The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Gaping hole in greenhouse gas emissions > Comments

Gaping hole in greenhouse gas emissions : Comments

By David Leyonhjelm, published 4/3/2019

Australia’s commitments, no matter what anyone thinks of them, are quite pointless unless they are conditional on action by the world’s big emitters.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
Might as well not vote in elections if individual actions don't make a difference. As the world's biggest exporter of both coal and LNG Australia is exacerbating global emissions. If not then let all the drug dealers out of jail since the harm is not their responsibility.

Apart from GHG abatement and peer demonstration there is also an early mover advantage to going low carbon. Imported oil will become unaffordable and east Australian gas is going that way. There's plenty of coal but in Australia the biggest users say they want to get out. If Australia went low carbon we'd have the moral authority to slap extra tariffs on goods imported from greenhouse rogues like China and India. There is much to gain from going low carbon ASAP.
Posted by Taswegian, Monday, 4 March 2019 8:29:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Very sensible. I can't help mention that I've been saying the same thing for over five years, see e.g. in this esteemed e-Journal "A Climate Policy for Grown-ups: unsolicited advice to the new government" on November 20 2013 http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=15728. See point 5 (of 6): "Don’t start forcing emissions cuts until you are certain that the world’s main emitters, and preferably the whole world, are doing the equivalent." And I stand by the other 5 pieces of 'advice' I gave then.
Posted by TomBie, Monday, 4 March 2019 8:47:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Australia is 15th largest emitter in 195 global nations.
Per capita, Australia is the globe's highest or #2 emitter.

Those who claim that Australia is a minor or even insignificant player are fooling themselves - we are the headline which other countries read.
Posted by SingletonEngineer, Monday, 4 March 2019 9:22:59 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The money we have wasted on subsidizing the installation of renewables would have been better spent on research and development that will make it easier for us and everyone else to reduce ghg emissions. This could include: helping the effort to develop red meat without the animal and nicer vego alternatives; greater soil CO2 sequestration; better carbon sucking trees; innovations in nuclear power; and more funding of pure science that will provide unexpected spin-offs.

We could also do pro-development R&D such as helping Africa develop higher yielding and more resilient crops.

These are all no-regrets policies. They are justified even if climate turns out to less sensitive to greenhouse emissions than expected.
Posted by David McMullen, Monday, 4 March 2019 9:39:11 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"Australia’s commitments, no matter what anyone thinks of them, are quite pointless unless they are conditional on action by the world’s big emitters."

This is absolutely correct. We have known this for decades - since before 1990. A bipartisan agreed caveat was included in Australia's commitment to the 'Toronto Targets':
"11 October 1990 The Australian Government adopted an Interim Planning
Target to stabilise greenhouse gas emission at 1988
levels by 2000 and to reduce emissions by 20 per cent by
the year 2005 based on 1988 levels (known as the Toronto
target). An important caveat was included in this
target. This stated that measures which would have net
adverse economic impacts nationally or on Australia's
trade competitiveness would not be implemented in the
absence of similar action by major greenhouse gas
producing nations. Actions would be taken if benefits
were realised in addition to the greenhouse gas emission
reduction benefits, for example energy conservation.
This became known as the 'no regrets' strategy. "
https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/Background_Papers/bp9798/98bp04

It was fully recognised in the Treasury report on the modelling for the Rudd Government's Carbon Polution Reduction Scheme ('carbon tax')

Just recently Professor Warwick McKibbin published the cost of taking action that is not part of a total world coordinated action. https://cama.crawford.anu.edu.au/publication/cama-working-paper-series/13677/global-economic-and-environmental-outcomes-paris

And a week or so Brian Fisher (ex head of ABARE and lead author of chapters in three IPCC reports) showed the cost of the ALP and Coalition polices, including in terms of jobs lost and reduce per capita income and lost industry. http://www.baeconomics.com.au/publications
Posted by Peter Lang, Monday, 4 March 2019 9:41:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Once again this fellow is just so wrong on so many points its difficult to know where to start. Sure, some relevance could exist were the library analogy in any way actually analogous to what Australia does in this space.. but its far, very far indeed, from the truth. Once again he's simply spreading ignorance. Australia, Australian institutions and Australians in general are VERY proactive in this space. Climate deniers like Lyin'Hell are not part of the solution; they are in fact a major part of the problem.
Posted by omygodnoitsitsitsyou, Monday, 4 March 2019 10:41:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy