Author: admin

Along with other environmental changes Dooleys Lidcombe Catholic Club has made, it is expected to save 213 tonnes of CO2 emissions a year with a plan to use a machine which turns food waste into pulp which is then converted into methane and sold to electricity suppliers, reported The Daily Telegraph (20/10/2006, p.17).

Changes make economic sense: "Overall we consider the environmental benefits of these changes far outweigh the costs," Dooley’s general manager Greg Kearins said.

Crunch time for clubs: With drought crippling the states, clubs are under pressure to conserve energy – with the hospitality industry one of the biggest consumers of water and energy. Clubs NSW introduced the scheme 12 months ago but so far only 17 members have joined.

While some might view nuclear power in favour of greenhouse-friendly energy production while ignoring the dangers, costs and problematic waste issues, nobody can deny its wasteful water consumption, according to Peter Feist in The Australian Financial Review (20/10/2006, p.79).

Nuclear power uses 25pc more water than coal: Nuclear power uses 25 per cent more water than that of conventional coal plants, according to scientific figures.

Nukes, drought don’t mix: The PM would be hard-pressed to install a drought relief task force if Australia went down the nuclear path.

Renewables the only way to go: Renewables are the only energy sources that emit zero greenhouse gases and close to zero water for their electricity production. In order to tackle global climate changes, renewable energy is the only possible solution.

Tax incentives needed: To attract this global boom, industries in Australia need incentives in the form of increased renewable energy target taxes on carbon emission and sanctions at the polls for misleading ideas coming from antiquated politicians.

The Australian Financial Review, 20/10/2006, p.79

Amendments to NSW’s biobanking bill will provide a state mechanism to enable biodiversity credits to be used as a security for major development activities instead of cash or bonds.

Temporary disruptions to biodiversity: Where impacts to biodiversity values will be of a temporary nature these amendments will provide for credits to be used as a surety instead of cash bonds to be held by the Minister for the Environment until the site has been rehabilitated. The minister said an example of a temporary impact on biodiversity would be where rehabilitation is proposed following the carrying out of a development such as mining.

Bigger impetus for site rehabilitation: Under these amendments, the retirement of credits for the development is deferred until rehabilitation is complete. Credits then would be released back to the proponent by the Minister for the Environment in line with the improvement to biodiversity values generated by the rehabilitation and then could be sold by the proponent to a third party. This gives the proponent an added incentive to restore the site.

Biobank sites stay on: The original biobank site at which the biodiversity credits were originally created would continue to be managed for conservation in perpetuity.

Reference: Parliament of New South Wales, Legislative As

Peter Mac – The Guardian

The NSW "Biobank" scheme is a good example of reactionary government-sponsored conservation trading arrangements to "protect" sites of natural significance. Under Biobank, a developer can clear and develop such a site, provided they protect another comparable site.

There are at least two major problems with this arrangement. Firstly, a development site may contain flora and/or fauna which are not found on the second site. In some cases they may be found in few other places, or even nowhere else.

Secondly, if carried to its logical conclusion, the scheme is a recipe for progressively halving the number of sites of natural significance. Under the normal laws of logic, if each of two sites is sufficiently important to warrant being kept, then both of them should be protected. However, under Biobank, only one needs to be protected, while the other may be sacrificed.

In anticipation of the scheme being launched, the developer Hardie Holdings has bought up 7000 hectares of Hunter Valley land of prime natural significance for development. Its subsidiary company, Eco Trades, is attempting to persuade various local landowners to buy into the scheme.