Lukas
And, What Christine Milne says …
Draft CPRS Bill: as thick as the phone book, but full of wrong numbers
Media Release | Spokesperson Christine Milne
Tuesday 10th March 2009, 5:28pm
The draft legislation for the Rudd Government’s planned emissions trading scheme is deeply flawed and will need significant changes in order to be made both environmentally and economically effective, the Australian Greens said today.
“This bill is as thick as the Canberra phone book, but it is full of wrong numbers,” said Australian Greens Deputy Leader, Senator Christine Milne.
“The emissions reduction targets that would be enshrined in the objects of this Bill are patently inadequate and would see Australia holding back the global effort to prevent climate catastrophe.
“5-15% reductions by 2020 are nowhere near the 40% reductions that are necessary from one of the world’s biggest polluters on any measure.
“The 60% 2050 target is many years out of date and has been long ago overtaken by the science, which now calls for net zero emissions by mid century.
“An immediate concern on looking at the draft legislation is that the Expert Advisory Committee, which will play a critical role in determining ongoing targets, will be appointed by the Minister without any consultation or criteria.
“It is unthinkable that an advisory group that the legislation puts on the same level as the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change could be appointed by a Minister whose advisory groups to date have been there to protect the interests of big polluters over the interests of the whole community.
“This advisory group must be led by climate scientists and include experts in renewable energy, energy efficiency and other sectors of the new, green economy that will benefit from strong action.
“The Government is persistently claiming that voluntary action will be able to be taken into account in setting targets. However, it is clear from the draft Bill that the targets will only be able to be changed 5 years out – a timeframe that is simply too late in the face of climate change tipping points.
“For the sake of efficiency, the Greens would prefer that one Senate Inquiry takes place and that the Government refer this draft bill to the new Select Committee announced today. However, if the Government insists on moving ahead with its own reference to the Economics Committee, we will not stand in the way.
“The Greens look forward to detailed Senate scrutiny of this draft bill and lengthy negotiations with the Government to green it up.”
==
Warning flaw in carbon scheme helps polluters
BY ROSSLYN BEEBY, SCIENCE AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTER
Canberra Times 11/03/2009 9:11:00 AM
The Rudd Government has not fixed a critical flaw in its carbon trading scheme that allows big polluters to reap benefits from community actions to cut emissions, a leading Australian economist says.
The warning comes as a series of United Nations climate change reports has urged Australia to improve its greenhouse emissions accounting methods to meet Kyoto protocol standards.
British economist Lord Nicholas Stern has also called for a global emissions trading scheme with a ”common carbon price” and global sanctions against ”dirty countries” persisting with high-carbon growth.
Yesterday, federal Climate Change Minister Penny Wong launched draft laws for the Rudd Government’s emissions trading scheme, which commits Australia to a 5 to 15 per cent reduction in greenhouse emissions on 2000 levels by 2020.
The Opposition, Greens, environment and business groups have called for the legislation to be defeated in the Senate and ”sent back to the drawing board” to revise its targets and timelines.
The Australian Industry Group wants the Government to delay the 2010 starting date for the scheme, saying Australian businesses ”cannot afford this extra impediment to investment”.
Senator Wong said the Government was willing to negotiate changes to the draft laws with the Greens and the Coalition, but warned against delaying the planned 2010 start date of the trading scheme.
”The question that will confront some senators is, ‘Do you throw away something because you’d rather have everything? We’re building a vehicle that will take us to the future and some people want it to be a Ferrari but if it can’t be a Ferrari would you really have no vehicle at all?”’
The director of political think-tank, the Australia Institute, economist Richard Denniss, has accused the Government of misleading the public over the way the scheme will work, particularly in relation to community efforts to cut greenhouse emissions.
”Nothing has changed in the legislation and it would be misleading for the Government to claim it has. Under this scheme as it stands, people’s efforts to cut their carbon footprint will just lower the price of permits for polluters,” he said.
