Philosophical Conversations Public Opinion Junk for code
parliament house.gif
Think Tanks
Oz Blogs
Economic Blogs
Foreign Policy Blogs
International Blogs
Media Blogs
South Australian Weblogs
Economic Resources
Environment Links
Political Resources
South Australian Links
"...public opinion deserves to be respected as well as despised" G.W.F. Hegel, 'Philosophy of Right'

saying no no no to Kyoto « Previous | |Next »
April 9, 2005

The Kyoto Protocol agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions is back in the news, as the US, Australia go their own way to develop an alternative to the Kyoto protocol.

Christo Komarnitski,

The energy intensive industries in Australia are also resistant to change. They want to put off taking action for as long as possible. The impression you get fromeading htei comments in the media is that these are people who have a knee-jerk negative reaction to any kind of environmental regulation—---or, for that matter, any kind of government regulation. But they continue to hold out their hand for government subsidies for their old polluting industries.

These business interests determined that the international climate negotiations were a threat to their livelihoods and profits.

They persuaded the Australia Government not to sign the Kyoto Protocol. Australia, it was said, should not agree to anything that might harm its economy. Their goal is to put off that day of restrictions on carbon emissions for as long as it is politically possible to do so. Their blindness is not the scepticism about science. It is that they do not see that the drive for climate solutions is a business opportunity: producing and selling alternative fuels, becoming exporters of renewable energy, attracting high-tech businesses, or even selling carbon emission reduction credits.

However, Australia is vulnerable to the effect of climate change from an economic and environmental perspective, and so restrictions on carbon emissions in this country are inevitable. So are the requirements that the largest greenhouse gas emitters disclose their emissions. That is why the states are beginning to establish a bottoms-up emissions trading system with targets and caps. Hopefully climate change becomes one of the drivers of energy policy.

The states say that they are doing their bit to make climate change a driver of energy policy with their in-pinciple agreement about a state-based emissions trading scheme. But are not these same states also going ahead building new coal-fired power stations, which cause the greenhouse emissions in the first place? Does not Queensland desire to be Australia's electricity generation powerhouse through providing cheap electricity with ever more coal-fired power stations?

| Posted by Gary Sauer-Thompson at 1:13 AM | | Comments (0)