Ben Quin
Australians have made it quite clear that they want political leadership and action to prepare our nation to confront all three challenges – global warming, climate change and the human induced greenhouse effect. I agree we need action on all three. Yet, the Federal Government’s CPRS only addresses the third and most uncertain concept.
I fear that we will wear ourselves out delivering our national effort to fighting on the wrong front if we adopt the CPRS as proposed.
Friends,
In following the debate on the newly named “Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme” (CPRS) it seems that we are muddling three distinct concepts into a single policy mess.
“Global warming” is one concept.
It holds that the world is warming, leading to the melting of ice-caps, rising sea levels and changes in global climate patterns. There is scientific consensus that the world is warming and we should prepare for the impacts. But scientific opinion is divided on whether human activity has any influence on global warming.
“Climate change” is a second concept.
It holds that as a result of global warming, global climate patterns will change. More extreme weather events are predicted, including droughts, floods, cyclones and temperature fluctuations. There is scientific consensus that climate patterns are changing throughout the world and, as with global warming, we need to prepare ourselves to adapt.
The third concept is “the human induced greenhouse effect”.
This holds that, purely as a result of human industry, greenhouse gases including carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane are being released into the atmosphere at unsustainable rates, and this is the major cause of global warming and thus climate change. There is no scientific consensus on this hypothesis.
Australians have made it quite clear that they want political leadership and action to prepare our nation to confront all three challenges – global warming, climate change and the human induced greenhouse effect. I agree we need action on all three. Yet, the Federal Government’s CPRS only addresses the third and most uncertain concept.
We accept global warming is a fact. We accept climate change is a fact. We are uncertain whether the human induced greenhouse effect is the cause. Yet it is proposed that our major endeavour will be directed at attacking the possibility of the human induced greenhouse effect. I fear that we will wear ourselves out delivering our national effort to fighting on the wrong front if we adopt the CPRS as proposed.
Consider the economic consequences for Australia of rising sea levels. All of our major population centres lie within a few metres of the existing high tide marks. What does CPRS propose in mitigation? Nothing!
Consider changing rainfall patterns. The Murray-Darling system has run dry now. What measures does CPRS propose for making managed adjustments to climate change? None!
CPRS, as currently proposed, is at best a fiddle at the most uncertain flank of the challenge. Yet it will cause massive distraction from the need for urgent and concurrent action on the other fronts.
Now, if our policy response made Australia the best prepared nation in the world to confront rising sea levels and changing climate patterns, then it would have served the nation well. If it also created the impetus for a technical cascade that caused the demise of the fossil fuel industry, then it would be something the world would adopt. But CPRS, in its current form, will do none of these things. It is a waste of national effort.
I have argued before in this forum that if we are to take sensible action on global warming, climate change and the human induced greenhouse effect, we need to consider a national environmental framework. For example, what sense is there to focus national attention only on carbon, when water has clearly an equal priority in the natural order?
We live in a world governed by photosynthesis and net primary productivity:
6CO2 + 6H2O à C6H12O6 + 6O2
Nothing that economists propose can change this reality. This is what we have to adapt to.
There is much to discuss. Don’t leave it to the politicians!
Regards,
Ben Quin
