With Ian Christesen
A recent opinion poll commissioned by WWF of 4000 residents showed that 79 per cent of respondents believe Australia should either begin reducing carbon pollution before other countries, or start reducing regardless of when other countries choose to act.
Rudd has duped the electors by refusing to take action on climate change despite exit polls at the last election showing climate change was a major issue in electors dumping the coalition. It appears that Rudd and Abbott have come to a silent agreement to take climate change off the agenda for the upcoming election.
This is despite the science continuing to mount of the need to take urgent action and that the world needs a stabilisation by 2015 followed by significant reductions. Economic research has also continually shown that the longer we forgo action the greater will be the detrimental impacts on our economy.
“Australia’s carbon pollution keeps going up and up. The longer we delay setting a price on carbon, the more it is going to cost Australian households and Australian businesses,” said Mr Bourne, CEO of WWF.
The Australia government continues to ignore the wealth and job creation opportunities of embracing the “clean industrial revolution” in favour of opening up more coal mines and becoming increasingly more economically dependent on a risky carbon pollution based economy.
“Since October last year more than 150 new measures have been announced globally to reduce climate pollution and 32 countries now have emissions trading schemes. Around US$200 billion is expected to be invested in clean energy solutions, in 2010.” Mr Bourne said.
Barack Obama, said in his State of the Nation address: “Providing incentives for energy-efficiency and clean energy are the right thing to do for our future, because the nation that leads the clean energy economy will be the nation that leads the global economy. And America must be that nation.”
The way government policy is going it is certainly not going to be Australia.
Even proposals to promote major energy efficiency initiatives also appear to be rejected by the Rudd government.
Greens Senator Christine Milne said: “Minister Ferguson and his government have rejected Greens’ proposals for mandatory efficiency programs for large energy users, and recommended that the Senate oppose the Greens’ bill for energy efficiency in office blocks, shopping centres, schools and hospitals.”
So what are some opportunities for a way forward?
Abbott and the coalition have successfully sidelined themselves from any credible solutions to the climate change debate.
This leaves the Greens trying to convince the government to support Professor Garnaut’s option of an interim fixed carbon price. The proposal would see a carbon levy of $20 a tonne growing at CPI plus 4 per cent each year. The levy would raise $10 billion annual revenue to support household, commercial, industrial and transport emissions reductions.
This is similar to another proposal by James Hansen, Director of the Goddard Institute for a flat fee collected from fossil fuel companies at their mines or wellheads. Obviously fossil fuel based energy costs would rise but householders would be compensated from the fund for those increases.
The issue has to be addressed now and with some goodwill and longer term vision solutions can be found to have climate policy aligned with the science and the economic opportunities that can be created.
Ian Christesen is Climate Change Policy Officer, Sunshine Coast Environment Council
Related articles:
Follow Eco