Yeh! Best place for a levy is on the table and just leave it there ; on the table.
Now you advocate socialism on a grand scale.

BTW. You say " ... a charge of $25 per tonne of carbon would only raise the price of air tickets by an estimated 2-4 per cent. "

Well why not place a levy on all student HELP costs to go towards funding this grand plan. After all it s only 2 to 4 percent.

Yes, withdraw some student benefits to help the developing countries. Sounds like a good idea.

Developing countries would be greatly helped in their adaptation efforts if their per-capita income was higher. If the Philippine people caught by the typhoon had been able to afford housing built to the building codes applicable along the northern coasts of Queensland, say, then the disaster would have been greatly reduced. Forget the supposed temperature increases and work on increasing income - many more people will be saved, no matter what happens. The tax might hurt development, by hindering tourism so it should be treated with suspicion.

I don't know about a levy or how that would help!
The actual and ever rising cost of bunker fuel will.
But particularly if a very savvy govt were to get involved and build its own maritime fleet, powered by pebble reactors.
If this fleet were designed as roll on roll off submersibles, and there isn't any technical reason why not, [we already have some hard won submarine building expertise],
we could undercut every Maritime freight forwarding company in the world.
The advantage of a submersible is, given inherent stability, it can be long enough to take entire kilometre long double decker train in one single loading action.
The seas could be whipped up to a frightening fury, as evidenced in the recent hurricane that demolished large parts of the Philippines, yet the vessels, would remain totally stable and secure at 50 below.
50 below, would also put them out of reach of pirates in small boats.
Current nuclear technology, would enable speeds of up to 50 knots, which would forward freight in half the time.
Inboard nuclear energy, could also be plugged into the train, ensuring that all chilled cargo remained chilled and that the air was frequently replenished from decomposed sea water.
Now if someone like Clive Palmer ran the country, he with his nose for a fail safe investment would say, look, in a four hundred billion dollar budget, we can set enough aside, to make this not just possible, but our very own massive income earning reality, ahead of the next election.
Precision laser cutters, single design patterns, robotics, continuous wire fed MIG welders and mass production, would enable us to turn out a dozen or more of these vessels every twelve months and have all sea trials concluded inside two years. And they only need to create a sea links between here and Singapore, China-Hong Kong, Korea-Japan, Norway-Britain-France, Siberia-Alaska etc, with the rest of the distance covered to our Asian/European customers, by very rapid rail links!
Rhrosty.

re: I don't know about a levy or how that would help!
The actual and ever rising cost of bunker fuel will.

Every little bit helps.

And who foots the cost of these imposed levies? The transport companies, yes?

About our submarine building expertise. Surely you jest.

If you want to have any hope of avoiding the worst of climate change we have to phase out the use of coal very soon. Tinkering around the edges just ain’t going to do the job.

Curmudgeon your comments about building to a better code would have only made one difference in the Philippines and that is the insurance bill would have vastly higher. With a 300+ Kph wind and a storm surge of around 12 feet, your typical Queensland house is going to fare no better than those in Tacloban. If you want proof you only have to look at what cyclone Tracy did to Darwin and they did not cop a storm surge.

The power of the wind goes up the cube of the wind speed or to put it crudely double the wind speed and you get 8 times more destruction. In reality when winds get anywhere close to 200 kph the only sensible thing to do is evacuate.

For a cyclone or typhoon to form the first and most important requirement is a sea temperatures above 26 degs C. We know that the sea temperatures around the Philippines have been well above this critical temperature recently and also well above average. There is a clear line of reasoning which links the high sea temperatures to the ferocity of the storm , you just have to figure out why the sea is currently so warm. The best exploitation is AGW.
ww.surfline.com/weather-forecasts/philippines/philippines-sea-surface-temperature_7263/

