I’ve written a post on EcoDirectory.com.au about how CleanUp Australia exemplifies our approach to environmental problems – those that care try to do something while those that don’t give a monkey get off scott free.
Posts tagged Australia
Irresponsible investment
You’d be hard-pressed these days to find a government body in Australia, from the Federal Government down to Woop Woop Council, that doesn’t claim to be leading the way on climate change. But a new Australian Conservation Foundation study [] shows how few are putting their money where their mouths are. The study reveals Australian government funds invest almost fifty times more ($6billion) in coal and uranium than in renewable energy ($126million), while only 1.5 per cent of funds are ethically screened.
Even states such as NSW and Victoria, which have policies banning uranium mining, still invest about five times more in uranium mining companies than in renewable energy.
It’s another reminder that sustainability hasn’t yet penetrated beyond the office partitions of the “environment department” into the everyday culture and thinking of all areas of government.
And on the subject of government spending … the cost of Australia’s involvement in Iraq has now passed the $2 billion mark.
Two reasons why a carbon trading scheme won’t work
July 26, 2008 · Filed under commentary · Tagged Australia, carbon, climate change, emissions trading, global warming, Rudd
Here are two examples of the problems with carbon trading.
Firstly, the Government has said it will exclude emissions from agriculture.
Why? Cows and sheep are estimated to account for 15 per cent of Australia’s greenhouse emissions – quite a significant contribution, so you’d think it would be important to reduce them. They have been excluded because it is too hard to measure these emissions with sufficient accuracy to be able to sell emissions permits. It’s not that these emissions can’t be reduced - cattle can be breed to produce less methane, for instance. It’s just that they can’t be traded.
And in a carbon trading scheme, being able to trade is more important than actually reducing emissions.
Secondly, the rules of the carbon trading market determine how it works, and these rules are often based on politics, not science. Today’s example: Kevin Rudd has said excise on petrol will be cut so the cost of road transport won’t rise. Yet carbon trading will push up rail costs. So the price signals will drive commuters and freight away from trains and onto the roads. Yet rail transport produces far fewer emissons than road travel. The scheme produces exactly the wrong outcome. Read the full article in The Australian.
A carbon trading scheme is going to be very hard to get right.
Leave a comment »