|
August 26, 2008
The political battle over climate change policy is intensifying with the Rudd Government lending a sympathetic ear to the rent seeking businesses seeking to become free riders. Whingeing about the cost of cutting emissions works for the resource lobby, even before the economic modeling by Ross Garnaut is released.
But we shouldn't impugn the motives of the Business Council of Australia, should we, even though its study did not even look at the Emission Trading Scheme winners in the new green industries.
Bruce Petty
There is even utilitarian talk from the Howard-huggers in the coal fields that the costs of business as usual---accepting global warming and continuing with coal -fired power stations without cutting emissions -----would be cheaper than the cost of cutting emissions.
|
The reality is Australia only produces something like 1.4 per cent of global emissions. So, in relation to a cost benefit analysis of Australia acting, the benefits might be hard pressed to outweigh the costs.
Hopefully China, India & Russia get on board sooner than might be expected: their lack of cooperation is one of the main points of leverage for deniers, and associated 'business as usual' folk.
China may: if water shortages become worse. They have 1.3 billion people to sustain after all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_water_crisis