EcoRadio

Author: admin

  • CSIRO bid to gag emissions trading scheme po;icy attack

    CSIRO bid to gag emissions trading scheme policy attack

     

    EXCLUSIVE: Nicola Berkovic | November 02, 2009

    Article from:  The Australian

    THE nation’s peak science agency has tried to gag the publication of a paper by one of its senior environmental economists attacking the Rudd government’s climate change policies.

    The paper, by the CSIRO’s Clive Spash, argues the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is an ineffective way to cut emissions, and instead direct legislation or a tax on carbon is needed.

    The paper was accepted for publication by the journal New Political Economy after being internationally peer-reviewed.

    But Dr Spash told the Australia New Zealand Society for Ecological Economics conference that the CSIRO had since June tried to block its publication.

    In the paper, Dr Spash argues the economic theory underpinning emissions trading schemes is “far removed” from the reality of permit markets. “While carbon trading and offset schemes seem set to spread, they so far appear ineffective in terms of actually reducing GHGs (greenhouse gases),” he says. “Despite this apparent failure, ETS remain politically popular amongst the industrialised polluters.

    “The public appearance is that action is being undertaken. The reality is that GHGs are increasing and society is avoiding the need for substantive proposals to address the problem of behavioural and structural change.”

    Dr Spash said trading schemes did not efficiently allocate emission cuts because their design was manipulated by vested interests. For example, in Australia, large polluters would be compensated with free permits while smaller, more competitive firms would have to buy theirs at auction. The schemes were also flawed because: global warming was caused by gases other than carbon; emissions were difficult to measure; carbon offsets bought from other countries were of dubious value; and the schemes “crowded out” voluntary action by individuals. He concludes that more direct measures, such as a carbon tax, regulations or new infrastructure would be simpler, more effective and less open to manipulation.

    Dr Spash could not be contacted by The Australian.

    However, his presentation to the ANZSEE conference in Darwin last Wednesday stated: “The CSIRO is currently maintaining they have the right to ban the written version of this paper from publication by myself as a representative of the organisation and by myself as a private citizen.”

    Dr Spash said CSIRO managers had written to the journal’s editor demanding the paper not be published.

    CSIRO spokesman Huw Morgan said the publication of Dr Spash’s paper was an internal matter and was being reviewed by the chief executive’s office.

    However, he said that under the agency’s charter scientists were forbidden from commenting on matters of government or opposition policy.

    The CSIRO charter, introduced last year, was trumpeted by Science Minister Kim Carr as a way to guarantee freedom of expression for scientists.

    Senator Carr said he was seeking a briefing from the CSIRO.

    Opposition science spokesman Eric Abetz accused the government of empty spin.

    Julian Cribb, adjunct professor of science communication at the University of Technology, Sydney, said gagging scientists deprived the public of scientific knowledge they had funded.

    ANZSEE president Wendy Proctor said if Dr Spash’s research questioned current orthodoxy, it should be made public to inform debate.

  • Atlantic Rising: planting mangroves to fortify coastlines

  • Welsh construction centre leads field in sustainability

    The new £3.1 million Construction and Sustainable Energy Centre at Pembroke College, Haverfordwest, opened in June by environment minister Jane Davidson, is an object lesson in reconciliation and symbiosis. Dedicated to learning the tools of a traditionally environmentally unfriendly trade, it is nevertheless one of the most sustainable buildings of its kind in the UK, an object lesson in and of itself, and a blueprint for a greener construction industry.

    The second phase of a £30 million redevelopment currently ongoing at the college, the Construction Centre looks to all intents and purposes like any other modern college outbuilding: unassuming and functional. If you didn’t know you were entering the first further education building in the UK to have won a BREEAM (Building Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method) rating of Excellent, in 2008, you probably wouldn’t think twice about it.

