In which CCS and nattering "Ned" are all the go ...

 

A pond correspondent kindly asked the question ...

A late thought regarding the front page; that’s the second day running the Lizard Oz has featured allegations of financial shenanigans in the Vatican. Given the prominence with which he is featured, presumably this is some sort of campaign to rehabilitate the reputation of the late Cardinal George Pell?

Most likely, but the Pellists have this day fallen down the charts in the Catholic Boys' Daily.

These are the top stories that made the cut early in the morning after the 6 am changover ...

A yarn could still be found, but it was way down the page and the Pellists weren't glorified in the header ... and woe of ancient Catholic woes, it wasn't labelled an EXCLUSIVE...

HOLY SEE BUDGET
Vatican announces $110m profit on real estate assets
Vatican celebrates its ‘best budget in years’ with $110m windfall, while shocking details emerge of money-laundering schemes from the Francis era.
By Paola Totaro

Still, that's better than the mass famine in Gaza, with the only mention of matters middle east seeing the UK move to recognise Palestine dubbed "a reward for Hamas".

Cockroaches have their own take on the matter, a strategy of out of sight, out of mind...

Instead of any of that, this day climate change was all the go, familiar turf for the hive mind, with the reptiles gloating on the one hand ...

EXCLUSIVE
Labor’s energy target all miss and wind as turbine construction slumps
Australia’s wind farm construction has ground to a complete halt as costs soar, putting Labor’s ambitious 82 per cent renewable energy target in serious doubt.
By Paul Garvey and Perry Williams

... and on the other Chambering a bullet offering exciting new times ...

EXCLUSIVE
Carbon-capture’s $66bn boost as net-zero support surges
Madeleine King will launch a report revealing an east coast carbon capture storage network could add $66bn to the economy, as polling shows surging post-election support for net zero.
By Geoff Chambers

The pond will spare punters the illustrations that accompanied the Chambering - they were a snap of King and a series of graphs which also enlivened the tedium of a "Ned" natter on the topic, and best saved to enliven his offering.

Instead, just marvel at the way that the reptiles were all in favour of CCS projects ...

Resources Minister Madeleine King will launch a major industry report revealing an integrated east-coast carbon capture and storage network could add $66bn to the economy and support more than 15,000 new jobs, as new polling shows surging post-election support for climate change targets and renewables.
Amid a push for stronger government backing of CCS projects to help remove emissions from hard-to-abate industries including cement production, fertiliser manufacturing, mining and metal refining, federal Labor remains split over the merits of the low-emissions tech.
An EY report, commissioned by Low Emission Technology Australia, says there is a “distinct opportunity, now and over the next decade, to develop and deploy CCS to deliver cost effective industrial decarbonisation and support Australia’s transition to net-zero emissions by 2050”.

LETA has a very flashy website, but the pond has its doubts. 

Per DeSmog ...

And so on, and to be honest, the pond was immediately put on alert and made to feel suspicious by the way that the reptiles jumped on board with the desire to waste money on CCS...

“However, the local industry currently lags leading countries like the US, UK and China, which are actively developing integrated CCS hubs as part of their broader industrial and climate action strategies,” the report says.
“A particular challenge for Australia is developing CCS on the east coast where progress has stalled but where much of the country’s industrial and manufacturing base is located.”
Global mining giant Glencore had its controversial CCS project in the Great Artesian Basin scuttled by the Queensland Labor government last year, prompting industry “death knell” concerns about the future of east coast CCS projects.
While some federal Labor MPs believe that “CCS perpetuates fossil fuels”, Ms King has fought to keep CCS in the government’s arsenal, despite opposition in the first-term Albanese government from some cabinet colleagues. Ms King, who will speak at the Parliament House report launch event on Wednesday night, this month declared that “we need to … use every tool we’ve got to try and decarbonise” – including CCS.
Australia’s three flagship CCS operations are: the Chevron-­operated Gorgon facility off Western Australia, the Santos-operated Moomba project in South Australia and the CO2CRC-operated Otway International Test Centre in Victoria.
Amid splits in the Coalition over whether to dump a commitment for net-zero emissions by 2050 and as the government finalises its new 2035 emissions-­reduction target, an SEC Newgate Mood of the Nation survey reveals support for the energy transition to renewables is growing, rising from 53 to 58 per cent since April.
The poll of 1855 Australians, conducted from July 8-16, found 64 per cent of voters (up from 56 per cent) backed the 2030 target to reduce carbon emissions by 43 per cent and 59 per cent (up from 53 per cent) endorsed the commitment to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Support for rooftop solar has risen to 89 per cent, ahead of hydroelectric power (75 per cent), solar farms (74 per cent), onshore wind (63 per cent), offshore wind (60 per cent), gas-fired power (35 per cent), nuclear power (31 per cent) and coal-fired power (31 per cent).
The EY report said that under a high-growth scenario where the “right mix of regulatory, technology, and commercial settings were introduced”, CCS deployment along the east coast could rapidly accelerate to 50 million tonnes of carbon dioxide in 2050.
“A fully networked CCS industry along the east coast could increase economic activity by around $66bn and support an additional 15,250 jobs over the coming decades,” the report said.
“Such a scenario would require a significant but achievable scale-up in common-use infrastructure, reductions in upfront capital and ongoing costs, particularly for emerging technologies such as ­direct air capture, and effective co-ordination across government and industry.
“CCS deployment is integral in sustaining the growth and global competitiveness of Australia’s hard-to-abate sectors, while still ensuring industry alignment with national climate goals under the Safeguard Mechanism.”
LETA acting chief executive Damian Dwyer said the report echoed advice from the International Energy Agency, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Australia’s Climate Change Authority and CSIRO on the importance of CCS. He said LETA was urging the federal government to “take steps to address regulatory barriers for CCS.

Carbon polluters of all kinds are no doubt dancing in the street.

All this was by of a warm up to the main act, "Ned" having a Wednesday natter over on the extreme far right, where he was briefly top of the world ma ...

What a dull and tedious day, but at least it allowed the pond to stay on topic, what with King Donald recently embarking on one of his mindless rants...

“And the other thing I say to Europe, we will not allow a windmill to be built in the United States, they’re killing us. They’re killing the beauty of our scenery, our valleys, our beautiful plains. And I’m not talking about airplanes, I’m talking about beautiful plains, beautiful areas of the United States, and you look up and you see windmills all over the place, it’s a horrible thing. It's the most expensive form of energy; it’s no good. They’re made in China, almost all of them. When they start to rust and rot in eight years, you can’t really turn them off, you can’t bury them, they won't let you. But the propellers, the props, because they’re a certain type of fiber that doesn’t go well with the land, that’s what they say. The environmentalists say you can’t bury them because the fiber doesn’t go well with the land; in other words, if you bury it, it will harm our soil. The whole thing is a con job.” (Rex Huppke)

The manchild king, spawn of Faux Noise, really is out there ...

... but his addled, deeply warped brain has real world consequences ...

Never mind, on to "Ned's" natter, a most peculiar sounding of alarums for five long tedious minutes, or so the reptiles clocked him, when in reality Barners, Tamworth's undying shame, is just enacting what so many reptiles have yearned for so many times over these past few decades...

The header: Rejecting net zero will condemn Liberals to electoral oblivion, The key to the party’s future is intellectual renewal. That won’t be found in pretending that climate change borders on a global hoax.

The caption: Liberal leader Sussan Ley says she wants the upshot to be a united Coalition stance, but that’s a monumental task. Picture: NewsWire / Martin Ollman

The magickal advice: This article contains features which are only available in the web version, Take me there

Borders on a global hoax?

The pond can't begin to count the number of times it has recounted some reptile ratbag or other banging on endlessly about the way that climate science doesn't just border on a global hoax, it is a cosmic hoax of the first water, a religious cult, a home to mad climate chance zealots, a delusional obsession preached by sometime uppity Swedish teenagers.

And now "Ned"is offering a moment of discordant "truth"?

The Liberal Party faces a moment of truth. Does it still aspire to be a governing party for Australia or is its future as a right-wing echo chamber for conservatives raging against progressive dominance on climate change?
The row about net zero at 2050 is about far more than a policy position. It goes to the meaning of the Liberal Party and its identity. This penetrates to whether the Liberals have a credible future with the voters of urban Australia, whether they can find a viable 21st-century stance on climate change, and whether the Coalition can survive given the fracture between Liberals and Nationals over net zero.

The pond will admit that the all-day sucker fell from the pond's mouth and landed with a thud on the floor as it read "Ned" raging at the right-wing echo chamber for conservatives raging against progressive dominance on climate change

Had "Ned" gone mad, or is it just another cunning plot to send the pond mad?

There came a reassuring caption that the notion of nuking the country to save the planet had nothing to do with it, The Liberal wipeout in urban Australia had nothing to do with the Scott Morrison/Peter Dutton stance of net zero at 2025.

