Nothing like trying to get your head around the ‘greatest moral challenge of our generation’ in less time than it takes to drink a soy latte, huh? Climate change is a huge issue and one I will put my hand up to admit, I don’t understand well at all. Assuming I’m not the only one, I’ve asked Mamamia’s spin-free political editor Julie Cowdroy to explain everything we need to know in SIMPLE TERMS:
What is the issue?
.
There is mounting evidence that human activity is contributing to climate change through increases in greenhouse gases in the Earth’s atmosphere. Greenhouse gases come from carbon dioxide and methane gases. These gases soak up heat from the sun but instead of the heat leaving the Earth’s atmosphere, some of it is trapped, making the Earth warmer.A “rise” of two degrees average global temperature would melt snow and ice across the planet and raise sea levels 0.4-1.4m which could submerge several small island states and Bangladesh resulting in large numbers of climate change refugees. There would be changes in rainfall patterns, changes in the migration of wildlife, massive species extinction, increased disease transmission, and drought amongst other impacts.
We can cut down on the amount of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere by reducing and even ending our reliance on things like dirty coal as our primary energy source, and look for alternatives like nuclear, solar, clean coal and burying carbon deep in the ground. We can cut down on methane emissions by reducing waste and changing our agricultural and farming techniques.
There is a minority who do not trust the science of man-made climate change. This group is commonly referred to as deniers, and there many who are sceptical of the science. You can read more about the science in an earlier cheat sheet. In this year’s election there is an official political party called the Climate Sceptics Party who have candidates running for both the House of Representatives and the Senate in the 2010 election. Their policies are here.
HELPFUL TOOLS…
A note on targets: When emissions are measured, it is usually against the emissions levels of 1990 or 2000. So when a party says it aims to reduce emissions by X%, it’s target is compared to either the 1990 or 2000 levels. Climate change scientists argue that emissions cuts between 25-40% by 2020 and 80-95% by 2050 are essential if we want to avoid a two degree rise.
Who are Stern & Garnaut? SirNicholas Stern and Ross Garnaut are two economists who issued reports regarding the impact climate change would have on the economy. The Stern Review is an international report while the Garnaut Climate Change Review was commissioned by the former PM Kevin Rudd and the State Premiers to discuss the economic impacts of climate change for Australia
A wee note on policies: I have taken what I believe to be the key points from each party. For more comprehensive policy outlines, click on the links.
Greens’ policy:
Bob Brown
Introduce a carbon tax of a flat rate of $20 per tonne of carbon over the next two years as an interim measure to reduce emissions
Revenue from the tax would provide a $5 billion return for households to invest in renewable energy, energy efficiency and other emissions reducing alternatives
Australia should achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as is feasible and by no later than 2050 with a minimum of 40% reduction by 2020 (N.B., Climate change scientists estimate a cut in 90% by 2050 is necessary to avoid catastrophe)
Future energy needs should be met using sustainable, renewable energy sources
Create a Minster for Climate Change and Energy
Reform the National Electricity Market to remove the bias towards dirty coal and encourage the development of renewable energy
Ensure that renewable electricity provides 30% of national demand by 2020
Facilitate the rollout of “smart meters” designed to ensure that people who are on low incomes are not unfairly penalised when changing to renewable energy
Oppose the establishment of new coal-fired power stations, new coal mines and the expansion of existing mines because the technology to capture and store greenhouse gas emissions remains unproven (see below on carbon capture and storage)
Provide incentives to promote public transport, and to encourage research, development, and commercialisation of energy efficiency and renewable energy sustainable alternative fuels
Ban public funding to refurbish any existing coal fired power stations
Develop a plan to assist affected communities in the transition from dependence on coal mining and coal-fired power stations, given that global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will inevitably reduce the demand for coal
Remove the GST on public transport
Reduce vehicle dependence and improve fuel efficiency by investing in public transport, providing housing with access to public transport and discouraging urban sprawl
Amend the Fringe Benefits Tax to remove the incentive to increase vehicle use.
Phase out diesel fuel subsidies by removing energy credits
Increase community awareness about the urgent need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and about the need to plan for future climate change impacts
Australia should take the lead globally in action against climate change and negotiate an “emission abatement treaty” which would include binding targets for all countries (abatement means reduction)
Assist countries in our region to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and adapt to climate change
Prohibit the use of native forests for electricity generation. More on forest management here
Read more about their stance against uranium mining and nuclear energy here
This information taken from the Greens’ website. More information re: their climate change policy is here.
Coalition Policy
Australia should achieve a 5% reduction in emissions by 2020
Tony Abbott
The centerpiece of the Coalition’s Direct Action Plan is an Emissions Reduction Fund – a pool of $2.6 billion over four years that pays farmers and businesses incentives to voluntarily cut emissions.
Penalties would be enforced for emissions over “business as usual” numbers (yet to orchestrate what the penalties will be)
An additional $100 million would be spent to install one million solar panels in households by 2020 ($1000 subsidies for individuals)
The Fund will pay for 20 million trees to be planted
The single largest opportunity for CO2 emissions reduction in Australia is through bio-sequestration (see note below on carbon capture and storage) which is the lowest cost CO2 emissions reduction available in Australia on a large scale.
