Australian Conservation Foundation’s environment election scorecard
Environment scorecard rates Coalition’s policies ‘woefully inadequate’, Guardian, Gareth Hutchens, 31 May 2016 The Australian Conservation Foundation’s assessment of the parties’ policies awards the Coalition 11 points out of 100, Labor 53 and the Greens 77
The Australian Conservation Foundation has described the Coalition’s environmental policies as “woefully inadequate” in its traditional election scorecard.
It gave the Coalition 11 points out of a possible 100, Labor 53 and the Greens 77.
The ACF’s chief executive, Kelly O’Shanassy, said: “The politicians who want to lead the country must have real plans to protect people, rivers, reefs, forests and wildlife for the future.”
“The Coalition’s 11 out of 100 on the environment is woefully inadequate. If they are not prepared to lead on climate and nature, they are not fit to lead the country.
“It’s not as if conservatives can’t be good conservationists – Liberal cabinet minister Garfield Barwick was ACF’s first president; Robert Menzies signed the first Antarctic Treaty; Malcolm Fraser made Kakadu a national park; John Howard established the national greenhouse inventory and the national water initiative,” she said.
The scores were calculated by measuring the parties’ policies on clean energy, pollution reduction, and environmental protection, and comparing them with the 40 tests set out in ACF’s national agenda for 2016.
Those tests include setting stronger pollution targets to help limit global warming to less than 1.5C above pre-industrial temperatures; stopping uranium mining and export; delivering on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan; and shifting to 100% renewable energy by 2050.
The ACF decides how many marks to award for each party policy on the basis of how completely it fulfils the ACF’s tests. Where a policy unwinds existing environmental protection, the ACF awards negative marks.
An ACF spokesman said the organisation had been in contact with all three major parties this year to tell them how their policies would likely rate in its election scorecard with its policies as they stand…….
A recent poll showed climate change is one of the top four issues for voters at this election. http://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/may/31/environment-scorecard-rates-coalitions-policies-woefully-inadequate
Transition to renewable energy favoured by most voters
Most voters support transition to 100% renewable energy, says Australia Institute
Polling indicates 71% would be more likely to vote for a party that supported distributed small-scale solar and storage, Guardian, http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2016/may/31/most-voters-support-transition-to-100-renewable-energy-says-australia-institute
Max Opray, 31 May 16, Battery storage technology has the potential to reshape not just the energy and transport sectors but also the upcoming Australian federal election, according to a new report.
The Australia Institute report Securing Renewables: How Batteries Solve the Problem of Clean Electricity includes polling indicating that 71% of Australians would be more likely to vote for a party that supported distributed small-scale solar and storage.
Based on a national opinion poll of 1,412 people undertaken between February and March 2016, the study also found 63% of respondents would be more likely to support a party that aims to transition to 100% renewable energy by 2030 and that 45% would be more likely to support a party that attempts to accelerate the uptake of electric vehicles.
“The combination of batteries paired with variable renewable energy such as solar and wind can now provide security of electricity supply, with zero emissions,” says the author of the report, Australia Institute strategist Dan Cass.
The report found that one in four Australians wish to create and store power in order to unplug from the grid and that 80% of the 1.5m Australian households to have already invested in rooftop solar are considering the purchase of batteries.
It also noted that the predicted boom in electric cars could see households using such vehicles when parked and plugged in as storage providers for the wider energy network.
Jobs in plenty in the renewabl energy industry
The Community Power Agency – which specialises in supporting community groups to set up a 
community owned renewable energy (CORE) project – is directly working with the 70 community energy groups across Australia.
Looking towards the election, the Community Power Agency is calling on all political parties to put in place robust policy to support the growth of community energy innovation in Australia.
“In terms of the focus for the election… the ALP and the Greens have both come out with excellent renewable energy policy and have been talking about it quite a lot. They could be talking about it more. But certainly the ALP has committed $28.7 million to support community energy projects across Australia and they have also committed to a 50 per cent renewables target by 2030, so there is some good policy basis there, we are yet to see any kind of announcement on this type of thing from the Coalition which is very disappointing.