The pond decided to break its rule about not enlarging reptile snaps because the vacant stare on the clap happy liar from the shire was simply too rich to celebrate.

Did he just see the rapture and his impending redemption or was it just another air flow problem in the style of King Donald?

The pond isn't certain as to the identity of that gaunt, haggard figure lurking over the clap happy's left shoulder, but a close reading of "Ned's" missive might help ...

Much of the post-election story has been the unleashing of the populist conservatives, demanding the abandonment of net zero, consumed with self-righteous conviction, and posing as crusading heroes leading their minions into the valley of death where fleeting glory, grief and political extinguishment await.
The key to the Liberal Party’s future is political and intellectual renewal. That won’t be found in pretending that climate change borders on a global hoax or running a strategy that alienates even more people than were alienated at the dismal 2025 election.
Let’s start with that election. The Liberal wipeout in urban Australia had nothing to do with the Scott Morrison/Peter Dutton stance of net zero at 2025. Where, pray, is the evidence for this? It doesn’t exist. The fallacy is to say that because the Liberals had a net zero policy in 2022 and 2025 and did badly, the policy should be dropped. This conflates correlation with causation. There were many reasons for the defeats of Morrison and Dutton but, to the extent climate was a factor, it was because the Liberals weren’t seen as sufficiently serious in tackling the problem.
Claiming the response to the 2025 defeat is to run harder against climate action is unforgivable folly and tactical madness.
Opposing net zero is a statement of non-belief. It is either a declaration of opposition to serious emissions reduction targets with 2050 as a benchmark or even of abandoning support for the Paris-based model of individual country commitments, which would suggest no real point staying in the Paris Agreement.
Either way, Labor would cast the Coalition as a climate denier. It would be branded – ditching Morrison and Dutton pragmatism while preferring Trump-type climate extremism. How would that play? Labor would add climate denial to Medicare as its fail-safe mechanisms to ensure the Coalition stayed in opposition in perpetuity.

And pray tell, what's wrong with being cast as climate deniers? 

The reptiles at the lizard Oz have routinely and proudly been climate deniers for decades, have whole heartedly embracing King Donald-type climate extremism, have built a business model and a hive mind community out of it.

How has it played in terms of circulation? Best not to ask, but it hasn't stopped all the key reptiles at various points raging about the complete wrongness of renewables, and so on, and such like...

At this point the reptiles decided what was needed was a few graphs and did a repeat of the graphs the pond had already seen Chambered in that CCS yarn ...

The pond should note that the last graph was cut off and there was no way for the pond to include all the wording:

Not that it mattered, because the reptiles seemed to see something significant in the polling wind, or perhaps in the windmills.

"Ned" continued with his revisionist approach, but not so much because of any apparent or inherent interest in the science, so much as what might happen at the polls...

Labor would have the full progressive orchestra behind it, singing in unison – teals, Greens, the women’s vote, the youth vote, the unions, the corporates, the finance sector, the NGOs, the education lobby and the full progressive media in its moralistic, outrage mode. What chance of getting a decent flow of preferences at the 2028 election? Forget it. A low primary vote would be tied to a low preference flow, entrenching the Coalition’s decline.
Why fall for such electoral stupidity when the Liberals have every chance of turning climate policy to their advantage in 2028? Every sign is that Labor, driven by the left of politics, will overreach. The Climate Change Authority has previously floated targets in the 65-75 per cent zone for 2035, a hefty leap from the 43 per cent 2030 target that Labor is struggling to achieve.
With a number of teals and environmental groups backing the 75 per cent target, Labor is trapped between the political pressure to be ambitious and the practical problems facing wind, solar and batteries.
There is a universal view within the Coalition that Labor’s energy transition is economically and structurally flawed, that reliance on renewables means system unreliability, ongoing price escalation for consumers and business, growing risks to industrial processes and jobs, more government spending on clean-energy subsidies and consumer price compensation, and a social licence crisis over wind farms.
“Let Labor bring itself undone” is the obvious tactic for the Coalition. Why spoil what the Coalition sees as an unfolding Albanese government blunder? Why give Labor a political life-raft? Anthony Albanese’s dream is for the Coalition to make itself the issue, to gift Labor a negative campaign, and distract from Labor’s energy failings. It is the type of politics at which Labor excels.
Barnaby Joyce has catapulted himself into the media spotlight with his bill to eliminate net zero as a commitment, a bill with no prospect of passage, but a mischief-making ploy that has drawn backing from his former rival, Michael McCormack, and channels National Party resistance to net zero. It undermines Opposition Leader Sussan Ley’s reviews, notably the net zero review across the Coalition conducted by frontbencher Dan Tehan. Ley says she wants the upshot to be a united Coalition stance, but that’s a monumental task.

