Omissions trading scheme
Community advocacy organisation GetUp is concerned that the Federal Government's green paper, outlining options for a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, risks putting in place an "omissions trading scheme" that leaves out Australia's biggest polluters and many other aspects of a scheme that would effectively reduce Australia's emissions.
Executive Director Brett Solomon identified the following problems with the model proposed in green paper:
- Free permits to pollute for trade-exposed emissions-intensive industries
- Direct payments to existing coal-fired electricity generators allowing coal-fired power stations to expand, instead of phasing into renewable energy
- Cutting the fuel excise, instead of using the money to promote low-carbon transport alternatives
- A cap on the price of carbon from 2010 - 2015, undermines the scheme's ability to price the real costs of greenhouse pollution.
"Australia now has a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transition to a low-carbon economy," said Mr Solomon. But this green paper offers free emissions permits covering up to 90 per cent of their emissions to Australia's biggest polluters."
"Direct payments to coal-fired power stations would undermine the scheme. We need to transition away from coal and into energy efficiency and renewable energy as soon as we can. We urge the Government to reconsider subsidising the big polluters and instead begin planning a just transition away from coal for the LaTrobe Valley and Hunter Valley."
Mr Solomon said by not including the big polluters there is a great risk that the effectiveness of the Reduction Scheme will be reduced from the start.
Australian Greens climate change spokesperson, Senator Christine Milne said the Rudd Government's green paper still provides no responsible target and lacks true leadership.
"Minister Wong's green paper protects polluters and provides no signal for investment for a zero-emissions future. Minister Wong used the term 'transformation' many times in her speech, but the Scheme proposed here provides no drivers at all for transformation, instead protecting existing investments at all costs," said Senator Milne.
The Rudd Government's plan for emissions trading has some similarities to John Howard's task group report on emissions trading. Some commentators have suggested the green paper is simply a rebadged cap-and-trade scheme.
The secretariat for the Coalition's task group was headed by Martin Parkinson, a former senior Treasury officer. Now he is secretary of Penny Wong's Climate Change Department, established by the Rudd Government, and the most important bureaucrat in putting together the 516-page green paper.
The difference however, according to John Connor, chief executive officer of the Climate Institute, is that the Rudd Government's process was better and was safeguarded from the influence of the big emitters BHP Billiton, Xstrata Coal, International Power, Qantas and Alumina Ltd.
Related articles:
- Garnaut’s vision not far enough
- What Rudd and Wong should take to Copenhagen
- Remove solar hot water from renewable energy target
- It’s time … for a real climate policy
- Electric cars will be the norm
Leave a Response
Entries(RSS)