Renewable Energy is a Jobs Rich Industry http://probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2016/05/renewable-energy-jobs-rich-industry/ A Not for Profit organisation dedicated to growing the community energy sector in Australia has claimed renewable energy is a jobs rich industry.
The Community Power Agency said Australian regions and towns can maximise employment in renewable energy with community-owned projects.
It comes after a new global report released by the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) showed that renewable energy jobs were on the rise, with community-owned projects to benefit most.
More than 8.1 million people around the world are now employed in renewable energy, up 5 per cent on last year.
Nicky Ison Community Power Agency director said renewable energy was a jobs-rich industry and when such projects were community-owned that created even more employment.
“The research from the US – because there are a lot more community energy programs in the US than here – shows that if you have a community ownership stake in a larger renewables project, like owning a couple of wind turbines in a larger wind farm, the economic benefit to that local community in terms of jobs, investment, money circulating in the local economy, the economic benefit is 1.5 to 3.5 times greater,” Ison told Pro Bono Australia News. Continue reading
Greg Hunt’s gaffe over UNESCO and the Great Barrier Reef
How Greg Hunt and his department turned good news into an international scandal
The full draft of the Unesco report on climate change reveals many mentions of Australia were actually positive, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 31 May 2016 Greg Hunt has conducted one of the strangest manoeuvres of his already rather gymnastic career, over the erasure of Australia from a United Nations report on climate change.
Guardian Australia had broken the story that all mentions of Australia and the Great Barrier Reef had been scrubbed from the report at the request of the environment department.
Hunt first denied knowing about it but then justified the move with reasons that went beyond those provided by the department.
In fact the full draft report, obtained exclusively by Guardian Australia, reveals many of the mentions of Australia were positive – but their removal turned what would have been a relatively good news story into an international scandal. Continue reading
South Australian Premier Jay Weatherill launches nuclear propaganda campaign
Premier Jay Weatherill Sunday, May 29, 2016 Consultation on nuclear future to extend across all of South Australia http://assets.yoursay.sa.gov.au/production/2016/05/29/01/29/06/0cee3e94-ed82-4dfa-992e-a44d25cec636/nuclearconsult.pdfPro coal, nuclear John White still quietly running Liberal govt’s resources policy
Turnbull’s #Innovation and #IdeasBoom is to flog fossil fuels. KaBOOM! Independent Australia Tracey Anton 28 May 2016 “………In an article in Crikey by Paddy Manning, entitled ‘Hunt pins hopes on uncompetitive clean coal technology’, Manning writes:
‘John White chairs the DICE network of companies and agencies developing the technology, and is an executive and founding shareholder of Ignite Energy Resources,(IER)’
White told Manning:
‘..It halves CO2 emissions and will be eligible for Emissions Reduction Funding under Direct Action policies.’
Not only was White in financial trouble prior to receiving over $20 million in “grants” for the DICE project but he had also incurred a loss of $6 million in the 2012 calendar year.
White is an old Liberal heavyweight who was former Prime Minister John Howard’s right hand man in developing the Uranium Industry Framework for Australia’s nuclear future and just happens to hold dominion over thousands of square kilometres in Gippsland through the company he is shareholder and founder of, Ignite Energy Resources. He also has an uncanny knack of developing new coal technology which will reward him benefits under the Coalition’s Direct Action climate policy that he advised on.
Then there were the concerns over a $3 billion port in Gippsland when White, allegedly, was head of the (GRID) panel on transport infrastructure. That would go with his planned open cut coal minein the groundwater depleted area of Gelliondale.
Next, was the inclusion of biomass (another “clean” energy project) in the Renewable Energy Target securing White feedstock from our Gippsland forests. Now, he is telling government that his Gippsland Gas project will provide an abundance of “clean, agricultural quality” extracted water from his proposed biogenic coal gas project in the water stressed area of South Gippsland. Simply put, it is coal seam gas with the same destructive intrusions and the same hazards.
White’s most grandiose venture was to produce nuclear energy for the world by turning uranium into nuclear fuel rods, leasing them and bringing back the waste (including plutonium from the U.S. weapons industry). It’s interesting that Ignite holds leases for thorium adjacent to the iconic Ninety Mile Beach in Gippsland. Thorium – uranium’s young sister – is hailed by nuclear proponents as the green energy source of the future.
Only problem is, its exploration and mining is banned in Victoria. Bizarrely, when IA‘s Sandi Keane and I reported on White’s involvement in Ignite (‘Victorian government ignores Gippsland gasfield concerns’), the Minerals Council of Victoria rather stupidly tried to get the article pulled. They claimed we’d got the WRONG John White. We didn’t. It was a desperate act by MCA. You can find the whole story here. It seems the reason they wanted us to pull the article was because they’d applied to the former state LNP government to have the legislation banning exploration and mining of thorium and uranium repealed and didn’t want White’s name mentioned. Welcome to the shadowy world of Dr White.https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/turnbulls-innovation-and-ideasboom-is-to-flog-fossil-fuels-kaboom,9038
Australia covered up plight of Tasmania wilderness and Kakadu in UN Report
Australia covered up UN climate change fears for Tasmania forests and Kakadu
Fears about damage to the Great Barrier Reef were removed from UN report along with concern about a threat to the environment in two other heritage sites, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 29 May 16, A draft UN report on climate change, which was scrubbed of all reference to Australia over fears it could deter visitors to the Great Barrier Reef, also outlined possible threats to the Tasmania wilderness and Kakadu.
The draft report contained a chapter on the Great Barrier Reef, which described climate change as “the biggest long-term threat to the [reef] today, and to its ecosystems services, biodiversity, heritage values and tourism economy”.
It concluded that “without a comprehensive response more in keeping with the scale of the threat, the [reef]’s extraordinary biodiversity and natural beauty may lose its world heritage values”.
But before it was scrubbed, the report had two other key sections on Australian world heritage sites, and the threats they face from climate change.
One of those sections was on the Tasmanian wilderness…….the censored section of the Unesco report on Tasmania is clear about the “dire” nature of the threat.
It said: “A 2013 assessment of climate threats identified the same habitats as at high risk from greater fire frequency and drier conditions, with likely catastrophic implications for fauna. These dire predictions appeared to be playing out in January 2016, when tens of thousands of hectares of forest burned, sparked by lightning strikes that came in a month when temperatures were 2C above average and in the wake of the driest two-year period ever recorded for the region.”
The deleted section on Kakadu national park contained similarly dire warnings.
It described the important natural and cultural values of Kakadu, which has been inhabited by Aboriginal people for 50,000 years.
“The thousands of rock art sites in the park are at risk from damage by more extreme rainfall events, while sea level rise is happening at twice the global average along the northern Australian coast,” the draft report said.
It warned that fresh-water wetlands were at risk from sea level rise, as they are likely to be inundated with salt water. “Climate change threatens Aboriginal traditional use by altering the ecosystems of the vast wetlands of Kakadu and raising temperatures to a level likely to lead to more intense fire regimes,” the report said.
The final version of the report entitled “World heritage and tourism in a changing climate” was published last week by Unesco, United Nationsenvironment programme and the Union of Concerned Scientists, with all references to Australia removed.
The lead author of the report, Adam Markham, told Guardian Australia: “I was shocked when I read in the Guardian the reasons the Australian government gave for why they had pressured Unesco to drop the Australian sites.” http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/may/29/australia-covered-up-un-climate-change-fears-for-tasmania-forests-and-kakadu
Greens energy plan to generate $53 billion of investment in Queensland
Greens announce $53b clean energy plan http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/2016/05/29/greens-announce-53b-clean-energy-plan The Greens have announced a clean energy plan for Queensland which it says will generate $53 billion of investment in projects over 15 years. “This would be delivered through a combination of direct government investment and ownership, and reverse auctions which provide bankable incentives for private sector investment.”Queensland Greens Senator Larissa Waters said delivering a clean-energy economy would also safeguard Great Barrier Reef tourism jobs and agricultural jobs that were threatened by coal mining and coal seam gas.
“The old parties are leaving Queensland at risk of missing out on the job-rich clean energy revolution,” she said.
Major political parties downplay environment as election approaches
Parties yet to turn on the green light http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/breaking-news/parties-yet-to-turn-on-the-green-light/news-story/33847ddc845b64eaffc5a62566d89188 May 28, 2016 One of the key issues missing from the election campaign so far is the environment.The economy, health and education have been the focus of the first three weeks of the campaign.
However, the environment has proven to be a well-trodden battleground in federal elections over the past two decades.
Tony Abbott’s crusade against Labor’s carbon tax helped propel him into office in 2013, despite Kevin Rudd’s best efforts to bring forward the start of the emissions trading scheme.
In 2010, both major parties made announcements on climate change, the health of the Murray-Darling system, marine parks, Queensland’s controversial wild rivers laws and forestry.
In 2007, Rudd’s promise to ratify the Kyoto protocol and take strong action on climate change helped convince thousands of voters to unseat the Howard coalition government.
John Howard himself kicked around the idea of an emissions trading scheme, having realised tackling issues such as water and climate were not only good for the environment but made economic and electoral sense.
Turnbull was rolled by his own party in 2009 over his support for Labor’s ETS and has been forced to embrace Abbott’s direct action plan, despite evidence of its ineffectiveness and voter confusion over what he really believes. Shorten says separate emissions trading schemes for the electricity sector and industry, coupled with a target of 50 per cent renewable energy by 2030, is the way to go.
For both major parties, there are votes to be won in talking up the benefits of jobs and economic growth from renewable energy, clean technology, greener farming practices and ensuring the long-term health of the Great Barrier Reef.
There are big electoral benefits for strong environmental policy.
Younger voters, especially, rate climate and the environment among their top concerns and if Labor or the coalition are to woo them away from the Greens they will need to come out early with some impressive policy.
A policy misstep by Labor could cost the party valuable Greens preferences.
Australia’s Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce all for the full nuclear fuel chain
Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce warns South Australians face higher power prices because of renewable energy, Adelaide Now, PAUL STARICKCHIEF REPORTER March 16 The Advertiser DEPUTY Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce is warning of rising household electricity prices triggered by South Australia’s world-leading renewable energy use and is urging nuclear power as a clean alternative.
In an interview with The Advertiser, Mr Joyce seized on the Port Augusta power stations’ looming closure in May and declared its impact of slashing baseload supply would likely result in higher prices for consumers……
Mr Joyce applauded SA’s Nuclear Royal Commission and backed public debate on its key interim recommendations, delivered last month, of an international waste repository for SA and further exploring nuclear power.
Declaring he would be unsurprised if both major parties eventually supported a waste repository, Mr Joyce said there was unprecedented bipartisan support for exploiting SA’s globally significant uranium resource across most aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle…..
“The ultimate renewable energy — zero emissions energy — is nuclear energy…” http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/deputy-prime-minister-barnaby-joyce-warns-south-australians-face-higher-power-prices-because-of-renewable-energy/news-story/89eb86ecfdc980fbb472a7617be0fdbb
Exposing Turnbull’s deceit on fossil fuels and climate change
Turnbull’s #Innovation and #IdeasBoom is to flog fossil fuels. KaBOOM! Independent Australia Tracey Anton 28 May 2016 Transitioning the economy away from fossil fuel dependency is now the global catchcry. So why is Turnbull funding DICE-y coal technology at the expense of renewables whilst claiming to mitigate climate change? Mining reformist, Tracey Anton reports.
CLIMATE CHANGE has quickly become an economic and energy policy nightmare for Government but what Turnbull is presenting to the public is based on deceit. The LNP’s mishmash of policy contradiction and current economic mismanagement of fossil fuel extraction is to defraud the public of billions of dollars.
Turnbull states:
“we transition from an economy that has been fired up by an unprecedented mining construction boom as we transition to the new economy of the 21st century.”
The great disparity between saying you will reduce emissions but then stealthily grow a new and bigger fossil fuel industry needs to be called out and exposed.
We already have LNP’s ongoing team assault on the environment now showing a jump in emissions since the removal of the carbon price in 2014 with increases in liquefied natural gas (LNG) greenhouse gases adding to the rise.
Worst still is the report by the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. Due to the LNP’s continual backflip and integrity of Turnbull and Co to apply believable climate mitigation strategies, Australia is way down the list for credibility to implement policy commitments.
Under the LNP, the Department of Climate Change has never been valued with their aim to subvert its legitimacy. Now, Climate Change dwells as a subsection in the Department of Environment.
Currently, the taxpayers will be shelving out billions of dollars to facilitate and subsidise a burgeoning fossil fuel energy future and the pain will only get worse if the Turnbull government is returned………
As for new coal technologies, coal still has to be extracted so the pits get bigger, groundwater is still bleed, air pollution is increased, waste water still needs to be disposed of and land and coastal subsidence will worsen, and the cycle goes on.
We already know that the mining industry is dictating government policy but the infiltration of agencies and our main science and research organisation, CSIRO is concerning.
CSIRO is now one of “entrepreneurial” innovation to market technology to the world…….
The innovation that he [CSIRO’s CEO Dr Larry Marshall] wants to sell to the world is the DICE technology, a coal to fuel derivative that starts with turning prime agricultural land into an open cut brown coal mine. How is that to mitigate climate change? Worse, the technology is also water and energy intensive — so it can burn cleaner somewhere else. Meanwhile, Turnbull has to build more dams because he is giving all our precious water to mining……..https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/turnbulls-innovation-and-ideasboom-is-to-flog-fossil-fuels-kaboom,9038
Coober Pedy headed for 70% renewable energy
Local jobs out of Hydro Tasmania project in Coober Pedy http://www.examiner.com.au/story/3934449/local-jobs-out-of-hydro-project/ Toli Papadopoulos 29 May 16.
A new project will inject millions into the Tasmanian economy and create local jobs, according to Hydro Tasmania CEO Steve Davy.
Mr Davy said the new project will use local manufacturing suppliers, and aims to turn South Australia’s Coober Pedy into a renewable township.
Hydro Tasmania’s manager off-grid solutions Simon Gamble said a number of Tasmanian companies would be involved in the project, including Doric engineering and Southern Prospect out in Wynyard.
He said the containerised systems and electrical equipment would be designed and tested in Tasmania.
Hydro said it was engaged by project developer Energy Developments Limited to develop technologies previously used in King Island.
They said Energy Developments Limited received a grant of $18.4 million by the Australian Renewable Energy Agency for the project.
“This is second project using this containerised modular system, the first was Flinders Island, but this one is by far the largest project we’ve done,” Mr Gamble said.
Mr Gamble said Hydro had already invested in projects in South-East Asia and the Pacific, and this was really just the beginning.
Hydro said 70 per cent of the town’s energy will be drawn from renewable sources once the technology is in place, with a goal of eventually making Coober Pedy completely renewable.
Doubts about the integrity of South Australia’s “Citizens’ Jury” nuclear waste plan
I am in fact, in favour of the Citizens’ Jury Idea. Instead of us being ‘talked down to’ by experts, (who are likely to have a vested interest in the nuclear waste import plan), ordinary non experts hear all the evidence and opposing opinions, discuss these, and come up with a sensible verdict.
After all, that is what we expect in a criminal trial. We do not trust the verdict to “experts” although we do expect their opinions to be heard.
My problem with the South Australia’s Citizens’ Jury on nuclear waste importing is that it doesn’t seem to be given a truly jury role.
The letter sent to potential jury participants says that their task will be to produce an independent guide to help every South Australian understand the recommendations raised by the Royal Commission’s report.
No mention of a verdict on whether or not the jury thinks that the nuclear waste import plan should go ahead.
The organisation running the process, newDemocracy, is using a trademarked definition of ‘Citizens’ Jury’ That trademark belongs to the Jefferson Center. They define the term;
The Citizens Jury convenes diverse groups of citizens to study an issue deeply, discuss different perspectives on the issue, and recommend a course of action or craft their own solutions to address the issue at hand.
I would like to give newDemocracy the benefit of the doubt. Their all too brief notes on this plan do end with this statement:
The first stage of the project will run from May through November 2016, and results in a gateway decision as to whether or not there is broad social consent to continue to pursue opportunities related to the Nuclear Fuel Cycle.
Greens push for Inquiry and assistance to Maralinga nuclear veterans and civilians affected
$130m vow for Maralinga veterans JARED OWENS, The Weekend Australian, May 28-29, p.29 Survivors of British nuclear testing in outback South Australia would receive a special “atomic survivors’ healthcare card” under a $130 million redress scheme being pushed by the Greens.
The policy, timed to coincide with Barack Obama’s historic visit to Hiroshima, includes an inquiry into the health effects of the nuclear testing and compensation for those who abandoned or were removed from their homes to escape the radiation.
Between 1952 and 1963 the Menzies government permitted nuclear testing at the Monte Bello Islands, off the West Australian coast, and at Emu Field and Maralinga in South Australia.
“Successive Australian governments ignored the humanitarian consequences of the British atomic weapons tests. It is now time for Australia to acknowledge the devastating health impacts suffered by ADF veterans and provide immediate health support from radiation fallout,” Greens co-deputy leader Scott Ludlam said, noting many Aboriginal people were driven from their traditional lands.
The civilian healthcare card would give “priority treatment” for medical conditions caused by radiation exposure and would be available to descendants who display “intergenerational health impacts”. Affected military personnel would receive a veterans’ gold card providing support for all conditions.
The Greens also want Australia to support UN efforts to abolish nuclear weapons.
Australian content removed from UNESCO climate change report
UNESCO climate change report lead author disappointed Australian content removed, ABC Radio, The World Today By Sarah Sedghi 27 May 16 The lead author of a United Nations report about climate change threats to World Heritage sites says he is disappointed content about Australia was removed and does not understand why it was done.
Key points:
- Lead author says what was removed was important to understanding risks
- Environment Department requested references to Australian World Heritage properties be removed
- Author knew of material removal but did not know the reason or of any other case studies being removed
The report initially included information about the Great Barrier Reef, as well as Kakadu and the Tasmanian Wilderness.
Adam Markham, the deputy director of climate and energy with the Union of Concerned Scientists and the lead author of report, said the report and what was removed was important work in understanding the risks to world heritage sites like the Great Barrier Reef, and how to protect them.
But the Environment Department expressed concerns about Australian World Heritage properties being included, and at its request, those references disappeared from the final document.
The report, authored by UNESCO, United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) and the Union of Concerned Scientists, was designed to give a snapshot of how climate change was affecting World Heritage sites across the globe.
Mr Markham said he knew they had taken out the Great Barrier Reef case study and material on the Tasmanian wilderness and Kakadu National Park, but he did not know why.
“I read in the paper like you did today the reason that the Australian Government gave, that they had put pressure on UNESCO to remove the case study,” he said.
He said he was disappointed those parts were removed. “Firstly we put a lot of work into writing them, and secondly we weren’t able to put anything about Australia in the report and it’s a huge continent, it’s got some amazing World Heritage sites,” he said.
“The Great Barrier Reef in particular is one that everyone knows is under severe threat, not just from human development and coal mining and such, but also from coral bleaching and warming.”
Mr Markham said he does not think any other case studies were removed from the report before its publication, despite about 50 revisions……..
Questions over why Hunt not informed
Senator Waters questioned why Mr Hunt had not been kept in the loop, and called on him to explain why he was not informed.
“The Minister is not doing his job properly if he is not involved in something as serious as a UN report about climate change affecting the Great Barrier Reef,” she said.
“And secondly if it’s true that he didn’t know, then for a start why didn’t he know, and secondly why would the Department do that?
“He would expect them to hide the inconvenient truth, because that’s what this Minister has been trying to do for years and the Department can predict that that’s what its minister wanted.”
Labor’s environment spokesperson Mark Butler said Mr Hunt and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull needed to come clean on whether actions were taken by them or their offices to seek to censor the work of UNESCO………http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-27/fair-and-balanced-work-removed-from-un-climate-change-report/7452338
1 This month.
Australians deserve the truth
about
AUKUS – https://aukuspublicinquiry.com/
PETITION – To: Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and the Australian Labor Government
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 