growth because of digital function.

I have a plan that constitutes two words and if these two words were a part of Australian belief then we would revere Earth as Australia’s Highest process. That plan has started by the formula x + y = ONE and that is man + Woman = Life and Kevin Rudd + Julia Gilard = Truth

So what is power, well its “numbers of” “perpetual motion” relativity; so why can’t we, if we have a device already available, put power in each back yard.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=1267&count=1

# multple intelligences, integrated disciplines and reinforcement of deferal to materials science. # humanities, critical thinking, metaphysics # integrated arts/science (art architecture music maths science) GEOMETRY, SPACE, SYMBOLISM, COLOUR, LIGHT, SOUND: VIBRATIONAL AND HARMONIC THEORY as SCIENCE OF Embedded ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM # INTEGRATIVE consciousness and cosmology studies # COMPARATIVE religious/spiritual studies (which should not defer to JC DEISM alone -god as architect and observer in void and hence all as artifice; negation of immanence, naturalism, common law birth rights, association to LAND rather than mercantile law of franchised colonies # INDIGENOUS MINDSET OF WHOLENESS (set which contains all sets- August Moebius, Felix Klein, Sophus Lie) which was noted by DAVID BOHM as being the CORRELETIVE of Quantum Physics.

There is a presumption that the dominant scientific mindset is the science of REALITY, and indeed that the INABILITY to reveal natures secrets and to know the nature of reality is a GIVEN, that every perspective is relative rather than opposites being complements and hence interconnected through non dual duality, while simultaneously, nature is being reverse engineered at an alarming rate and cutting edge cosmology serves the project of Artificial intelligence, cybernetics and technohumanism all of which is marketed as the means through which humans will be liberated from the mortal coil of basic labours. Is the human the muse or the mule. Is artificial intelligence, genetic engineering, cybernetics and technohumanism to deliver humanities worst science fiction nightmare? Biological ANDROIDS. With the level of conditioning that is obviously a great success in the English speaking world, will anyone know it is happening?

PROBLEM: closed minded scepticism used to DEFEND coal tar chemistry mindset, supported by PEER REVIEWED NON SCIENTIFIC BUFFOONERY which consistently uses JAMES RANDI a magician without any scientific credentials to DEBUNK all paranormal or subtle and vibrational sciences such as HOMOEOPATHY and Chi Gong- while the British Royal Family is treated with Homoeopathy and GEORGE BUSH SENIOR is treated by China’s greatest CHI GONG MASTER, and Chinese leaders imprison FULON GUNG MASTERS for FREE TRAINING of the general population, due to it’s POWERFUL success preventing ill health, healing, and developing self empowerment.

ABC, SBS, Australia Television and radio are all effected by a bureaucracy that is either completely ignorant or complicit to the power and use of neurolinguistic programming which effectively conditions the general population in a manner that used to be called MINDCONTROL and now is lightly referred to as media cut ups and education(?) through marketing. Relying on the BBC and NBC for international reports places Australian international journalism at risk of reporting only on soft stories and hence Australia itself remains DEPENDENT on the TOP DOWN FEEDING to its subjugated citizens, from England and America.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4005&count=1

At some time prior to 175 million years ago, but following the partition of the continent of Australia from the continent of Antarctica, the earth was struck by a massive object from about 17 - 17.5° North of West, at a shallow angle. The initial impact was southeast of central Australia. Note that this is the current location of the impact point; at the time of the impact, Australia would undoubtedly have been ‘elsewhere’ on the planet.

The impact created an elongated crater of dimensions approximately 2,600 km major axis, and 1,920 km minor axis.

The pressure wave from this impact travelled quickly through the earth, and was reflected. On its return to near the centre of the initial impact, a great deal of material was ejected from the earth, in the manner of the rebound of a water drop. The material which was ejected possibly coalesced to form a moon sized object. This may or may not be the object we know as the Moon. Current estimations of the age of the Moon do not appear to be consistent with the timing of this event.

A second crater was left by this ejection event. This crater is more circular, with a major axis of 1,760 km and a minor axis of 1,690 km.

Remnants of these events remain.

• The Great Dividing Range is the eastern edge of the impact crater.

• A large depression near the centre of the impact crater, and on the inner edge of the ejection crater, remains, as Lake Eyre.

• A large spill of debris from the impact crater remains, off the continental shelf, from near Port Lincoln to the West Australian border.

• A large rock known as Ayers Rock or in its Aboriginal name, Uluru, lies close to the centre of the ejecta crater.

• Mountain ranges, or otherwise disturbed areas, generally delineate the outer edge of both craters.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=3127&count=1

Noisy motorbikes especially owned by criminal gangs should be forced by law to quieten down; the same goes for noisy cars. This could lead to huge reduction in criminal behaviour.

Luddism:

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=2533&count=1

as for saving energy why dont you make it law that 1 day a week you turn all your power aplliecace off ecept the necesetiy ( eg fridge) and go back old school

Health:

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4475&count=1

All pharmaceuticals with side effects should be off the government benefits.

Too much finance is being spent on highly expensive medical research, which is not going to benefit many people.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4008&count=1

The significance of Complementary Therapies is still not recognised in prevention of illness and disease. Remedial/Sports massage, Herbal Medicine, Naturopathy and Homeopathy have huge success in returning people health and ability to function in society, before major illness, chronic conditions or disease occurs. Currently, these therapies are not recognised by our public health system.

http://www.australia2020.gov.au/submissions/viewTopic.cfm?id=4130&count=1

change all medical degrees to be entered through nursing. drop the high scores required for entrance and take people who have greater levels of compassion (which nurses usually do)

An open letter to Kevin Rudd and the Australia 2020 Summit.

As worldwide concern mounts over the potentially serious effects caused by potential forcing of changes in climatic systems resulting from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases, Australia must undertake serious consideration of how best to reduce, within reason, the anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions of our civilization.

In an Australian context, the most significant, obvious step which we can take towards the mitigation of CO2 emissions is the replacement of our extremely polluting and harmful primarily coal-fired stationary electricity generation capacity with alternative systems for stationary electricity generation on the large scale required, which are environmentally sustainable and not CO2 emissions intensive.

50% of all anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions in Australia come from stationary energy generation - clearly this is the most obvious place to start if we really want to make a dent in carbon dioxide emissions.

The idea that 80% of our electricity generation capacity is being generated from coal and fossil fuels, with the dangerous waste of fossil fuels just being spewed into the environment as usual, is absolutely appalling.

To this end, rational, factual, well-researched and scientifically motivated consideration must be paid in particular to the use of nuclear energy - which is a proven, mature, environmentally sound and non CO2 emissions intensive source of electricity generation which works on the large scales of energy output required.

Nuclear energy must be considered, and compared with the alternatives available, in a way which is informed, scientifically motivated and free of dogma, ignorance and political bias, and based on consideration of the environmentally sound technologies which are available and proven right now which can most successfully provide large scale electricity generation with the high capacity factors required to substitute for and replace dangerous and environmentally destructive coal-fired generation in the near future. Nuclear energy is a technology which satisfies all these criteria.

I would like to hear what account the Rudd government would give, what scientifically, factually motivated basis they could give, for their opposition to nuclear energy - and I strongly urge them to reconsider it, for the good of us all.
[Yes, I did officially submit something very close to the above to the summit.]