The reptiles seized on Tamworth's never-ending shame to provide an interrupting snap, Michael McCormack will vote for Barnaby Joyce’s private member’s bill to repeal net zero. Picture: Martin Ollman

Naturally the pond couldn't resist a hot air ballon moment for Tamworth's compleat humiliation...

The pond isn't sure about the Banksie reference, with the way the image shatters a child's dreams and hopes ...

The pond continues to have a soft spot for the infallible Pope's portrait, and having promised to use it again at some point, here it is again ...

"Ned" continued on his tortured way...

Joyce has nothing to lose and everything to gain from his assault on net zero. It is a nostalgia trip for him. The Liberals, by contrast, have everything to lose and nothing to gain. The election is three years away, but Joyce is already damaging Liberal MPs in their few remaining urban seats.
The Nationals, to be fair, have a different interest because community opinion in rural and regional seats is more hostile to net zero – the direct result of Labor and progressive patronisation of the regions and their contempt for legitimate rural and farmer concerns. With Matt Canavan – the most lethal critic of net zero in the parliament – involved in the Nationals’ review of their policy, the short odds are on a change of party stance.
But how far will the Nationals go? Will they make a binary decision and throw out the complete concept? If so, they invite the fracturing of the Coalition, against Ley’s wishes. The Liberals cannot have Coalition policy hijacked by the Nats and they cannot tolerate the optics of being dictated to by the junior partner.

At this point the reptiles interrupted with a Sky Noise down under moment, featuring Danica ... Sky News host Danica De Giorgio discusses the Coalition’s relevance to the net zero debate after Labor’s recent election win. “Let’s talk about net zero, Opposition leader Sussan Ley seems to be really struggling to unite the party on this,” Ms De Giorgio said. “Matt Canavan said earlier it does not matter if the Coalition debate over net zero gets messy because the Coalition is irrelevant right now, does he have a point?”

Of course he has a point. How the reptiles have loved the "coal that batters" Canavan caravan over the years.

You don't have to look too far to see Danica, doing her best to embrace the Mar-a-Lago look for TV presenters, blathering on about climate zealots...

Sky News host Danica De Giorgio criticised the renewable energy “zealots”, including Minister Chris Bowen, for their "obsession" with keeping the "dying fantasy" of renewables alive.

Sorry, the pond doesn't usually link to reptile outfits, but rest assured Danica has been very blonde on the matter of climate science for many a year ...

Now back to "Ned" for final thoughts...

In conclusion, there is no way the Liberal Party can finish this process with a binary rejection of net zero at 2050. That is neither a policy nor a political option. It would signal the Liberal Party rejection of its historic mission as a governing party. It would repudiate the majority sentiment of Middle Australia – that climate change is a problem, that the national government must recognise this truth and formulate a meaningful response (even when many of those same people have limits on the price hikes they might tolerate.)
In practice, rejecting net zero is not a policy any more than opposing emissions reduction targets is a policy. Yet the anti-net zero populists rarely talk policy. What do they want? Government-financed new coal-fired power stations, the sure road to electoral oblivion? Or perhaps they prefer giving the designated nuclear power plants another doomed run?
The Liberals need to beware the propaganda line that China isn’t on the clean-energy train. Sure, China is investing in coal, but it’s also investing massively in renewables.
Yet there will be scope for Liberal creativity within the net zero framing. There is nothing to stop the Liberals from a new branding: “An Australian Way to Achieve Net Zero” – a direct repudiation of the conga line of international moralists lecturing this country. It’s what comes under this assertion of sovereignty that matters – even perhaps the radical step of excluding the agricultural sector from the deadline; a huge political move and concession for the Nats.
There is a bigger issue. The future of the Liberal Party lies in looking outwards, not inwards, not in becoming cultural hostage to the populist right. The party’s intellectual foundations are in desperate need of renewal, yet the sources of conservative intellectual input in this country are almost extinct, a situation where, on climate policy, Sky After Dark and the Melbourne-based Institute of Public Affairs loom as the tempting and damaging distractors.

Say what?

"Ned" having a go at the populist right? 

"Ned" having a go at Sky After Dark and the IPA as "damaging distractors"?

