« February 2007 | Main | April 2007 »
March 2007
Gore's recommendations
Gore recently testified to the US house and senate, and made some serious recommendations .
There is an article about them on Grist.
They are serious recommendations getting to 90% reduction by 2050 (the sort of numbers the labor party should be talking about if they want to be a serious OPPOSITION). A summary of the recommendations are below, and there is a video of his opening statement.
- An immediate "carbon freeze" that would cap U.S. CO2 emissions at current levels, followed by a program to generate 90% reductions by 2050.
- Start a long-term tax shift to reduce payroll taxes and increase taxes on CO2 emissions.
- Put aside a portion of carbon tax revenues to help low-income people make the transition.
- Create a strong international treaty by working toward "de facto compliance with Kyoto" and moving up the start date for Kyoto's successor from 2012 to 2010.
- Implement a moratorium on construction of new coal-fired power plants that are not compatible with carbon capture and sequestration.
- Create an "ELECTRANET" -- a smart electricity grid that allows individuals and businesses to feed power back in at prevailing market rates.
- Raise CAFE standards.
- Set a date for a ban on incandescent light bulbs.
- Create "Connie Mae," a carbon-neutral mortgage association, to help defray the upfront costs of energy-efficient building.
- Have the SEC (US equivalent of ASIC) require disclosure of carbon emissions in corporate reporting, as a relevant "material risk."
Posted by Blog Administrator at 3:00 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Comparing NSW party positions on climate change
Vote Climate has done a side-by-side comparison of the platforms of the various parties vying for power in the NSW election.
It does a pretty good job, though could be improved (see below).
Its noticeable how similar, and how poor both Liberals and Labors policies are. This was born out at the recent candidates meeting, where local candidates Don Page (Nationals, sitting); Melanie Dorien (Labor) and John Bailey (Greens) told us their policies. John was excellent as should be expected from the Greens, Don clearly knows a fair bit about the issue, but of course it should be pointed out that the National Party doesn't share his understanding, nor is it likely to come out with what Don is advocating, and Don votes with the party. Don also refused to be drawn on actual targets prior to their (late) announcement by the shadow environment minister. Labor's policies were similar, which is really poor since you would - if you hadn't experienced many years of their government - expect them to be siding with people rather than profits. I was particularly disappointed in Labors dismal targets and Melanie's lack of understanding of the need for targets that drive policy.
I addressed the meeting on both the need for strong targets that will solve the problem (20% by 2020 is basically heading us for runaway climate change), and for a stable playing field that ensures businesses can invest in energy & carbon-saving measures on the expectation of decent Minimum Renewable Energy Targets (MRETs) and even better a carbon tax.
There were three ways I think this comparison could be extended ...
- Add the Nationals as distinct from Liberals, though they vote as a team in parliament.
- Uranium as far as I know only has two significant uses - nuclear power, and nuclear bombs. Since labor supports expanded mining, but opposes nuclear power one is left wondering whether they would like to see the uranium used in bombs?
- It needs the specific numbers on targets, and also shorter (end of the parliamentary term) and longer term (2050) targets both for emission reductions and MRETs.
- It needs to draw attention that both Coalition and Labor support privatisation of the electricity industry, a disastrous move as it removes many of the opportunities to push non-financial outcomes. Selling off a massive publicly owned infrastructure is certainly something that should be a question for voters, not the subject of backroom deals.
See the full table at voteclimate.org.au/?q=NSW07-Policy-At-A-Glance-Online.
Posted by Blog Administrator at 2:27 PM
New Zealand to be the first Carbon Neutral country?
This press release came from Beyond Zero Emissions,
Prime Minister Helen Clarke is setting the direction for a realigning of
the NZ economy to Carbon Neutrality. New Zealand is taking the lead to
be the first country to be net zero emissions across all sectors..
The New Zealand Government is in the process of developing a series of
targets, the first of which is that 6 of it's 34 own agencies will be
Carbon neutral by 2012.
"New Zealand is targeting all key sectors of their economy and are going
to reduce their emissions to near zero emissions and then offset the
rest, at the same time the Australian government, representing some of
the biggest polluting industries in the world such as BHP and Rio Tinto,
can't even agree to the 108% increase on 1990 levels. that we would be
bound to under the Kyoto agreement, which is the biggest concession
given to any industrialised country." said Matthew Wright Beyond Zero
Emissions Campaigner.
(Read on, and check the references at the end).
Continue reading "New Zealand to be the first Carbon Neutral country?"
Posted by Blog Administrator at 7:30 PM | Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)
Jim Hansen presentation to National Press Club
Jim Hansen is head of the US NASA Goddard Institute's climate research. Of course, given the efforts of the Bush administration to silence him, I presume in this article that he is speaking as a private citizen, its a good (and reasonably brief) summary of current thinking.
(via Greenleap)
Continue reading "Jim Hansen presentation to National Press Club"
Posted by Blog Administrator at 7:53 PM | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)