    The build is certainly traditional enough, with its steel frame and cavity construction infill, but the feel of the building is different. For a start it’s open and airy, the perfect learning environment. It has a sophisticated daylight-linked lighting control, so lights turns themselves on and off according to motion sensors, become dimmer and brighter according to how much sun there is or how close to windows they are. Urinals are waterless, while flush toilets use rainwater topped up with mains water when necessary. It has good thermal properties, with 100mm of wall insulation, 150mm in the roof and 150mm in the floors, and well-aired, high-ceilinged rooms, so it’s warm in the winter, cool in the summer. Energy consumption is so low that solar panels are not required other than to heat tap water.

    Outside is a silo for holding up to 17 tonnes of wood pellets, which are fed into a 300kW wood-fired boiler with the capacity to heat the Construction Centre, the next-door Innovation Centre and, when it’s constructed, the new Engineering Centre – phase three in the redevelopment plan. The potash produced once the pellets are burned is used as fertiliser on the college’s flowerbeds.

    The building was designed specifically to accommodate carpentry and brickwork students, and the green innovations they see all around them are part of the message that is gradually seeping into the industry: that sustainability in the way we build, teach and live is the way forward. The lessons they learn here will inform a new generation of more environment-conscious architects, carpenters and construction workers.

    The repercussions of the building are being felt already. Most building projects are sustainable only while on the architect’s drawing board, but construction company Dawnus was expected by BREEAM to monitor site management procedures, water and electricity usage, recycling and waste management procedures and recycling of waste… It was a steep learning curve that paid off with the Excellent rating, and now the company has trained up its own BREEAM assessor for future projects.

    ‘A lot of contractors might have said that BREEAM was a waste of time, whereas Dawnus had a much more positive outlook,’ says Paul Bullock of Bullock Consulting Ltd, who advised on the mechanical and electrical side of the project. ‘They can see it’s the future, it’s a case of sink or swim, and what they’ve created is a blueprint for future buildings.’

    ‘It only took six months to build and was a masterclass for our construction students in how to get something done quickly, and done well,’ agrees Pembroke College’s Laurence Rook. ‘Everyone is really pleased with the result.’

    Seventy per cent of the building’s funding came courtesy of a capital grant from the Welsh Assembly Government. The Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform’s low-carbon building programme helped pay for the renewable technologies.

    ‘This building represents the next step in education thinking, the realisation of a vision for our environment and our young people,’ said environment minister Jane Davidson AM, opening the building in June. ‘This building is exciting in that it shows the direction we are travelling. It is energy efficient, relies on biomass heating and reuses rainwater. In other words it is sustainable and represents the future of new buildings across Wales.’

    ‘It’s a real live building and the data generated from it is available for comparative analysis and benchmarking, so we can talk the talk and walk the walk,’ says Paul Robinson, head of school for construction, environment and design. ‘Most newbuild construction campuses in Wales and beyond will probably be modelled on this in the future. Whether in terms of BREEAM ratings or financial incentives, there’s real value in being sustainable. We can show the builders of the future that this is sustainable technology is in action.’

     

  • EU climate aid: The politicians are the only winners in this deal

     

    Today’s announcement in Brussels on climate aid is a necessary step towards a deal, but also a model of what we can expect as countries gear up for crucial political talks on global warming in Copenhagen in December.

    Ahead of the Brussels meeting there were gloomy reports of a split and warnings of a likely crisis, quickly followed by a political huddle and talk of the need to compromise. A few hours of discussion later and his colleagues were able to emerge with handshakes and announce almost what everybody had expected all along. Job done.

    As revealed in the Guardian on Tuesday, the EU has announced that poor countries need to receive some €100bn a year by 2020 from the world’s rich nations to help them cope with the likely impact of global warming. Up to half of this will come from taxpayers with the rest coming from the private sector.

