|
November 28, 2009
As in Australia so in the US with respect to acting on climate change. As Jeffrey Sachs observes:
There are several reasons for US inaction – including ideology and scientific ignorance – but a lot comes down to one word: coal. No fewer than 25 states produce coal, which not only generates income, jobs and tax revenue, but also provides a disproportionately large share of their energy... Since addressing climate change is first and foremost directed at reduced emissions from coal – the most carbon-intensive of all fuels – America's coal states are especially fearful about the economic implications of any controls
For Australia just think Queensland, NSW , Victoria, South Australia--coal states. Minimal reform with lots of public subsidies is their game plane. Now think coal state senators with their blackhats.
Sachs says that:
until recently, many believed that China and India would be the real holdouts in the global climate change negotiations. Yet China has announced a set of major initiatives – in solar, wind, nuclear, and carbon-capture technologies – to reduce its economy's greenhouse gas intensity. India, long feared to be a spoiler, has said that it is ready to adopt a significant national action plan to move towards a trajectory of sustainable energy.
Sachs asks: "could the US Senate really prove to be the world's last great holdout?" Nope. There is the Australian Senate since many Coalition Senators senators from the coal states are unlikely to support decisive action on climate change, other than to prevent the economic impact on the coal states and to demand even more favours for business.
They are not concerned about market failure, or how to produce much more energy with much less CO2, nor with influence the demand side of the market, leading to consumers adopting more sustainable behavior by making sustainable low-carbon choices. Nor do they talk about making buildings more efficient or mandating green buildings.
I can imagine some blackhat Senators saying that if energy efficiency worked, everyone would have done it already. When others look a bit puzzled they would elaborate along the lines that what they meant was that this is like the joke about the two economists who ignore a $100 bill they see lying on the street, figuring that if the money were real someone would have picked it up.
So what is Copenhagen about? The conservatives would say that these good guys are a good guide to what is going on. One of them--Lord Monckton spoke at a recent IPA conference in Australia. There is nothing online from the conference, but some of Monckton's climate change denial rhetoric can be foundhere.
|
Thanks Gary.
Do I smell a Kyoto? Australia and the US refusing to aim high because of coal boots?