The Australian Labor Party releases its environment policy blueprint
Labor leader Kim Beazley commits a future Labor govt to a 60 per cent cut in Australia's 2000 emission levels by 2050.
It all looks promising, but what about the coal?
Just a month ago the Howard government's brazen environmental policy corruption was laid bare, thanks to the ABC Four Corners program The Greenhouse Mafia (see this page).
Howard's conservative clique was found gagging Australia's CSIRO scientists, preventing them from "being frank and fearless" about policy implications for the dire state of the environment and about climate change impacts.
Now the Australian Labor Party has released its environmental policy blueprint, and on the face of it, the policy looks 'half decent'.
But - as always needs to be asked - is the ALP policy all it's stated to be? And, how vulnerable is the stated target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050, once the next election is behind us, and once the ALP has undergone one of its many leadership changes, and once the lobbying by the coal industry is in full swing?
This page brings together the news of the ALP policy, and a reply by Greenpeace Australia, and intends to start your thinking on whether any sustainable energy policy, that targets a massive reduction in greenhouse gas pollution, can feasibly dismiss the notion that all use of fossil fuels, starting with coal, should be halted in Australia.
Click the links below to jump down to the articles and items on this page with the same title.
3 December 2006: From coal and horses and shock-jocks: Forcing the coal industry on its environmental knees - The judgment against Centennial Coal's Anvil mine by the New South Wales' Land and Environment court was a blow for the coal industry, but a giant - albeit potential - win for the planet, which brought together on the same side of the table some very unlikely partners: shock-jock Alan Jones, a 26-year-old student from Newcastle, and wine growers from The Hunter.
5 March 2006: Silencing the climate change prophets - ABC Four Corners lifts the lid off government gagging of those who know and should tell us. "Some scientists believe that there'll be more environmental refugees. Is that a possibility?" - "I can't really comment on that..."
15 September 2005: Friends of the Earth Australia: A Citizens Guide to Climate Refugees - While the Earth has always endured natural climate change variability, we are now facing the possibility of irreversible climate change in the near future. The increase of greenhouse gases in the Earth's atmosphere from industrial processes has enhanced the natural greenhouse effect.
5 January 2005 - Changing worlds: the coming of envirogees - In the last week of 2004, when undersea earthquakes followed by tsunamis seriously impacted on countless local communities, the entire world was given a wake-up call which none of us can afford to ignore. An article by Project SafeCom's Jack Smit.
The Australian
Steve Lewis
Chief political correspondent
March 07, 2006
LABOR will force Australia's fossil fuel industries to invest billions of dollars in clean technology under an ambitious climate change plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60% by 2050.
Opening a policy divide with the Howard Government, Kim Beazley will today also unveil plans to lift the level of renewable energy - such as wind and solar - delivered by big energy suppliers to households and business.
Despite a strong pitch from within Labor to keep open the nuclear energy option - whose supporters include resources spokesman Martin Ferguson - there is no mention of nuclear power in the Labor policy.
Labor could also top up the $7000 first-home owners grant for people willing to invest in eco-friendly energy systems - part of a bid to win back voter support in new housing estates.
The Opposition Leader will also announce plans to shift the "mandatory renewable energy target" - which stipulates how much energy should be derived from green sources such as wind and solar power - from 2 per cent to 5 per cent. This would be one of the most ambitious targets among developed economies.
Mr Beazley will unveil his climate change blueprint in Sydney to a business audience today, hoping to secure industry support for a program even more rigorous than that laid down by the Kyoto Protocol. He is promising to deliver tax incentives and grants to help develop more eco-friendly echnologies.
But Mr Beazley risks a backlash from sections of industry with his aggressive pitch to make compulsory the uptake of these renewable sources of power.
The Government will also accuse Labor of promoting policies that will undermine the viability of coal and other significant industries in Australia.
Mr Beazley is determined to take a more aggressive stance on climate change policy, despite some resistance within his party about the effects this will have on traditional jobs in mining and other related industries.
He will argue that working towards a long-term goal of cutting greenhouse emissions will give consumers and business greater certainty.
From http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/com....601,00.html
Sydney Morning Herald
By Wendy Frew
Environment Reporter
March 8, 2006
ANY chance of Australia significantly cutting its greenhouse gas emissions was called into question yesterday as the Federal Opposition joined the Coalition in endorsing coal as a long-term source of power.
In a blueprint to protect Australia from the threat of climate change, the Leader of the Opposition, Kim Beazley, also placed confidence in unproven clean-coal technology.
He committed a federal Labor government to a 60 per cent cut in Australia's 2000 emission levels by 2050.
Mr Beazley stressed the need to act within the next few years and said Labor would invest in clean-coal technology and solar power.
He did not want cuts in coal exports or in the use of coal as a domestic source of power, however, and provided no funding commitments for energy research and development. Nor would he say by how much Labor would raise the Government's mandatory renewable energy target, which gives some support to solar, wind and biomass power.
The ambitious greenhouse gas target came as state Labor governments continue to issue coalmining licences. In NSW, the Government and industry are spending hundreds of millions of dollars upgrading railways and ports in the Hunter Valley to cope with a coalmining boom.
Mr Beazley said: "We have 300 years' worth of coal reserves in this country. There is always going to be a requirement for it so - we have to make sure that industry can progress within an environmentally friendly context." That meant getting clean-coal technology into place.
A Greenpeace campaigns manager, Danny Kennedy, said: "All recent analysis shows that it is not possible to achieve deep [emission] cuts while using coal, even with as-yet-unproven [clean-coal] technologies."
From http://smh.com.au/news/national/emissions-policy....1141701510097.html
The Age
By James Button, London
March 11, 2006
IT WAS a frenetic week for Tim Flannery. He spoke at three public meetings in London, met top climate change advisers to the British Government, and launched a British edition of his book on global warming, The Weather Makers.
On Monday night nearly 2000 people packed into St Paul's Cathedral to hear the Australian scientist talk about climate change with the natural history broadcaster Sir David Attenborough. Meanwhile, The Times called his book an "epic" work that was both an epitaph for the Earth and a cause for hope.
On top of a visit to Germany, Denmark and the Netherlands, Flannery's stay in Britain fired him with optimism that governments and citizens were serious about global warming.
Then, on Thursday, his wife, Alex, picked up a copy of The Sydney Morning Herald. Flannery read that Opposition Leader Kim Beazley had followed Prime Minister John Howard in announcing that energy from coal was Australia's future.
"It's like they're in a totally different space," he said. "When you travel the world, you realise that position cannot be sustained. In the Netherlands people are terrified. I would not like to live there."
This is the message he wants to bring home: Australia is disconnected from much of the world on climate change. He has seen how Denmark is using tax incentives to induce people to drive cleaner cars.
He thinks Britain has been "fantastic" on getting industry to reduce emissions, but could do more to reduce emissions in transport and households.
Australia, on the other hand, has "done an immoral thing" by selling coal to the world but taking no responsibility for reducing the worst effects of coal-burning by signing the Kyoto Protocol.
Climate change is bigger news in Britain than in Australia.
Reports of dramatic melting in the polar ice caps often appear on the front pages.
But in Britain, as in Australia, environmentalists struggle to engage the public. Flannery seems to do better than most. This week the American magazine The New Republic described The Weather Makers as "riveting".
At St Paul's he spoke of a world out of joint. How within 30 years we may have to spend billions on shoring up sea barriers against extreme weather events.
How, "one summer, towards the end of this century", there would be no more polar ice or polar bears.
"Our planet blazes into the night sky with frightening brilliance," he said. From his plane seat he had looked down at the vast cities of Asia and Europe with all their lights on, hungry to consume power.
But Flannery is a pragmatist, too.
Asked about nuclear power, he replied: "I'm afraid that I am now of the view that it is inevitable - indeed desirable - that China and India gain access to nuclear power for energy generation."
Both countries have nuclear programs but are planning huge expansions. Given how fast their economies and greenhouse gas emissions were growing, he saw no choice.
A murmur of displeasure rippled through parts of the crowd. The British Government is considering expanding its nuclear program, highly contentious in Britain, and Sir David reflected that in his response.
Wind and solar power - not coal and nuclear - were the answer, he declared. People applauded, but Flannery did not back down.
"I am not suggesting that nuclear power is at all problem-free," he replied. But an environmental disaster already loomed as China shifted back to coal in response to the soaring price of natural gas. Coal-burning was so devastating that hard decisions had to be made.
Now it was Flannery's turn to win applause.
Yet he believes strongly that Australia should not go nuclear. He does not think it needs to. With its reserves of gas, geo-thermal power, sun and wind, it could reduce its reliance on coal, avoid nuclear and solve its emissions problems relatively fast.
But, he said: "We are going to have to sell our uranium, that's for sure."
He says people were so negative about uranium, yet a single coal-fired power station in NSW emitted more radiation than the whole underground French nuclear testing program in the Pacific.
Next week, Flannery goes to the US to promote his book, which has sold 36,000 copies in Australia and is scheduled to be translated into 20 languages.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/warning....6109.html
Press Release
Greenpeace Australia
Sydney
Tuesday, 07 March, 2006
Greenpeace cautiously welcomed Federal Opposition Leader Kim Beazley's commitment to action on climate change, while warning that the policies announced today would be worthless unless the ALP commits nationally to quit coal.
Greenpeace campaigns manager, Danny Kennedy, said "By launching this policy blueprint today, Mr Beazley has differentiated the Federal ALP from the Howard Government, ensuring that climate change will be an election issue in 2007.
"However, because both major parties leave coal front and centre of Australia's future, voters will see that they both continue to favour the interests of coal companies over the interests of the community and the environment."
The blueprint commits an ALP Government to voluntarily reducing greenhouse pollution by 60% by 2050, a target that environment groups have long been calling for. However, Greenpeace looks forward to seeing interim targets and a clear pathway to achieve these cuts set out before the 2007 election.
"When talking about deep cuts in greenhouse pollution, Mr Beazley must understand that achieving those cuts is not compatible with his party's continuing addiction to coal.
"All recent analysis shows that it is not possible to achieve deep cuts while using coal, even with as-yet unproven geosequestration technologies. Putting a cost on greenhouse pollution with emissions trading, and ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, are certainly positive steps, but we cannot tackle climate change by continuing to rely on the fuel that is causing it in the first place.
"We look forward to hearing the details of the ALP's renewable energy target. If it is to take Australia into a leadership position and bring the economic and jobs benefits as well as clean energy, it must be set at least at 10% by 2010 and 20% by 2020.
"If Mr Beazley is serious about tackling climate change, he must also challenge his NSW ALP counterparts to stop the expansion of the state's coal export infrastructure.
"This morning, Greenpeace joined with Hunter Valley residents, coal miners and environmentalists, to launch the Anvil Hill Alliance, dedicated to stopping the development of this massive new mine as a first step in tackling climate change and moving the Hunter Valley towards a sustainable future."
http://www.greenpeace.org.au/media/press_details.php?site_id=8&news_id=1929
Greenpeace website
Coal, Climate Change,
and renewable energy in Asia
Thousands have perished and countless more have become refugees due to the human-induced impacts of the world's changing climate. Millions of people are at risk from climate change, mainly the world's poorest living in the developing countries of Africa and Asia. Our hunger for deriving the majority of our energy from the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas, has resulted in the dumping of billions of tonnes of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, primarily carbon dioxide (CO2). Industrialised countries bear the main responsibility, but governments of developing countries are also to blame. Rather than avoiding the mistakes of industrialised nations, the governments of developing countries appear intent on repeating them and are being enthusiastically aided by the very countries that have turned their backs on dirty energy in favour of clean, renewable energy.
As most of the world's developed economies rush to exploit clean renewable energy sources like wind, solar and wave power, coal-fired power generation is rapidly expanding in Asia where booming, power-hungry economies make for rich pickings for companies mostly based in OECD countries who no longer have domestic markets for their dirty technologies.
From melting ice at the poles and retreating glaciers to extreme weather events, floods and droughts, and the spread of diseases, dangerous climate change is already with us. Scientists predict that current rates of human-induced climate change will have the greatest impacts on developing countries in Africa and Asia. Every year for the past 20 years, an average of over 400 million people have been exposed to floods in Asia. Between 1987 and 1997, 44% of all flood disasters worldwide affected Asia, claiming 228,000 lives (93% of all flood-related deaths worldwide) and resulting in economic losses of around US $136 billion.
A small, but important step was achieved when the Kyoto protocol became law on February 16, 2005 committing industrialised governments to cutting greenhouse gas emissions to at least 5% below 1990 levels by 2008-2012. We are already committed to future warming and further impacts due to the greenhouse gases already emitted and it will be impossible to avoid a 1oC or more increase above pre-industrial levels in the global average temperature. Climate impacts are already killing people and destroying ecosystems, but to prevent some of the worst impacts, we need to keep the average temperature rise to below 2ºC above pre-industrial times and reduce it as fast as possible thereafter. This 2-degree target means there must be a global cut in greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 1990 levels by the middle of this century; industrialised countries need to cut their emissions by at least 80% by 2050.
Achieving the necessary emission cuts means phasing out the use of fossil fuels as a source of primary energy and rapidly expanding the use of renewable energy sources coupled with energy efficiency programmes and demand side management. But the expansion of coal use throughout Asia is a major concern as coal produces more CO2 than other fuel.
Kyoto now needs to develop and expand rapidly, extending the international emissions trading system and providing more help for developing countries to leapfrog dirty technology. The choice is clear - there is none.
Providing the necessary energy services without further destabilising the climate or destroying the health, welfare and livelihoods of communities, can be achieved by the rapid expansion of renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, micro-hydro, wave and biomass power, coupled with increasing energy efficiency and conservation.
However, the potential for the uptake of renewable energy is not being realised, not because of technology failings but due to political and fiscal barriers - chiefly the estimated US$250 and US$300 billion each year in subsidies which give fossil fuels and nuclear power generation such a market advantage over renewable energy.
The same governments who have agreed to cut greenhouse gas emissions and to transfer clean technology to developing countries are directly supporting an increase in global emissions and hooking these countries into polluting technologies through their Multilateral Development Banks (MDB) and Export Credit Agencies (ECAs). Australia and the US, which cite the fact that developing countries don't have emission reduction commitments, as justification for not signing the Kyoto protocol, are pushing fossil fuels, in particular coal, to Asia through funding and exports.
The transfer of 'dirty technology' is funded through government-backed financial institutions, which provide the loans, insurance and the guarantees needed to promote the coal addiction of the developing world. Despite the global and local impacts of fossil fuel power generation, and the availability of viable alternative solutions, more coal fired power generation plants are planned for Asia funded by various combinations of private banks, Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) and Export Credit Agencies (ECAs).
So-called 'clean coal' technologies, according to the industry, aim to try to reduce polluting emissions, chiefly sulphur and nitrogen oxides from coal power plants and increase efficiencies. But low sulphur is irrelevant when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions. To address CO2 emissions, the coal industry points to 'end-of-pipe' technologies such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and using trees, so called carbon sinks, to take out the CO2 their industry dumps into the atmosphere. The notion that CCS will allow coal plants to be built and not add vast amounts of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere is an illusion. At best it will not be available for any new plants in the coming 15 to 20 years and is an expensive and difficult process that might not work in the end. Much higher emission cuts can be made using currently available natural gas, wind and modern biomass that are already in widespread use. 1
Whichever way you wash it, pulverise it or scrub it, coal, from its extraction to its end use, remains a dirty, dangerous, polluting source of energy. Australia is the leading supplier of coal to the Asian market. In 2002-03, 80 per cent (165 million tonnes) of Australian coal exports went to Asia. Hong Kong based China Light and Power (CLP) is another key player in the Asian Coal market and aims to be the leading investor-operator in the Asia-Pacific electric power industry especially in the Chinese mainland.
Five issues drive the need for a massive expansion of renewable energy technologies:
These issues demand an urgent change in the way governments plan for and support the development of energy sources and that the international finance system must stop supporting energy- and carbon-intensive production capacities and infrastructure.
ALL GOVERNMENTS
....should ratify the Kyoto Protocol allowing it to develop and expand rapidly, extending the international emissions trading system and providing more help for developing countries to leapfrog dirty technology.
INDUSTRIALISED COUNTRIES
....commit to 80% greenhouse gas emission cuts by 2050
ALL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
http://www.greenpeace.org/seasia/en/asia-energy-revolution/burning-our-future