Author: admin

At last, the Federal Government says a trial all-electric car may have a future in Australia, if its importers allow it to undergo rigorous testing.

The Adelaide importer of the Indian Reva car says it may have to be crushed at the end of the week when its year-long licence expires, because it does not have approval to be driven on local roads.

The federal Roads Minister, Jim Lloyd, says such drastic action might not be necessary.

"You know we’re talking to them at the moment in being able to take the vehicle off their hands and actually let it undergo the full ADR (Australian Design Rules) testing," he said.

"So once and for all we can know whether it will meet the standards.

"If it meets the standards, well then, we can go forward on it, if it doesn’t well then it won’t be on Australian roads."

The Reva, designed and manufactured in India, has been on Indian roads since 2001 and is exported internationally. For the Indian market, the Government offers a generous subsidy to public institutions such as educational institutions, government and public sector organisations, hospitals and for the tourism industry.

Considering Australians dependence on motor vehicles and high national greenhouse gas emissions output, it is reasonable to ask Mr Lloyd why he has not moved more quickly to have the Reva undergo a full ADR. After all, the importer has been pushing for this for over 12 months.

• Part 3A already gives the Planning Minister a disturbing degree of discretionary power, and removes many avenues for legal challenge of the Minister’s decisions. These amendments will completely remove the requirement for proponents to even assess the development’s impacts.
• This will affect projects far beyond Anvil Hill, and will remove the need for any Part 3A project to thoroughly assess environmental impacts.
• The Government is facing a legal challenge regarding the Anvil Hill coal mine proposal. The challenge seeks to ensure that the climate change impacts on the environment and community of NSW are fully assessed.
• Frank Sartor introduced the amendments this week, claiming that they were “housekeeping measures” but they will nullify the court challenge by removing the requirement for the Minister to consider any environmental assessment.

• Specific transitional arrangements in the amending Bill ensure that all projects that have approval pending will be affected by these changes. That means Anvil Hill, and dozens of other Major Projects, and if passed it will affect all developments declared as Major Projects from now on.
• In order to avoid assessing the full impacts of Anvil Hill, the Government is winding back 25 years of planning law, and is disregarding the public interest, and even public safety.
• Companies undertaking Major Projects, like chemical plants or mines, are currently required to undertake assessment within parameters set out by the Government.
• Following these changes, they will be able to write Environmental Assessments, if they write them at all, that do not discuss dangerous or destructive impacts of their project.
• This means that the public and the Government will be in the dark, and will not have the opportunity to avoid the worst impacts of Major Projects.
• This might expose NSW to serious risk of damage inflicted by private companies, for which the Government will be liable, because they will have abrogated their responsibility to assess the environmental impacts of the project.

• I am disgusted that the Government is seeking to hide and evade true environmental impacts of coal mining and other destructive industries in NSW through the Environmental Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2006
• I am concerned that these amendments will allow private companies to hide the potentially destructive impacts of Major Projects, exposing the public to danger and the Government to litigation.
• I call on you to sack your Planning Minister, Frank Sartor for misleading the parliament and the public by understating the intent and the substance of these amendments

(a) the proponent has duly applied to the Minister for approval under this Part to carry out a project, and

(b) the environmental assessment requirements under this Division with respect to the project have been complied with,

the Minister may approve or disapprove of the carrying out of the project.

The amendments will change this section:

[6] Omit section 75J (1) (a) and (b). Insert instead:

(a) the proponent makes an application for the approval of the Minister under this Part to carry out a project, and

(b) the Director-General has given his or her report on the project to the Minister,

The Government has ensured through Savings and Transitional Arrangements for the Bill, that the amendments will apply to all projects for which approval is pending. This includes the Anvil Hill coal mine proposal, as well as the new Coal Exporting Terminal at Newcastle Harbour, the controversial Moolarben Coal Project and many others.

SA Premier Mike Rann called for public comment on plans to increase container deposit levies to 10c or 20c – up from the 5c levy introduced in 1975, reported The Australian (27 October 2006 p7).