Magnetron rail links, would enable this service to beat current air freight, and for less than half the cost!
Simply put, decarbonizing our economies, will just massively improve our economies and opportunities, but particularly for those with the vision and the wit to go first.
We just need govts to stop thinking about creating microscopic opportunities for entirely self serving individuals, and start thinking about creating ones for the entire nation!
But more than that, how we as a single united homogenous society, can earn enough foreign capital, to never ever again put our hand out to problematic foreign investors, or, ever need to ever again pay any personal tax.
Simply put, a grand plan, and forward thinkers, could ensure we as corporate Australia, earned more than enough to run the country.
Our current and still finite exports would underwrite/pay for the plan. As would any and all later capital inflows!
Govts can borrow money for far less than the private market!
It's not such a big ask, given the number of monolithic multinationals, who already manage budgets far larger than that of many sovereign nations. If they can with their top heavy cost structures, then we with a streamlined and less expensive to operate, govt owned corporation, can do at least as well!?
We just need to ensure that politicians don't run the things, or exercise any control over operating capital!
Particularly, given the number of failed business persons, who seem to gravitate to politics and political salaries, as their personal bankruptcy avoidance measure?
We just need enough check and balances built into the system, to ensure that pollies, don't see any govt owned corporation as their own personal piggy bank or ATM!
Dividend streams can start when all debt is paid down or out!
What is critical, is parliaments, finally rid of the moribund morons, who go around muttering meincharge, or, that the govt has no business in business, almost as if there were any or some element of actual truth, in this particularly pernicious idiocy!?
Rhrosty.

No warmair the first requirement for any severe weather is the potential between the tropics & the polls. The higher the difference in temperature, the greater the potential for storms, & the more sever the storms are likely to be. Do some reading other than propaganda sheets.

As the theory of global warming goes, it is polls that warm fastest, & to a greater extent. Thus the greater the warming, the less number & severity of storms.

Take heart, the Philippines typhoon, if it is actually exceptional, is proof that the earth is cooling. As it was in fact, not exceptional, it says nothing at all about CO2 or global warming.

It does however say quite a lot about Green harpies who want to jump on any bit of bad news to push their dying case, & everything it says is not at all complementary.

And Graham, why so many articles by kids.

Surely it would be better if these kids finished their apprenticeship & spent some time paying their debt to the community that educated them, before they start pontificating on how the grown ups should live.

No Kilmouski, I do not jest. It took a while to be sure, but we as ship and submarine builders, can now compete with the best.
What we need to get rid of is the problematic foreign made liquid oxygen/Diesel engines?
I mean, most of the reported problems have been with the engines, fuel leaks and fuel fires? Not good in submarines!
And freight forwarding submersibles don't need to operate at a thousand feet or more below, which has a tendency, to expose welding flaws and design failures.
Ask any nation which uses our home made patrol boats, if we can or cannot build good ships, and the answer is usually, yes we can.
We invented the computer controlled precision cutting, which allows every part to seamlessly fit with the others.
Our major problem, is I dare say, is people just like you, who regard our own as second best, regardless of the actual facts?
We are not by any stretch second best, and we do export fast ferries to most of the rest of the world.
I would agree however, that our expertise, would in no way be harmed if we included a few experienced Norwegian shipbuilders and designers in it, particularly, if we were to undertake, the proposed submersibles build!
They have considerable expertise in roll on roll off ferries, which are already partially submersible!
While it might be a little cheaper to have these things built in china, maintenance and spare parts supply is usually much more reliable, from the viewpoint of an entirely indigenous operation!
We already have iron ore and coal, from which we make great steel by the direct reduction process, which by the way, is the lowest carbon producing method.
It therefore follows, we should turn some of this stuff into nuclear powered ships, that we use to run the world's freight around with?
Shipping remains one of the most profitable operations on the planet, with the best dividends!
Cheers, Rhrosty.

Warmair
Building codes would certainly have made a difference in the Philippines and Darwin is a prime example. Compare the devestation and death tolls in Darwin with what happened in the Philippines. As devastating as it seemed at the time to us, there is no comparison, and that was in the 1970s. Now go and look at what happened when Yasi hit the Nth Queensland coast in 2011. Note that in the town of Tully, which was by far the worst hit, all the houses there were built before a change in building codes, so they lost their roofs. Elsewhere, housing stock was damaged but not devastated.

