![]() ![]() ![]() 'Stopping the boats' will become a quaint historical idea.Īnd finally, on what scientists really know about climate change, they know a lot. Australia will in no way be insulated from those changes, and will have to play its part in coping with a dramatic increase in displaced people moving through our region as a result of those kinds of conflicts and food shortages. The cost of adaptation is perhaps hundreds of times the cost of mitigation, and will be paid as much in blood as money if resource wars break out over dwindling arable land and water resources. Even the US Congressional Budget Office has been crunching numbers on how a carbon tax would work (note to the CBO – an emissions trading scheme is easier to sell politically). They expect rich nations like Australia to do their bit too. Other nations and states, including China, South Korea, the EU nations, New Zealand, California and Quebec, have set up, or are trialling, market-based carbon-reducing measures. None of these positions stand up to much scrutiny. Others think scientists can’t possibly know what the effect or our greenhouse gas emissions is, or that the world is ‘cooling’, or that we’re in a mini-ice-age that requires more, or variations on that theme. Some clearly think that the cost of adaptation will be less than that cost of preventing the disruption of existing climatic patterns, including nasties such as the reversal of ocean currents and raising of sea levels. There are many MPs at a federal level who believe it’s hopeless to try to do anything about climate change, simply because poorer nations with billions of people in them won’t get around to doing anything and Australia’s small size means our actions won’t help a bit. So building renewable infrastructure via ‘direct action’ is essential if Australia wants to be part of a global solution to the problem of unpredictable climate change caused by emissions of the various greenhouse gases. Carbon emission reductions must take place either by more efficient use of carbon-based energy sources, or by their replacement with renewables. That second part, the ‘direct action’ component of the Gillard government’s plan, is vital. A sizable proportion of what's left over is earmarked for lending or investing in renewable energy via the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and Australian Renewable Energy Agency. On Swan’s watch, half the money raised during the $23/tonne ‘carbon tax’ period is handed back to householders – through tax breaks, pension increases and family tax benefits – to spend as they like. The dream, such as it is right now, is to reduce carbon emissions by 5 per cent of 1990 levels by 2020 by selling permits to polluters and lending or investing the money to build renewable energy capacity. The two-party-preferred vote figures just won’t budge for Labor, with the Essential Poll earlier this week showing 55/45 to the Coalition for the fourth week in a row, and the latest Galaxy poll showing a nasty 59/41 drubbing.Īnd if Swan is stuck at home with his beloved Bruce Springsteen record collection, he will no doubt wince each time in The River, the Boss sings “Is a dream a lie if it don’t come true, or is it something worse”?įor there is a dream Labor will bequeath to a Coalition government, should one be formed, and there is a very good chance it will become a lie, and then something worse. There is a good chance that the honourable member for Lilley may not only lose the second top job in Australian governance, but might be sent home altogether after losing his seat. All indications are that Treasurer Swan is going to have a frustrating 2014.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |