---

Budget update 17/5/10

CLIMATE ACTION CENTRE
MEDIA RELEASE
 
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Immediate Release
 
*Kevin Rudd's back flip on climate has not been addressed*
 
Kevin Rudd's back flip on climate has not been addressed by Wayne Swan's Budget, the Climate Action Centre said today. “Australian's angry and disappointed by Kevin Rudd's recent back flip on
climate change will not be mollified by this Budget,” said Damien Lawson, coordinator, Climate Action Centre.
 
“Labor has again failed to take an opportunity to make polluters accountable by putting a price on carbon and cutting subsidies to the coal industry. While there is some new money for energy efficiency and renewable energy in the Budget, it is only $652.5 million over four years, well short of what is needed. The money does not really start to flow until 2012 and there is little
detail on how it will be spent. And there is still more money in the Budget for the fossil industry than
for climate change, in fact those chasing the clean coal pipe dream still get about as much as the renewable energy sector.
 
Elsewhere the government has slashed $200 million from its Green Car Fund, and failed to put any money into the electric vehicle revolution this country needs.
 
There is no vision for a zero carbon economy in this Budget just more of the same quarry vision that we had under the Howard government.
 
The public will see through this attempt to green wash the Labor government
after a hit in the polls because of its climate back flips.”
 
*For information and comment: Damien Lawson 0419 253 342*

Update 24/11/09

As we write this the Federal Labor Government and the Liberal Government are negotiating over amendments to an Emissions Trading Scheme that has been so compromised and watered down that it would be better for the climate if it were not passed.

The following web page  from the Greens sets out some detail about what is wrong with the CPRS (emissions trading scheme) and suggestions as to what should be done. GSG is not politically aligned but is happy to highlight constructive suggestions that are in line with our mission and objectives.

Update 22/10/09

Renewable Energy Targets Passed!

Below is a press release from Environment Victoria which accurately sets out the advantages and problems with the Federal Government's 20% Renewable Energy Target


Environment Victoria today welcomed the passage of the Renewable Energy Target (RET) through the Federal Parliament, although were disappointed with a number of aspects of the legislation.

Environment Victoria Campaigns Director Mark Wakeham said the new laws were a step in the right direction.

“Over the next 11 years Australia will move from having approximately six per cent of its electricity coming from renewable energy to 20 per cent. That’s a strong step forward that will deliver substantial investment in clean energy industries and greater emissions reductions than any previous law passed in Australia,” he said.

“The RET will create new businesses and jobs that have a vested interest in increasing the level of support for renewable energy.

“We saw this with the Howard Government’s two per cent renewable energy target, and although it was a very small target, it built the foundations for a vocal constituency demanding more support for renewable energy.”

Mr Wakeham said Environment Victoria was however disappointed with a number of weaknesses and design flaws in the RET legislation.

“Unfortunately under the new RET laws investment in new projects will not happen until the second half of next decade,” he said.

“This is for two reasons, firstly, the RET ramps up slowly to 20 per cent, and secondly, the existence of the ‘phantom solar credits’ means that the target will be met in the early years through renewable energy certificates that do not correspond with actual renewable energy generation.

“This has the potential to become a major problem that will delay investment in new large scale renewable energy projects. This problem should be fixed by the Rudd Government as the regulations for the legislation are developed.

“We are also disappointed that once again big polluters are able to avoid responsibility as a result of the final legislation. We are concerned that the inclusion of methane gas capture and biomass from native forests undermines the scheme’s integrity.

“We’d also prefer solar water heating was supported by other policies as it has the potential to dominate the RET and doesn’t actually generate electricity.”

“While we welcome progress in terms of a higher target Australia can and should deliver much more renewable energy than 20% by 2020. Looking forward to the 2010 election we should be looking to catch up to Germany, Spain and other renewable leaders by doubling the renewable energy target to 90,000 GWh by 2020.


For further information or comment: Mark Wakeham on 0439 700 501

Update 10/8/09

This correspondence is quite long but it gives some valuable insight into and details about the excessive compensation to polluters in the proposed Emissions Trading Scheme which will make the supposed incentives to reduce carbon almost meaningless

Hi Everybody,
 
You may be interested in the following correspondence exposing the Libs for their spoiler tactics.
 
Since the Rudd Govt has bunkered down against the extreme criticism it is receiving for its “no polluters will be left out in the cold” position, it seems the most efficient tactic could be to shame the Libs into doing something positive on this issue for a change. I understand that both Turnbull and Hunt know the science better than anybody (I know Hunt has read Climate Code Red)…note their email addresses below and I would encourage you to send a message or call their offices yourself. Here’s a link to Parliament House for further contact details http://www.aph.gov.au/ and to the Dept of Climate Change http://www.climatechange.gov.au/about/contacts.html, always worth having a chat...
 
Meanwhile, here is a link to the UN Copenhagen petition http://www.sealthedeal2009.org/ called Seal the Deal!, a targeted campaign by the United Nations to encourage governments to agree to a fair, balanced and effective climate agreement when they meet in Copenhagen this December.
 
Happy midwinter campaigning!
 
With best wishes,
Deborah Hart on behalf of LIVE
 
PS apologies for any cross postings w/David Robinson. Given LIVE’s list is now over 1,500 (YAY), we have a few data management issues to sort through. Having said this, please keep spreading the word!
 
From: Deborah Hart [mailto:deborah.hart@live.org.au]
Sent: Saturday, 1 August 2009 4:09 PM
To: Turnbull, Malcolm (MP) [mailto:Malcolm.Turnbull.MP@aph.gov.au] ; Hunt, Greg (MP) [mailto:Greg.Hunt.MP@aph.gov.au]
Cc: 'Senator.wong@aph.gov.au'; 'Senator.Milne@aph.gov.au'; 'Brown, Bob (Senator)'; 'communications@climatechange.gov.au'
Subject: Making the right demands for Australians
 
Dear Malcolm and Greg,
 
I am wondering if you read Olga Galacho’s insightful article in the Herald Sun? I have pasted it below for your convenience.
 
You will recall that at the last Federal election over 94% of the net new ALP seats were determined by Green party preferences. And then of course there was that midyear by-election in WA which shot another Green into Parliament, indeed a shockingly humiliating defeat for the ALP candidate.
 
I would suggest that the Australian people have overwhelmingly given their decision makers a mandate to tackle climate change yet are being failed dismally by their governments. In fact, I have recently learned about another ‘peoples power’ initiative, p2p2020.com , which aims to bypass our inept decision makers in order to deliver what Australians want: ZERO EMISSION RENEWABLE ENERGY.
 
So, rather than continue with your highly compromising “no polluters will be left out in the cold” position, I would suggest that your party could have at least some chance of coming out of the wilderness if it called for climate change legislation which will best serve all Australians by rapidly and quantifiably reducing carbon emissions - in Australia – starting immediately while stimulating many more and more sustainable jobs in local green economies as a consequence. Let’s have some good news! Wouldn’t you rather be (and be seen to be) doers not spoilers?
 
Meanwhile, are you aware of the alarming new record low for the Arctic Sea ice? It is so thin now that about 70% - up from 40% 30 years ago – is one-year-old ice which is highly susceptible to summer melting...  ice older than two years now accounts for less than 10 percent of the ice cover. Images are here: http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_index/images/daily_images/N_timeseries.png
 
Gentleman, we are educated people… there is no escaping the fact that our planet is determined by the laws of physics and chemistry and that these are not negotiable. Our response to climate change must be based on the science. Anything less is unthinkable, as are the consequences.
 
Yours faithfully,
Deborah Hart on behalf of LIVE
 
PS For a reminder re amendments required to CPRS legislation to make it effective, see copy of LIVE’s last message to you below Olga’s excellent article about the Liberal Party’s role in selling out Australians.
 
*********************
 
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25855113-5017909,00.html

Olga Galacho

July 30, 2009 12:00am

THERE is almost nothing in Malcolm Turnbull's demands that will make
the proposed emissions trading scheme more effective, if the point of
the exercise is to reduce carbon pollution.

I mean, that is what we are talking about, right? Reducing the amount
of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases emitted in future?

Mr Turnbull's call for more compensation for coal-fired electricity
generators undermines the intent of the legislation to encourage the
energy sector to move away from burning fossil fuels.

Victoria's power plants are already going to get billions of dollars
of their emissions trading costs offset.