As town planning is also quite different in Nth Qld the storm surge would not have anything like the same effect (and didn't at the time of Yasi), so that's out as well.

If the Philippines could afford better buildings, as well as proper evacuation plans and reinforced emergency shelters and the like, a lot of tragedy and damage could be averted. Supporting a carbon tax is highly unlikely to do anything about warm oceans but it may affect national incomes and that would cost far more lives.

Are, another write in effort to OLO of the "Global Voices youth delegate to the current UNFCCC" campaign.

An improvement on poor Darcy's attempt last week - at http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15744&page=0

But still like all young, naïve, left-wing(?) efforts they are both fixated with blaming developed Western countries.

Look around Global Voices youth delegates, it is developing China and India that are heavily dependent on dirty coal power stations.

Developing China and India are contributing most to growing climate changing greenhouse gas these days.

How about making China and India (and Saudi Arabia?) pay for the damage rather than China and India being the main recipients of most of the guilt money extorted out of the West.

Rhrosty

No. Australia never had authentic "hard won submarine building expertise". The Collins submarine had a long troubled development. Most of these subs remain under repair or maintenance. Much has been covered up. The Collins is a highly unreliable, dysfunctional submarine - that few submariners want to serve in.

Australia's submarine "expertise" and its labour force have mainly been lost.

Pete

Rhrosty
To add to this true but depressing observation :

Quote

" No. Australia never had authentic "hard won submarine building expertise". The Collins submarine had a long troubled development. Most of these subs remain under repair or maintenance. Much has been covered up. The Collins is a highly unreliable, dysfunctional submarine - that few submariners want to serve in. "

We killed off our " high technical expertise " many, many years ago. How do I know. I was there. I grew up with it!

We built a satellite and had it in orbit in a few months. We designed and built anti submarine misslies/ torpedo systems, and exported them. We built and designed the most amazing laser depth profilers we were amazing! Our sonar systems WERE amazing.

How do I know - I was there.

Now all we have is " bloody google" and every body elses work except our own.

Hasbeen is completely correct. If you believe in AGW then you must logically believe in fewer cyclones/hurricanes/ typhoons, which meteorologically are all the same thing. The reason is a reduction in the primary energy and therefore temperature gradients on Earth horizontally between the poles and the equator and vertically with the creation of a THS.

Richard Muller has noted this:

http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/expert-claims-climate-change-is-making-tornadoes-weaker/story-fnii5s3x-1226766820533

And the IPCC has disavowed any connection between AGW and extreme weather events:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/10/03/pielke-jr-agrees-extreme-weather-to-climate-connection-is-a-dead-issue/

As for surface temperatures, globally they look like this:

http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadsst2gl/from:2003/trend/plot/hadsst2sh/from:2003/trend/plot/none

As can plainly be seen both SSTs globally and in the SH are declining since 2003 the time when the ARGO floats, the most exact measurement of SST, were introduced.

People who argue that the Philippine's typhoon was due to AGW are idiots.

Curmudgeon
Typhoon haiyan hit the land with sustained winds of 315 KPH ( more than 10 mins) compared to cyclone Yasi which only managed 205 KPH . That makes Haiyan 3.6 times more powerful than Yasi. You simple can not compare the two.

Hasbeen
The poles lose heat far more quickly than the equator and no mater what you do that is not going to change anytime soon. This means that we can not predict that a warmer world will have less weather. The crucial point is that a warmer world will have higher rates of evaporation which in turn adds huge amounts of energy to the atmosphere. If I remember correctly you said you had done a fair amount of sailing well I prefer my sailing in 3 dimensions and we stay well clear of thunderstorms which are capable generating updraughts of 5000 ft per min or more, the source of these fantastic updraughts is condensing moisture.

