In the event that this law actually comes into force, and is not disallowed by the Queen on the advice of Prime Minister Abbott (presuming that he becomes PM within the next year), it is obvious its two great objectives (support from the Greens and the opening of a whole new area of taxation) will serve to permit the fat public sector to continue to consume the economy. Greece and Italy serve as examples of the end result of this practice. The coming world depression will cause the emission of global warming gases to decline substantially, but this will not deter the groups in society (mainly graduates employed by government) from continuing a scare campaign designed to result in their continued employment. Hopefully we have enough resources that, coupled with a ban on immigration, may allow us to preserve an island of happiness in a world of misery.

Good article, puts the case very well for why a global ETS will only act to allow developed nations to go on with business as usual, and even to increase their greenhouse emissions by utilising permit and credit offsetts, whilst developing countries will fall further behind in their development. Alternatively developing countries, including China, may sell permits and benefit from grants for green schemes whilst also going on with business as usual and continuing growth and consumption. Permit and credit scheme "scams" and double counting can be expected to abound. Net result can only be an increase in emissions.

I also don't believe our carbon tax will do anything to reduce our emissions, not when households and selected industries will be subsidised so that business and consumption may continue as usual. It's just plain counterintuitive, pure and simple.

Fair dinkum about reducing emissions? Then use the product of the mining boom to invest in alternative energy at home and abroad (conditional foreign aid), and in re-forestation and anti-deforestation at home and abroad; and of course in any and all global initiatives to reduce population growth.