What The People Want

Do some of these people look at nothing but their own pet ideas. Solar and wind power has been proven to be totally unrealistic as other than a miniscule contributor to power generation at huge subsidies. Bio-fuel is cost and land intensive and is causing havoc in food prices thus causing food trauma in poor countries to poor people. But then maybe a few less mouthes to feed is considered good for the environment as long as it is not you and yours that become less.

It's kind of an odd idea that we owe the world coal exports. Aside from climate change concerns, fossil fuel prices are escalating rapidly with demand. It would be much more useful to poorer countries if we helped bring the cost of renewables down. Solar is already dropping fast, but wealthier countries are better placed to be early adopters, resulting in economy of scale and improved technology that will make it cheaper for poorer countries. Contrast that with coal, where being an "early adopter" means you get the coal that's cheapest to dig out of the ground, leaving that which is more expensive to extract for countries slower to develop.

Equity and the opportunity to catch up increasingly favour renewables -- not coal and oil.

Graham: "anthropomorphically"? I think you want "anthropogenically".

At the end of your analysis you state "Development is not a dirty word in Queensland, as long as it is done right."

Yeah, more and more to the right unfortunately.

I believe queensland, especially the south east, is being developed to death. sustainable - you must be kidding?

Also, we do not need to keep increasing our population and thus, pollution. I feel optimistic every time I see an increase in the price of oil.

Graham , maybe there are more old dinosaurs than others because they have the time. I make the time because I think I am entitled to an opinion and I thank you for making it possible.
Keep up the good work.

True Joe, it doesn't rate too well on that graph, but that was about whether the state was heading in the right direction. When it came to concerns about energy and resource development concerns about the environment were quite high.

What I'm trying to do with this report is give a quick over-view that doesn't give achingly boring detail about everything I might have found.

You'll find "sustainable" rates in another of the graphs relating specifically to development, and just under it "solar".

When you look at the question of the favoured type of development, top concern is "environment" (11.3%). Add pollution (3.2%), polluting (2.8%), climate (2.8%), greenhouse (2.4%) to that and it is starting to mount-up.

So thanks for the question, I should probably have gone into more detail.

If climate change doesn't get us, pollution and evironmental vandalism will. "Doomsday" will a be a term visited more frequently by the next generation in my opinion if attitudes and anti-environmental behaviour doesn't turn around very soon in droves by the populous, and not just with the changing climate, anthropomorphically produced or not.

The sustainable is very important. The government should be looking to invest in solar power instead of fossil fuel powered Elect Stations. Bio diesel is far better that Oil Shale muck.
Once Queensland was the Sunshine State - easy living .. now it has become the Quarry State with most of the east coast under threat of being industrial towns like Gladstone or open pit mines for Oil Shale.
What happen to the keeper of 1 of the worlds 7 wonders, The Great Barrier Reef.
I am moving out of Queensland 1st chance I get.

We all want development but not at any cost. The wildlife are losing habitat, our air is dirty and dusty (Ipswich) these are the costs that must be avoided. Why do we cut down every tree on a housing development only to have the people who buy the houses plant exotics. Can't we build some houses around the trees, not an impossible ask I would think.
The Government have a devlopment at any cost mentality and the cost is going too high.

We all want development but not at any cost. The wildlife are losing habitat, our air is dirty and dusty (Ipswich) these are the costs that must be avoided. Why do we cut down every tree on a housing development only to have the people who buy the houses plant exotics. Can't we build some houses around the trees, not an impossible ask I would think.
The Government have a devlopment at any cost mentality and the cost is going too high.

How can we all be environmentalists when on your tiny image environment comes in 16th?

I do agree totally thought that "we want to see growth continue. Development is not a dirty word in Queensland."

The lazy Bligh government is having to pay catch up at top dollar and ironically creating more pollution as we all sit in traffic waiting for her roads to be built. If they had been built earlier the traffic would be producing less pollution and actually flowing.