85 million tonnes of carbon would be buried in Australia’s soil
Incentives will be made available for the oldest and most inefficient power stations to reduce their emissions in an orderly manner which protects jobs, electricity prices and Australia’s energy security
Recognises the potential for clean energy to underpin future employment growth in key regional areas
Provide $60 million to develop the La Trobe Valley, Hunter and Central Queensland regions as “Clean Energy Employment Hubs” to drive additional clean energy research and development
Allocate $100 million to a “Solar Towns and Solar Schools Initiative” holding competitive tenders for towns, non-capital cities and schools to access direct solar energy for on site use
Allocate $50 million to a “Geothermal and Tidal Towns Initiative” holding competitive tenders commencing for towns and non-capital cities to submit proposals for projects that access direct geothermal or tidal energy for on site use
$400 million allocated for a “Green Army” of 15,000 18-25 year old who are paid $300 a week training wage to work on projects for up to six months for community groups to help them cut their carbon footprint
Total cost would be $10 billion for 10 years or $3.2 billion over 4 years
This information taken from the Liberal party website. More information here.
ALP Policy
Julia Gillard
Target is a 5% reduction in emissions by 2020 with a view to reassess which could lift the target as high as 25% depending on the nature of future global agreements
A Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme that has an ETS (Emission Trading Scheme) as its centerpiece. However the ETS was blocked by the Greens and the Coalition in the Senate in November 2009, and in early 2010
Funds raised by the ETS collection were to be reinvested into Australian households to help ease the burden of the carbon tax
The ETS has been shelved until the end of 2012 but the ALP recommits to the need for a market based mechanism
Create a “Climate Change Commission” made up of independent experts to explain the science of climate change and to report on progress in international action
Develop a “Citizens’ Assembly” made up of 150 Australians to examine over 12 months the evidence on climate change, the case for action and the possible consequences of introducing a market-based approach to limiting and reducing carbon emissions
The members of the Citizens’ Assembly would be voluntary participants and selected through the electoral roll by an independent authority.
New coal fired power stations to be built would have to be carbon capture and storage ready (see note on CCS below)
$1 billion over 10 years given to new sources of renewable energy such as solar power, geothermal, wind and wave technologies
This information taken from the ALP’s website. More information here and the PM’s speech entitled “Moving forward together on Climate Change” here
THREE THINGS TO CONSIDER
1. The science of climate change is highly politicised
Climate Change is a highly political issue. Political parties, corporations or advocacy groups apply pressure economically and legally to influence the findings of scientific research and the way it is interpreted and communicated. Both climate scientists and climate sceptics have accused each other of politicising the issue to advance their agendas. This makes it tricky to work out what is going on. Naturally and evidently things get messy and we are left throwing our hands up in the air. The International Panel of Climate Change (IPCC) is a group set up by the United Nations to “provide the world with a clear scientific view on the current state of climate change and its potential environmental and economic consequences”. Because it is both a scientific and government body it is often criticised. It is important that we are presented with spin free science of the facts of climate change but this is often hard to find. Especially in an election year.
2. The ETS vs Carbon Tax question
An ETS is an economic incentive issued by the government to encourage corporations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is a market based incentive that places a cap on the amount of emissions companies use and if they want to increase their emissions, they must buy credits from those who pollute less. As time progresses, the idea is that the cap is lowered which results in a lower national emissions target. The ETS makes the polluter pays for each tonne of carbon they emit. An ETS is also often referred to as a “cap and trade” system. A carbon tax, on the other hand is simply a flat tax applied to each tonne of carbon. It makes using dirty fuels expensive and makes alternative energy more competitive with polluting fuels like coal, natural gas and oil, which are currently much cheaper. Remember an ETS is the most economically safe way to lower emissions, not necessarily the most environmentally beneficial way.
3. Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS, otherwise known as Carbon Capture and Sequestration)
Too much emphasis is put on a cost on carbon. We need to learn to use carbon properly which is why the solution of CCS is a viable one. CCS is where CO2 is collected and pumped into geological storage sites. The basic idea of CCS is already pretty much proven, but more demonstration plants are needed. Although engineers know how to store carbon and are doing so on a small scale, more large-scale storage remains unproven. More investments into developing the technology must be made in order for CCS to be maximised. If the argument is simply about a price on carbon, a global solution will not be reached (remember Copenhagen?). China is powered by 80% coal and pretty much won’t sign onto reducing emissions, but if CCS was developed to the point of being used widely, there would be more chance for international consensus in the reduction of greenhouse gases.
Top Comments
Carbon Capture and Storage is
1. not a proven technology
2. Far from carbon neutral. You have to count the cost of mining and transporting the coal, maintaining the power plant etc.
Far better are real renewables - proven technologies such as Windpower and Solar Thermal Storage.
see http://beyondzeroemissions.... for a highly professional paper on why and how we should aim for zero emissions by 2020, based on STS and Wind - NOT CCS.
Although protecting the environment is important, people are part of the environment too.
The Greens are pro euthanasia
-ie the state sanctioned killing of people ( supposedly voluntarily euthanasia). Hoever, as the link below points out, in countries such as Holland, where euthanasia has been legalised people have been killed without their consent.
http://www.euthanasia.com/m...
If you want trees and whales to live votes for the Greens, but if you are interested in protecting your own right to life, Greens are not a good choice.