The Cost of Inaction on Carbon Emissions With so much deliberately generated uncertainty on climate change and the extenuation of same, it is little wonder that the polls show such poor support for the Multi Party Committee on Climate Change (MPCCC) decision to introduce a carbon tax. The Liberal National Coalition, in opposition to the government, decided not to participate and yet its leader, Tony Abbott has made it his prime objective to destroy the work of the committee. There have been bold statements about Australia’s premature action. According to Mr Abbott, nobody else is doing anything to mitigate climate change. One of the countries touted by the Opposition as inactive is the UK and yet Britain has just presented its 4th Carbon Budget. The follow up to that is the white paper “Planning Our Electric Future”. http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/policy-‐legislation/EMR/2176-‐emr-‐ white-‐paper.pdf Published in tandem with the “UK Renewable Energy Roadmap” it lays down a clear path to an 80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the same target set out by the MPCCC. http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/meeting-‐energy-‐demand/renewable-‐ energy/2167-‐uk-‐renewable-‐energy-‐roadmap.pdf In the UK white paper it also states: “In the Fourth Carbon Budget, the Government set a legally-‐binding goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions for the period of 2023 to 2027 of 1950 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent – a 50 per cent reduction on 1990 levels”. This is hardly a country doing nothing and with a far greater dependence on electricity than Australia, it sets the scene for bold and challenging times ahead. The Abbott line about the price going up and up is also totally incorrect, as other market indicators will show. The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (EU ETS) has been in place for some time and the carbon price is now floating on an open and vibrant market. At the time of writing it was sitting at 19.00 Euros, the price actually fell that week from 23 Euros as a normal fluctuation in the market. The Australian model has the price fixed at $23 for the first 3 years and then floated from thereon. Obviously, it will be subjected to the same market forces, especially when linked to the rest of the world and not keep rising as stated. It is this sort of scaremongering that causes uncertainty, especially to the average person in the street. The UK is so far ahead on alternative energy because instead of arguing against the science and the price of action, business leaders considered the cost of doing nothing, not just to the environment but also to business. Reading through the
UK Renewable Energy Roadmap there are many examples of innovative projects already in existence and as a direct result of a carbon tax. Offshore and onshore wind farms are already in place and contributing heavily to the mix of power generation in the UK. Wave power generators are also in operation and a whole industry for construction and export has evolved under the scheme, creating many new and sustainable jobs. One project, which is quite imaginative, is a plant in Dorset, which takes liquid waste from a dairy and uses it to generate gas. The Anaerobic Digestion Plant uses the breaking down of this waste, by bacteria, to generate a biogas. This is burnt and in turn, produces electrical power and heat. The £2.3 million plant makes enough electricity to power all the dairy and food processing operations and feed a surplus back into the grid. The heat generated also replaces that normally fired by oil, which is part of the company’s manufacturing process. The project has reduced the company’s carbon footprint by 60%. Australia needs to get on with the job of bilaterally tackling climate change and leave the politics out of the discussions. There were similar scaremongering tactics employed by opposition on the introduction of the GST. Ironically, it was the then Labor opposition and the unions, driving the scaremongering with “Jobs not GST”. “This -‐ as much as the unfairness of the GST -‐ is what Labor, and Australia, have at stake in this tax debate. This is why we are keeping our election promise to oppose the GST”. (Kim Beazley, 13th May 1999) Unfortunately, it is inherent in our political system to have government and opposition, to govern and to oppose. Until we have a policy-‐based, multi-‐party system of politics in Australia we are condemned to scaremongering, whoever is in opposition and that is unproductive. The reality is that other countries are acting on carbon and have done so for some time and contrary to the sky falling in the system appears to be working well. The Scottish Government has committed to a target of 100% renewable energy by 2020. Northern Ireland is committed to 40% renewable by 2020 and “The Welsh Government has indicated that it has the potential to produce twice the amount of electricity it currently uses from renewable sources by 2025, and deliver 4 GW of this from marine energy”. (Chapter 1 -‐ UK Renewable Energy Roadmap 2011)
These are areas of the United Kingdom that traditionally suffered high unemployment and relied heavily on extractive industries. They are also regions not blessed with long days of strong sunshine like Australia.
Despite our continent being blessed with abundant solar, geothermal, wave and wind power opportunities, we are the highest per capita polluters on the planet: “Over 90 percent of total energy consumed in Australia is based on an energy source derived from fossil fuels”. (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001) Moreover, Australia is the largest exporter of coal on Earth. More than half the world’s metallurgical (coking) coal is mined in and exported from Australia. That would make Australia responsible directly and indirectly for a much larger percentage of global emissions than any other country.
Main Trade Flows in Seaborne Hard Coal Trade, 2008 (in Mt)
Seaborne trade: 839 Mt Incl.
632 Mt steam coal 207 Mt coking coal
Global hard coal production: 5.85 Bt
Source: VDKI, Hamburg 2009
According to Peter Daniels, Senior lecturer at the Griffith School of Environment at the Griffith University, Clinging to carbon is bad for Australia’s economic future for five reasons: 1. Carbon tariffs and peak oil will push up prices and decrease export competitiveness.
2. Demand will reduce for Australia’s existing exports as the world’s economies become less dependent upon fossil carbon energy. 3. There will be poor gains in energy efficiency throughout the entire economy (due to lack of incentives). 4. The economy will become increasingly inflexible and there will be more barriers to competitive change as we continue to invest in industry, urban and social infrastructure based on fossil carbon energy. 5. Our fossil carbon dependence will reduce confidence and international capital flows into the Australian economy. (Article published in The Conversation 12 July 2011)
Source: Key World Energy Statistics 2009, IEA
The time has come surely, to stop bickering and opposing, whichever side of politics one represents and get on with the task of fixing the mess Australia has created before the mess turns Australia into a no go zone in the global economy. David Leigh -‐ http://www.davidleigh.com.au