Has "Ned" been so distracted, so up his navel, so involved in fluff-gathering from his belly button that he entirely missed what the reptiles at the lizard Oz have been up to these past few decades?

The delusions are strong in this one ...

Usually at this point the pond would offer a bonus, but the pond will be running this afternoon at 4.30 pm the third reptile featured in the pond's Sunday meditation, unceremoniously shoved by a bot behind an age verification wall, and that's more than enough.

Besides, the only other strong contender was Dame Slap, and the pond simply couldn't muster the enthusiasm ...

Labor, ACTU have long fed from CFMEU trough 
It took some gall for Sally McManus to blame bosses for slow productivity growth considering the conduct of the CFMEU.
By Janet Albrechtsen
Columnist

Perhaps as a substitute a pond correspondent could ask AI to compose a column in the style of Dame Slap indulging in a dose of union and Labor bashing, it being a reversion to old school style reptile snake bashings ...

Here's what ChatGPT came up with when the pond asked the bot a question ...

Certainly. Here's a column written in the style of Janet Albrechtsen, known for her incisive, libertarian-conservative commentary, often found in publications like The Australian. The tone is sharp, unapologetic, and challenges institutional orthodoxy—in this case, trade unions:

Title: Time to Unmask the Union Mirage

By Janet Albrechtsen (style imitation)

If the modern union movement had a slogan, it would be this: "Entitlement first, accountability never." Once noble entities defending miners and factory workers from Dickensian exploitation, unions today have mutated into bloated bureaucracies propping up privilege, clinging to irrelevance by strangling productivity and punishing innovation.

Let’s drop the pretence. Unions no longer represent the downtrodden. They represent the entrenched. Their core business is less about defending the vulnerable and more about flexing muscle in public sector boardrooms, feathering nests, and ensuring their own political survival. The Australian Labor Party may have separated church from state long ago, but the union cathedral still dominates its altar.

Just ask the average parent trying to navigate school closures dictated not by health but by union dictates. Or the small business owner whose enterprise is hamstrung by archaic award rules and “go slow” tactics dreamed up by industrial dinosaurs. The cost? Lost opportunities, stagnant wages, and a younger generation that sees little future in a workforce choked by rigid conditions and militant gatekeepers.

When unions aren't busy bullying elected governments, they're shovelling millions into campaigns to protect their turf. They rail against casualisation—as if giving workers flexibility is an act of violence. They demonise enterprise bargaining—as if negotiation between grown adults is something to be feared, not embraced. And they oppose performance pay—as if rewarding excellence somehow undermines equality.

The hypocrisy is breathtaking. These are the same unions that claim to fight for fairness while running their own fiefdoms like closed shops. The same unions who demand transparency from corporations but cry foul when scrutiny turns inward. And let’s not forget: they remain Australia’s most powerful unelected lobby.

But the public is waking up. Membership is plummeting outside the public sector. The more unions tie themselves to political power plays rather than serving their members, the more irrelevant they become. What we are witnessing is not a workers’ revolution, but the last stand of a privileged class unwilling to face a changing world.

It’s time we stopped treating unions as sacred cows. They’re more like sacred anachronisms—desperately mooing into a megaphone that fewer and fewer Australians are listening to.

The helpful bot even offered to do more ...

Let me know if you'd like this tailored to a particular issue—like teachers' unions, construction unions, or recent legislation.

Nah, bot, that'll do, that's more than enough, all that did was reminded the pond why it never could trust the artificial intelligence of Dame Slap, or its artificial imitators.

The pond has already suffered in the bot wars, and likely will do more suffering in the future.

And so to wrap up the morning issue with a celebratory infallible Pope...

It's always in the detail, and look at poor Bo Peep, who has lost her nyet zero sheep, just as "Ned" seems to have lost his Sky/IPA way ...

Little Bo-Peep has lost her Nat nuts,

And can't tell where to find them;

Leave them alone, and they'll come home,

Bringing their tails behind them.

Little Bo-Peep fell fast asleep,

And dreamt she heard them bleating;

But when she awoke, she found it a joke,

For they were still all fleeting.

Then up she took her little crook,

Determined for to find them;

She found them indeed, but it made her heart bleed,

For they'd left their tails behind them.

It happened one day, as Bo-Peep did stray

Into a meadow hard by,

There she espied their tails, side by side,

All hung on a tree to dry.

She heaved a sigh and wiped her eye,

And over the hillocks she raced;

And tried what she could, as a shepherdess should,

That each tail be properly placed.