Cohenite
Your links are not credible sources of information.
Quote
People who argue that the Philippine's typhoon was due to AGW are idiots
End quote

People who fail to understand the point that higher sea surface temperatures lead to more severe storms really are not very bright .

Whether increased atmospheric water levels, specific humidity, SH, amplify temperature through feedback is problematic given that the more SH there is the more clouds form and clouds are a negative feedback acting to cool warming.

But as Miskolzi's work and the data conclusively shows SH is decreasing and therefore it cannot be argued that there is more SH available to fuel cyclones; see:

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/327/5970/1219.abstract

http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/abs/10.1175/JCLI-D-11-00003.1

http://meteora.ucsd.edu/~pierce/papers/Pierce_et_al_AIRS_vs_models_2006GL027060.pdf

http://www.klimatupplysningen.se/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/paltridgearkingpook.pdf

http://c3headlines.typepad.com/.a/6a010536b58035970c017ee7c6621a970d-pi

Miskolzi 2010 at page 243:

http://www.eike-klima-energie.eu/uploads/media/EE_21-4_paradigm_shift_output_limited_3_Mb.pdf

It is also the case that evaporation has declined in recent years:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022169411007487

This really refutes any attempt to proffer SH as the AGW mechanism in combination with CO2; and with water CO2's heating capacity is minute and exhausted at 300ppm.

Here we go again !
Worrying about the wrong problem.
Jack Benneto, the global warming panic is so last decade.

There is not enough fossil fuel available to reach the most benine of
the IPCC's three projections.
If the cost of fossil fuels rises faster then expected the earth may
not reach even that lower level.

Have a look here;
http://aleklett.wordpress.com/
The link I had to the Global Energy Systems Group at Upsalla University
has disappeared from my browser, but google should find it.

cohenite
There is ample evidence that rainfall, river flows, and cloud cover have increased overall, nevertheless you are correct in pointing out the pan evaporation rates have declined world wide over land. This has is often referred to as the Evaporation Paradox.
It is has been thoroughly investigated and is quite well summed up below
http://www.jhu.edu/news_info/news/home98/nov98/paradox.html
And in detail here:
http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/human-dimensions/staff/tbrown/trends_pan_evap_actual_et_conterminous_us.pdf

Quote
But as Miskolzi's work and the data conclusively shows SH is decreasing and therefore it cannot be argued that there is more SH available to fuel cyclones; see:
end Quote

The formation of a typhoon or cyclone only takes place over the ocean and requires water temperatures to exceed 26.5C degrees. The higher the water temperature the more powerful the storm. The reason the Philippines typhoon was so powerful was due to the fact that the surrounding sea temperatures were around the 30c. The technical reasons are here:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tropical_cyclone#Maximum_Potential_Intensity

Your comment is based on the premiss that lower evaporation is taking place over the land (doubtful) and in any event is not relevant

warmair
I thought you might try to come back with the objection that the Philippines typhoon was stronger that Yasi. In fact the Philippines typhoon was about the same force as Tracy.. I was quoting Yasi as an example of just how changes in building codes effect structure survival, not as a comparison.. if stronger storms hit an area then you need stronger building codes, and if worse comes to worse you can have storm cellars built into houses as they do in the American mid-west in case of twisters, which are the ultimate.. forget typhoons. sorry but you're grasping at straws in an effort to rescue your argument.. income and building codes is far more important in these matters than any efforts to cut emissions. Your solution in fact would directly harm the people you are trying to help.

My primary solution to severe Typhoons such as Haiyan is to evacuate the area as is been done in India right now.
Indian cyclone evacuation
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-11-28/an-cyclone-lehar-barrels-towards-southeast-india/5121328

My second suggestion is don’t build too close to the coast in cyclone prone areas. Building codes are irrelevant if your house is flooded to 20 feet or so as happened in New Orleans when Katrina hit.

My third suggestion is to monitor the weather more closely so that people can be given plenty of warning.

My fourth suggestion is that richer countries stop adding to the existing problems of climate change by failing to reduce their emissions of CO2 and other GHGs.