Archived material from historical editions of The Generator
Dr Switkowski says Labor’s target needs to be part of a global framework.
"If the world, the community of high emitting nations in particular, achieve that target then we will collectively benefit from a stabilisation of global warming and leave the global climate in reasonable circumstance," he said.
Population-based quota allocations: Garnaut argued that an international cap and trade carbon trading regime could begin with emission quotas allocated mainly to the rich greenhouse gas producing nations, such as Australia, but probably would gradually move towards a quota distribution based on population. That would favour the developing nations.
Target energy user emissions, not exporters: The "smart way" to structure the regime would be to target emissions of energy users rather than energy exporters. "If Australia exports a lot of coal to Japan, that’s part of Japan’s emissions," he said. "The issue for our coal producers is not what we do in Australia but what other countries are doing." The coal industry, "which has figured prominently in the discussions so far", has a very strong interest in the development of a good international regime, he said.
Global coal demand could fall: "On the whole our coal exports are relatively clean. We may find global coal use falls a lot but our place in the total coal economy improves." However, in the absence of a strong international regime, countries will be tempted to protect their own coal industries. "The easiest coal for China to exclude will be the imported coal. The easiest coal for Germany to exclude will be the imported coal," he added.
The Australian Financial Review, 1/5/2007, p.8
“We welcome the task group’s recommendation that an emissions trading scheme should cover a range of sectors, not just electricity generation, and that certificates should be auctioned, not given away to polluters.
“It is now time for Government and Opposition to commit to developing an emissions trading scheme that has as its primary objective putting Australia on track to avoiding dangerous climate change.”
In a speech stunningly devoid of any description of the impact of climate change on Australia’s environment, cities, agriculture or economic wellbeing, Prime Minister Howard today put off real action for at least another five years.
“John Howard simply doesn’t understand climate change,” Greens Leader Bob Brown said today.
“His comment that it would be ‘foolish indeed’ to ignore the evidence on climate change condemns his own foolishness for the past 11 years in failing to tackle climate change.”
“Far from leaving our children ‘debt-free’, Howard is racking up a debt of more bushfires, more intense droughts, a bleached Great Barrier Reef and no ski-fields for Australia’s children – as if these are no-cost factors.”
“Not once in his entire speech did the Prime Minister talk about what the science demands in response to climate change. He ignored the environment and spoke only of what the coal, aluminium and aviation sectors are prepared to accept,” Greens Climate Change spokesperson, Senator Christine Milne said.
“Climate change is not going to wait for the Liberal party. Keeping global temperature rises to 2C or less requires rigorous action now and it is Prime Minister Howard who has been ‘missing in action’ and who is ‘steeped in recklessness and symbolism’."
“Australia can trust the Greens to face the reality of climate change and to make decisions that will truly give our children hope,” Senator Milne said.
The National Farmers Federation, the World Wildlife Foundation, and The Greens have all damned the proposal as unviable and backwards looking. The considerations encompass many of the same issues that appear to have successfully scuttled the plan to dam the Mary River. A report prepared for 9 Queensland mayors affected by the Traveston Crossing dam, identifies rainwater tanks and local water recycling solutions as the most cost effective way to address South East Queensland’s water issues. “With the [implementation] of these demand side options, there is no need for … additional supply infrastructure.” The report concluded that managing water better would cost less than half building a new dam and the requisite piping, as well as creating far less greenhouse gases and social impact.
“Turnbull has thrown a grenade into this community and walked away,” Bennett told the Ebono Institute.
“If this is an example of how the Federal Government plans to use its proposed water powers, then State Governments should back right off and protect the constitutional rights of their constituents.” Bennett noted that it is supposed to require a referendum to change the constitutional arrangements about State and Federal Powers.
Sources close to the NSW Department of Primary Industry believe that the government knows that the dam is economically unviable, but the proposal will win votes in South East Queensland and put the Labor State governments of NSW and Queensland in the awkward position of having to explain why the dam is impossible to build.
Residents can make submissions to the Traveston Dam Senate Committee through the Secretary of the Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee, known as RRAT for short. Documents should be sent as email attachments to rrat.sen@aph.gov.au. Current submissions and information about the enquiry can be found at The Australian Parliament House website under Senate, Committees, RRAT. http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/rrat_ctte/
The committee is meeting now but submissions will be processed until the end of the week. Earlier submissions will receive preferential treatment.
Prime Minister John Howard says his carbon emissions report will silence critics who claim the Government has not acted on climate change.
The report, by the Commonwealth’s carbon emissions task group, says a trading scheme could be up and running by 2012.
But it does not set a price on carbon or name a specific target for greenhouse gas reductions.
Mr Howard is yet to formally release the report and this morning he would not say whether he would commit to its recommendations.
"This is a hugely burdensome and responsible decision," he said.
"If we get this wrong, if we embrace a target, we’ll do crippling damage to our economy.
"If we embrace a target that will increase electricity prices more than they should go up, then we’ll do enormous damage to Australian households and the broad economy."