malrob: "If anyone wants to check the credibility of your list maybe they can start by googling 'American Federation of Scientists' and see what they get"

I got this:

http://www.fas.org/about/index.html

FAS: "With 69 Nobel Laureates on its Board of Sponsors, FAS provides timely, nonpartisan technical analysis on complex global issues that hinge on science and technology"

http://www.fas.org/programs/energy/index.html

FAS: "There is no serious doubt that human activity is altering the earth's climate in potentially catastrophic ways."

Trying to cherry pick are we? You seemed to have skipped all of those the national science academies, not to mention the overarching juggernaut The InterAcademy Council. Any reason for that? Seems your attempt backfired anyway.

malrob: "And I have failed to find any paper providing unequivocal observed evidence that anthropogenic CO2 is having a significant effect on global temperatures."

And you'll be looking for a long time. Why on Earth would you think all of the evidence would be in one paper!? Take a look at the discovery of quantum mechanics for example - that didn't occur in one paper that's for sure. That would be like a judge saying "sure, you have 100 witnesses with contributing evidence, but not one of them has *all* of the evidence that proves the case". I think you are mistaking the term "paper" for a more general report. Here is a recent paper in the August 2008 edition of Theoretical and Applied Climatology: "Eddy covariance CO2 flux above a Gmelin larch forest on continuous permafrost in Central Siberia during a growing season".

"On the contrary, even the influence of CO2 itself, whether anthropogenic or not, is suspect as a significant driver of temperature once concentrations exceed about 50ppm."

Yeah right. Got that off a Weeties packet did you?

An idea that all political parties can accept.

Another strategy to reduce greenhouse emissions than putting a price on carbon is to use zero interest loans to construct emissions reducing infrastructure.

Let the Reserve Bank create some money called Energy Rewards that must be used to build renewable energy plants or reduce energy consumption through things like insulation. Let us give this money to people as Rewards in inverse proportion to the amount of energy they purchase so they have an incentive not to use energy.

The money created would not increase inflation because the money will be used to produce a productive asset and that means that over time the loan will be paid off and return more money to society. Inflation occurs when we create money which is spent for consumption without gain in productive output from the expenditure.

Rewards will encourage behavioural change to reduce energy consumption which in turn will increase the efficiency of our energy infrastructure which will reduce inflation because we will get the same value from a lower amount of energy consumed or put another way we get an increase in energy productivity.

Rewards must be spent in the infrastructure market place so it will be spent efficiently.

The price of energy can remain the same - or decrease if we want to cause fossil fuel power stations to close down because they will become uneconomic as the running costs of fossil fuel plants are at least twice the cost of renewable energy plants.

The running costs of renewable energy plants is 1 cent per kwh which is half or less than the cost of fossil burning plants. A renewable solar thermal or hot rock geothermal energy plant should have a life of at least 100 years and will produce enough energy within a few years to pay back the money loaned. We know that there are enough renewable energy sites to produce several thousand times current energy consumption and we know that no matter how much energy we produce it will always find a market if the running costs are low

Fickle Pickle

I second your proposal. We do eventually have to make the transition from nonrenewable to sustainable forms of energy and this way everyone wins.

Fickle Pickle you are in danger of being shot for treasonable thoughts in regard to the current running of our economic system.

The Reserve Bank presently is no more than the coachman in our ancient horse-and-buggy fiscal system. The horses creating the momentum of money supply are our private banks.

The banks provide the capital, and the money supply escalates with the interest charged on the loan.

Your suggestion will interfere with this sacred system, and buggar it altogether.