Their owners, many of whom are rich multinational conglomerates like
China Light and Power, Mitsubishi Industries and International Power,
would have done due diligence before buying the generators in full
knowledge that a carbon cost was inevitable.

For goodness sake, countries have talking about addressing global
warming for decades, even before the Kyoto Protocol which was
formulated 10 years ago.

And besides, those companies that bought the Latrobe Valley generators
would have signed a contract, known as an International Swaps and
Derivatives Association master form of agreement, that obliged them to
abide by the electricity market rules.

The rules would have referred to the protocol the power companies had
to abide by in the event of a carbon tax or trading.

Further, for those generators to claim also that they will have to
forgo ongoing maintenance of their ageing equipment is rubbish. No
bank in its right mind would lend money to a power generator that
refused to give an ironclad guarantee that it would service the
mortgaged asset.

As The Climate Institute finally pointed out yesterday: it's time for
the coal industry and other big polluters to stop their reckless
special pleading and deception.

What the debate on emissions trading needs is more insights into how
the rest of the world is cleaning up its energy act. Insights such as
the one provided by energy writer Keith Orchison in The Australian
recently.

He wrote: "Since 2005, China has required all new, large power plants
to use at least high-efficiency, super-critical technology, and since
2007 it has shut down small, inefficient plants with a capacity of
14,380MW (more capacity than in NSW)."

Contrast this with an excerpt from Energy Minister Martin Ferguson's
opinion piece last week, also in The Australian: "Every four months,
from now until 2020, China will build new coal-fired power stations
possessing the same capacity as Australia's entire coal-fired power
sector."

Now consider the minister's claim in the context of Mr Orchison's
suggestion and you arrive at this conclusion: because China's new
coal-fired power plants are twice as clean as Australia's, that is
they produce half of the emissions, then every eight months China will
have displaced the equivalent amount of emissions that Australia's
coal-fired electricity industry produces.

Therefore, the argument used by climate sceptics that it is futile for
Australia to cut back on using coal because China will be building
more coal power plants is a non sequitur.

Orchison continued: "By 2020, China aims to have installed . . .
1800MW of solar power and more than 50,000MW of wind farms.

Sounds impressive, but the reality is even more stunning.

Here's an update: as part of its new energy stimulus plan, China has
revised its 2020 target for solar power capacity from 1800MW to
20,000MW.

The Chinese also have now doubled their target for wind to 100,000MW.

Much of this extra capacity will come from what the Chinese have
dubbed the Three Gorges of Wind, a reference to the country's giant
Three Gorges hydro-power program.

Where in Mr Turnbull's log of claims to revamp the ETS was there any
mention of encouraging renewable energy like this?

Oh, yeah . . . it disappeared up a smoke stack.

***********************************************************
 
From: Deborah Hart [mailto:deborah.hart@live.org.au]
Sent: Wednesday, 6 May 2009 5:53 PM
To: Turnbull, Malcolm (MP); Hunt, Greg (MP)
Cc: 'David Robinson'
Subject: RE: The CPRS
 
Dear Malcolm and Greg,
 
Thank you both for taking the time to reply to my correspondence. I always appreciate it.
 
I would appreciate it even more if you would commit the Coalition to climate change policies which will secure a safe climate future for all Australians.
 
This is not as difficult a task as it may seem…66 Climate Action Groups (including LIVE) wrote to the Prime Minister yesterday recommending the following amendments to the CPRS legislation:
 

·         Urgently exclude international permits from the CPRS so that actual emissions in Australia will begin to fall from 2010 onwards, rather than reductions only taking place from 2035 onwards (as forecast by the Federal Treasury) because by then Australian summers will make last one look mild.
 
·         Remove the emission floor so that individual action can contribute to additional emissions abatement over and above the emissions reduction target band. The proposed ‘Australian Carbon Trust’ does not alleviate our concerns on the need for individual action to be additional to the 5% target under the CPRS. The Trust simply formalises what individuals were always able to do anyway;
 
·         Exclude both reforestation and deforestation from the Scheme – the current treatment creates a market distortion in favour of increasing native forest logging. This requires urgent rectification;
 
·         Replace ALL free-permits in the CPRS with a system of Border Adjustments, to ensure that these sectors transition to a lower emissions intensity without being unduly disadvantaged in the international market;
 
·         Change the requirements for the $3.9 billion of assistance to coal-fired generators under the CPRS to be conditional upon a phase-out plan for these generators.
 
 
I know that you will understand that the above measures will in fact make the CPRS an honest and effective ETS (as opposed to a deadly diamantes studded Carbon Pollution Scheme); one which will be successful in stimulating hundreds of thousands of new sustainable jobs in 21st Century appropriate industries.
 
Rather than being part of the problem I am sure you would both like to be part of the solutions both in terms of preserving our climate and shifting us out of our backward quarry based economy. 
 
What do you think? Will you lift the Coalition’s game for the sake of all living and future Australians?
 
I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts  –
Thanks again,
Deborah

 
PS: Re the Media Release, I don’t understand how you can claim that Australia’s trade-exposed industries are still placed at a disadvantage to their competitors, even though the disadvantage is less severe than in the original scheme AND Australia’s largest export earner, the coal industry, is still treated anomalously when Australian tax payers will be footing even more of their bills so they can continue their highly energy intense practices (we’ve been paying for their massive consumption of cheap electricity for decades) …besides, of course they’ve seen this coming, every economy in the world is transitioning to low carbon

From: Turnbull, Malcolm (MP) [mailto:Malcolm.Turnbull.MP@aph.gov.au]
Sent: Tuesday, 5 May 2009 5:17 AM
To: Deborah Hart
Subject: RE: The CPRS
 
Thanks Deborah for copying me in on your email to Senator Wong, all noted and please let me know if she responds.
 
You may also be interested in reading my recent media release here http://malcolmturnbull.com.au/Media/MediaReleases/tabid/90/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/459/Time-to-get-it-right-on-Climate-Change.aspx
 
All the best
Malcolm
 
From: Deborah Hart [mailto:deborah.hart@live.org.au]
Sent: Monday, 4 May 2009 9:57 PM
To: Wong, Penelope (Senator)
Cc: Garrett, Peter (MP); Turnbull, Malcolm (MP); Hunt, Greg (MP); Danby, Michael (MP); Brown, Bob (Senator); Milne, Christine (Senator); Committee, Climate (SEN); climatechange@dpc.vic.gov.au; 'David Robinson'
Subject: The CPRS
 
Dear Minister,
 
Rather than address the well known and extensively documented flaws in the Rudd Government’s Carbon Pollution Reduction scheme, your latest tampering with it simply attempts to disguise the damage it will do by:
 
·         Increasing the compensation and payouts for Australia’s biggest polluters who are now set to get 95% of their pollution permits for free. With a pitiful cap of only $10 per tonne in the first year, the polluting industries (compromised of capital intensive, multinational corporations which employ relatively few Australians and send the majority of their profits offshore) will be effectively paying around 50c per tonne to pollute while households and small businesses carry the real burden.
 
·         Removing incentives for investment in cutting edge renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies (read new green jobs) necessary for a just and rapid transition to a low carbon economy;
 
·         Further undermining Australia’s voluntary carbon reduction schemes, such as Greenpower
 
Why should Australians welcome this repackaged ‘business as usual’ path which will lead to the collapse of our climate?
 
To secure a future that is best and fair for all, including the creation of sustainable local green economies, we ALL must play a role in drastically reducing Australia’s spiralling greenhouse gas emissions (that is within our borders not via cheap offshore credits).
 
It’s simple, polluters must pay for every ounce of pollution they emit.
 
Too much is at stake for us to accept carbon reduction laws which can be distorted by self serving vested interests.
 
Minister, your Government is breaking its election promises to take effective action on climate change. Your policies are deceiving and will fail Australians. Surely that is not in any of our best interests.
 
Yours faithfully,
 
Deborah Hart
On behalf of LIVE www.live.org.au

---

Update 25/6/09

We reprint this article as a summary of what is happening at the moment (unfortunately)

What a wicked web Wong weaves

Explanations of changes to CPRS 8/5/09

[excerpt from letter to members]

Dear GSG Member,

You may have heard that the Federal Government changed its proposed CPRS (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) this week. You may have heard that some green groups were in favour of the changes. To find out the truth, and what the changes mean, read the articles below. Schemes such as the CPRS are complex but it is important to understand and engage with them.

David Spratt wrote an excellent analysis article which was too large to reprint : http://climatecodered.blogspot.com/2009/05/has-kevin-rudd-taken-significant-step.html

Dave Campbell
President
Geelong Sustainability Group


CHOICE is running a consumer cyber-action on their website regarding the changes to the CPRS on GreenPower and voluntary action. 

http://www.choice.com.au/viewArticle.aspx?id=106764

Environment Victoria’s response to changes to CPRS changes

The good:

• Environment Victoria welcomes the increase in the Rudd Government’s conditional target to 25% cuts on 2000 levels. This target is still inadequate to safeguard our climate even if adopted by all developed nations. However it is not as destructive to international negotiations as the 5-15% target range and therefore should be welcomed as progress.

• The Climate Change Action Fund of $200 million for 2009-10 provides some incentive for immediate emissions reductions.

The bad:

• The delay of commencement of the scheme by 1 year, and then a fixed price cap of $10 per tonne for the first 12 months means that the polluters have effectively delayed action for another 2 years, on top of the past decade of inaction.

• This delay puts Australia further behind the pace in creating new green jobs and investment and risks us cementing our status as a clean technology importer.

The ugly:

• Increased free permits to big polluters as part of the so-called ‘Global Recession Buffer’. The largest emissions intensive trade exposed industries will now get 95% of their pollution permits for free. This means that in year one of the scheme when the cap is set at $10 per tonne, big polluters will be effectively paying 50c per tonne to pollute: the same price as a postage stamp. Households and small businesses will be carrying an unfair share of the burden to provide this free ride for polluters.
• The fix to recognise household and business voluntary action through GreenPower is welcome, but the mechanism is awful. By only recognizing additional GreenPower purchases above 2009 levels the Government is guaranteeing the collapse of existing GreenPower customer purchases and therefore jeopardizing the whole program. Furthermore the Rudd Government has failed to recognise the benefit of all other types of voluntary emissions reductions or additional action, which, like GreenPower, can be accounted for.

Key problems remain with the scheme including the pathetic 5% unconditional target, the free permits to polluters, the handouts to coal-fired generators and unlimited international permit purchases eliminating the need for domestic emissions reductions.

Mark Wakeham
Campaigns Director
Environment Victoria

Getup Petition on CPRS / Renewable Energy

Yesterday Kevin Rudd announced more than a billion dollars in extra handouts for big polluters, on top of the more than $7.4 billion already announced - and that we'll have to wait until after the next election before the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme begins.

What's more, the emissions reduction target remains the same - a measly 5% - unless other countries drag us to the unlikely new upper limit, 25%. Meaningful action on climate change is getting further away - and experts have long told us that delay costs the economy and the environment.

We know the solution - you told us in this year's survey: a massive investment in renewable energy; overwhelmingly your number one priority. So we're launching this simple commonsense ask: "Invest more in renewable energy than you handout to big polluters":

Click here to sign the petition.

A massive investment in renewable energy means we can stimulate the Australian economy and create hundreds of thousands of clean energy jobs, starting right now. It's the only way we can break free of the shackles of the dirty coal industry, whose political donations and threats about jobs are holding us back.

The emissions trading scheme won't even start before the next election, but clean energy jobs are there for the taking today. With so many Australian jobs under threat from the global financial crisis, we can't afford NOT to invest in renewable energy.

It's pretty simple stuff - but this Government's just not getting the message. Tell them today:

Click here to sign the petition - www.getup.org.au/campaign/ClimateActionNow&id=638.

To tackle climate change we need to wean ourselves off dirty energy - that's what emissions trading is for. But more importantly, we need to make renewable energy cheaper - and investment in new clean energy technology does that, while creating thousands of jobs. Who'd be against that?

Thanks for making it happen,
The GetUp team

PS - More than 90% of you rated investment in renewable energy as a top campaign priority for this year. The climate crisis means we can't wait until after the next election for action, so let's send the Government a clear message: clean energy investment and clean energy jobs, not polluter handouts and corporate greed.

PPS - Keep an eye out in The Australian tomorrow for our full-page pulp mill ad! It will appear simultaneously in the Asian Financial Times, thanks to GetUp members' generous support.

Local MPs