Big savings on aluminium: Environment Minister Gail Gago said recycling helped reduce greenhouse gasses. "The savings on the current levels of aluminium-can recycling at present is the equivalent to removing about 2500 cars off our roads, it’s about 20-odd thousand barrels of oil," she said.

Vic Opposition keen on deposit system: In Victoria, Liberal leader Ted Baillieu has pledged, if elected, to impose a 5c levy on drinks sold in aluminium cans, plastic and glass bottles, refundable once containers are handed in.

WA and Tas looking at collecting their empties too: The Western Australian and Tasmanian governments are also considering implementing container deposit schemes.

The Australian, 27/10/2006, p.7

Source: Erisk Net 

Melbourne is set to record its driest October since 1914, a year in which there was a disastrous drought and a national wheat crop failure, reported The Age (30/10/2006, p.3).

Pattern similar to 92 years ago: The drought of 1914-15, which resulted in record low rain in large areas of southern Australia, coincided, like the droughts of 1937-45, with Australian involvement in a world war. Only 7.5 millimetres fell in October 1914 – so far this month there have been 8.8 millimetres with only a few showers forecast for today and tomorrow. The average rain for the month is 67 millimetres.

El Nino behind 1914 crisis: A strong El Nino – a warm ocean current off South America that causes major temperature changes – is believed to have been the reason for the severe conditions in 1914. The year started hot and Victoria had widespread bushfires in February and March which destroyed more than 100,000 hectares. Good rain brought relief in March and April, but extremely dry conditions prevailed for the rest of the year.

October records still stand: The months from May to October 1914 have been recorded as the driest for many areas of south-eastern Australia. Melbourne’s lowest October rain and hottest October day were in 1914 – 7.5 millimetres and 36.9 degrees, respectively.

Murray flow fell to 2pc: By the end of the month, the national wheat crop, then harvested mainly in the southern states, was a total failure. Rivers fell to low levels and millions of sheep, horses and cattle were moved by rail to places where feed was available. The Murray River at Echuca fell to 2 per cent of its normal flow by December and downstream of Swan Hill the river was reduced to a series of stagnant pools.

The Age, 30/10/2006, p.3

Source: Erisk Net  

Rupert Murdoch’s son James, chief executive, of BSkyB, the UK satellite broadcaster, claims his company is the world’s first “carbon neutral” corporation, according to Tony Walker in The Australian Financial Review (28/10/2006, p.22).

Clever James shows the way: This may or may not be the case, but News Corp insiders credit James – arguably the most liberal, possibly the smartest of Murdoch’s four adult children – with turning his father on to the risks of global warming.

Climate not anti-market: “He’s a person with a very open mind to ideas and it’s why he’s been able to stay ahead of the curve his entire working life,” says Andrew Butcher, the News Corp spokesman. A senior News executive who is close to Murdoch’s thinking on a range of issues had this explanation: “What’s informed Rupert’s response on all of this is that the issue of global warming has become a market issue, not an anti-market issue.”

To corporate mind, it makes sense: This means Murdoch can buy into the idea of corporate responsibility for doing something about the environment not because it is being imposed under some sort of arbitrary protocol, but because it makes sense from the standpoint of the individual corporation.

30pc odds are high enough: In a recent interview with The New Yorker, Murdoch addressed the global warming issue this way: “I’m still a bit more sceptical than most people. But if there is even a 30 per cent chance that the experts are right we should do everything we can to insure against a bad outcome.”

Commentators sniff the wind: Translate Murdoch’s “30 per cent chance” into a signal to his editors and you have an explanation for the sudden greening of John Howard-admiring, Kyoto-Protocol-opposing Australian commentators. They’ve suddenly discovered the environment in one of the worst droughts in the country’s history.

News on carbon-neutral trail: At a conference organised in Pebble Beach, California in the summer Rupert Murdoch urged News Corp executives to follow James’s lead on climate change issues. News Corp has established an in-house team to study ways in which to achieve carbon neutral status across the whole group.

The Australian Financial Review, 28/10/2006, p. 22

Source: Erisk Net