Senator Wong said existing and future impacts of voluntary actions by households, state governments or industries could ”be taken into account” when setting five-year caps on Australia’s emissions. But the impact of these voluntary actions would not alter the scheme’s emission reduction target range. ”The target range remains the same 5 to 15 [per cent] that is the decision of the Government.
”The caps within that range for the five years and ahead, can take into account the past and likely future voluntary action.”
Senator Wong said the Government would also welcome suggestions from the public on ”how voluntary action would be calculated, being very mindful we don’t want to be in the position of imposing an unreasonable burden on households in terms of reporting of their own emissions”.
Environment Business Australia the peak body for green business has called on the Government to develop ”a mega masterplan” to build new markets, industries and jobs that ”are not based on short-termism, collateral damage and excessive greed”.
The organisation’s chief executive, Fiona Wain, said Australia could achieve a 20 per cent reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2020 by improving energy efficiency.
”The scheme’s reduction targets are too low to send a credible signal to investors who have identified clean energy as a key element in the next technological era,” she said.
Australian Greens deputy leader Christine Milne said the draft legislation was ”deeply flawed” and needed significant changes to be environmentally and economically effective.
”An immediate concern on looking at the draft legislation is that the Expert Advisory Committee, which will play a critical role in determining ongoing targets, will be appointed by the minister without any consultation or criteria.
”This advisory group must be led by climate scientists and include experts in renewable energy, energy efficiency and other sectors of the new, green economy that will benefit from strong action,” she said.
Senator Wong said without the scheme, Australia’s greenhouse emissions would grow ”to 20 per cent above 2000 levels that is, we will be at 120 per cent of 2000 levels so 5 to 15 [per cent] represents up to a 30 per cent reduction of business as usual.
”This is a very significant set of targets … on the table.”
==
Climate Ark – Australia carbon scheme faces inquiry delay
Source: Copyright 2009, Reuters
Date: March 9, 2009
Original URL
Australia’s planned carbon trading scheme faces sweeping revision and possible delays after opposing upper house lawmakers joined forces to agree on an intensive two-month review.
Draft laws on the proposed emissions trading scheme (ETS) will be released later on Tuesday and the government wants them passed by the end of June, a year before the July 2010 start, but Climate Change Minister Penny Wong has conceded the laws might not pass by the July deadline.
The major conservative opposition and rival Australian Greens have struck a deal to ensure a two-month Senate committee inquiry to look at the scheme’s flaws and alternatives to the approach preferred by the ruling center-left Labor government.
Greens Senator Christine Milne agreed her party’s preferred scheme with tough emission reduction targets was poles apart from conservative support for a softened scheme, but said on Tuesday the inquiry would hear evidence from all possible sides.
She said the inquiry would look at green jobs and transformation of the A$1 trillion ($632.9 billion) energy-reliant economy, as well as renewable energy and adequacy of the government’s 5 percent emission reduction target by 2020.
“It is just not high enough. It doesn’t meet the demands of the science,” Milne said.
Australia, the world’s biggest coal exporter and a growing supplier of LNG, accounts for 1.5 percent of global carbon emissions but is one of the highest per-capita polluters, with 80 percent of electricity from coal-fired power stations.
Milne said the committee would report in time for the Senate’s scheduled June consideration, but debate on the measures could stretch beyond that date, with conservatives controlling the largest bloc of upper house votes.
Wong has come under mounting business and political pressure as conservative MPs want the scheme’s start delayed until 2011 or 2012. They argue that more free emissions permits should be granted to major polluters by the government to ensure a soft start to the scheme amid the current global financial tumult.
The architect of the government’s scheme, academic economist Ross Garnaut, said it would receive public advice through the Senate process and it would be disappointing if the package had no commitment to low emissions technology development.
He added that Prime Minister Kevin Rudd’s 5 percent target was a “reasonable position” if global talks in Copenhagen later this year on a post-Kyoto climate deal for the world collapsed.
===