    The agreement is a model of political negotiation, in that each national leader gets to go home and report victory to their domestic audiences. Brown, the UK prime minister, gets the credit for forcing through an overall figure, while the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, can point out that Europe has not actually committed itself to provide any specific funds, keeping that card up its sleeve. Meanwhile the heads of the member states most reluctant to put their hands in their pockets, such as Poland, have won concessions on what they are expected to pay upfront.

    Against this realpolitik, campaign groups are doing what they do best – pressuring their leaders to do more and to ensure the promised money is not pilfered from existing aid budgets.

  • Government slashes insulation rebate

     

    “We have also seen the industry grow enormously, creating jobs and supporting the economy,” he said.

    “The time is now right for us to make sensible changes to take pressure off the market, whilst ensuring this hugely popular program still offers generous incentives for households.”

    Transitional arrangements for people who had accepted a quote but were waiting for work to be done would apply, provided their job was completed by November 16.

    Extra safety precautions and consumer protections will be enforced too.

    Metal fasteners for foil insulation will be banned from tomorrow, and a targeted electrical safety inspection program of Queensland homes with foil insulation installed under the program rolled out.

    Mr Garrett said the proscription of metal staples or nail fasteners would reduce the risk of electrocution for insulation installers, after a Brisbane man died from that cause earlier this month.

    From December 1, the Government will also publish a name and shame list for any business struck from the installer register for dodgy behaviour, require two genuinely independent quotes to approve a rebate and demand a formal risk assessment of installation projects before a job can start.

    “There’s no room in this program for businesses that aren’t willing to stand publicly by the quality of their work,” Mr Garrett said.

    “Insulation installers are on notice that we will not hesitate to strike them from the register, take legal action and name and shame them if they are found doing the wrong thing.”

  • Surging dollar hits chance of deal on ETS

     

    But in the short term the expected forecasts are disastrous for the Coalition, which was relying on unallocated excess revenue from permit sales to pay for its proposed amendments to boost assistance to emissions-intensive industries, small businesses and electricity generators.

    The forecast estimates will dramatically lessen the chances of a deal in ETS negotiations between the government and the opposition, ahead of the second Senate vote late next month when the laws could become a double-dissolution trigger.

    The Coalition could reject Kevin Rudd’s proposed carbon emissions trading scheme next month even if the Prime Minister accepts all of Malcolm Turnbull’s proposed amendments.

    Senate leader Nick Minchin said yesterday there was no guarantee the Coalition partyroom would accept any agreed proposals, sparking government claims the opposition was acting in bad faith in negotiating with it over amendments.

    Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner demanded the Opposition Leader intervene to clarify the position.

    Opposition emissions trading spokesman Ian Macfarlane has insisted the cost of changes proposed by the Coalition would be covered by revenue from permit sales.

    “There’s $50bn in unallocated credits by 2030. And it’s about $20bn by 2020,” he said last week. “That’s how much they are collecting and keeping as a tax. There’s enough money in unallocated credits to fund our scheme — more than comfortably fund our changes.”

    But The Weekend Australian expects new government forecasts will show the continued strength of the Australian dollar will dramatically cut revenue generated by the scheme because permits sourced offshore become relatively cheaper in Australian dollar terms.

    As foreign permits, from international schemes such as the Clean Development Mechanism, become cheaper, more firms will meet their requirements by buying offshore permits rather than buying Australian permits at auction, and the price they are prepared to pay for Australian permits will be reduced.

    Unlike the US, Europe and Japan, Australia is not proposing to limit the amount of greenhouse abatement that can be sourced from overseas.

    Strong growth in commodity exports could also reduce the scheme’s revenue. The Climate Institute’s estimate of an $11bn surplus over the first decade of the scheme is based on the government’s assumption of a 3per cent growth in the emissions-intensive industries that qualify for free permits.

    The forecast estimates will be the first time the government has provided 10-year costings for its ETS. Climate Institute chief executive John Connor conceded yesterday that “all the risk is on the downside” to his estimate of an $11bn surplus over 10 years.