Liberal Coalition policy on climate change does not stand up to scrutiny
In this article, the author says that Tony Abbott “confirmed his belief in man-made climate change.” But in fact, he didn’t. Abbott said that ‘‘We accept the science that says that something is happening to our planet.’’ So – Abbott agreed about the change, but NOT about whether human activiity was the cause of the change.
Doubts over Coalition plan to cut emissions SMH, May 28, 2013 Tom Arup Environment editor, The Age Storing carbon dioxide in soil and plants will deliver less than five per cent of the emissions cuts assumed under the Coalition’s direct action climate change policy, according to government estimates, as Tony Abbott also confirmed in Parliament his belief in man-made climate change.
Climate change department officials told a Senate estimates hearing on Monday night that soil carbon and revegetation projects are currently expected to deliver just 3.7 million tonnes a year of emissions cuts by 2020.
Labor says these new estimates blow a hole in the Coalition’s direct action climate change policy, which suggested up to 85 million tonnes per year of carbon dioxide cuts could come from soil carbon projects alone by the end of the decade. Continue reading
As Australians learn about cheaper renewable energy, most want to keep the carbon tax
Mixed Greens: Swing voters want carbon price to stay – poll REneweconomy, By Sophie Vorrath 28 May 2013
The Australian reports that the poll also showed that while 42 per cent of voters want the carbon pricing regime repealed, when given a message suggesting it would make renewable energy cheaper, that number falls to 35 per cent. The poll also showed that, when given this positive message, the number of voters who thought carbon pricing should be given a chance to work rose from 39 per cent to 45 per cent. Of Labor voters, 76 per cent think the carbon price should be given a chance; and 77 per cent of Greens voters. But 65 per cent of Liberal voters want the carbon price repealed, reports The Australian…. eneweconomy.com.au/2013/mixed-greens-swing-voters-want-carbon-price-to-stay-poll-65575
In 2001 Australia’s Liberal Party began the Renewable Energy Target, but now backtrackng on it
Renewable Energy Projects in Australia Shelved Until September Election Results International Business Times,By Athena Yenko | May 27, 2013 Future plans of further developing the Infigen renewable energy project in Canberra and other related projects has come in a standstill as Australia waits for September election results…… Meanwhile, the challenge in changing or developing renewable energy projects is on opposition leader Tony Abbott. The challenge is politically risky for Mr. Abbott not only because there is a multi-billion of dollars at risk but more importantly because the campaign for renewable energy is Conservative’s “baby project.”
It is to be recalled that in 2001, the conservative government introduced the world-first mandatory target for renewable energy. The decision followed scientific warnings of global warming and pressure from the public to act on the ten-year drought…….
During Labor’s seat in power in 2007, laws were passed requiring that 20 per cent of power will come from renewable energy come 2020. The said law stated that fixedRenewable Energy Target of 41,00 gigawatt hours from solar, geothermal and win. This was supported by certified certificates saying that to make renewable energy more usable than coal generators, the RET will be supported by 41 million tons of greenhouse produced from national emissions yearly.
But as Australia waits for the September 14 results, all planned remained hanging in the air.
Nathan Fabian, head of Australia’s Investor Group on Climate Change, said that “We expect changes. We don’t know what they’ll be. But the uncertainty is having a crippling effect on the market. We don’t see any clear long-term policy direction on the climate or energy sector from the opposition. And until that is clear, capital is sitting on the sidelines.”
Mr. Fabian and Australia’s Investor Group on Climate Change had investments with approximately $900 billion in funds – a great risk they fear if the industry suffers because of the change in political seats. The group’s investments include pension funds and major international banks.http://au.ibtimes.com/articles/471478/20130527/renewable-energy-projects-australia-september-14-elections.htm#.UaUITdJwpLs
Liberal Coalition would reverse renewable energy progress. Risky politics?
Reversing renewable momentum would be politically risky for opposition leader Tony Abbott, not only because of electoral concern about climate change and the billions of dollars at stake, but also because the push to cleaner energy was born in conservative politics.
Australia’s political freeze on renewables Climate Spectator, Rob Taylor 27 May13, On a line of low hills standing sentinel beside a dry lake bed near Australia’s capital, giant turbines turning slo in a chill winter breeze give no hint of a multi-billion-dollar storm building around renewable energy. Slowly Infigen Energy’s Capital Windfarm, built five years ago, was a vanguard for wind power as Australia sought to wean itself from cheap fossil-fuel power in the face of climate shift blamed in part for Lake George’s transformation to a vast plain.
But big plans to expand the Infigen renewable energy project near Canberra and others like it have been put on hold awaiting the outcome of the September election. The ballot, which opinion polls show the opposition conservatives winning, along with an economic slowdown and rising home energy bills have put the brakes on Australia’s decade-long clean energy push.
At stake in the September 14 vote is a controversial carbon trading scheme championed by ruling Labor to curb greenhouse gas emissions, with a $20 billion pipeline in renewable investment largely on hold as nervous companies sit on their hands. Continue reading
Australian Greens’ practical plan for an Energy Savings Agency
Politics of solar: Milne, Hunt and the CEFC, REneweconomy, By Giles Parkinson 24 May 2013 The politics around solar, and the renewable energy target, and enabling bodies such as the Clean Energy Finance Corporation continue to get murkier as the election approaches. Attendees at the Solar 2013 conference in Melbourne got a taste of it on Friday as various politicians swaggered into the conference. Investment certainty is craved, and promised. But it remains elusive.
Greens leader Christine Milne delivered the only new initiative, saying she wants to establish a new federal government agency – the Energy Savings Agency – that she says will lower electricity bills, save energy and reduce emissions.
She says the Energy Savings Agency will have three priorities – focusing on reducing demand in peak periods, striking a minimum and compulsory “fair price” for electricity generated by consumers and exported to the grid, and designing a national energy efficiency scheme, something that Labor has talked about but failed to deliver.
Milne proposes providing $400 million over 5 years in incentives to reduce demand, which she says could deliver $1 billion in energy savings. The national EE scheme would look to combine and expand the three state-based schemes currently in operation.
She said the agency will make Australia’s energy system fairer, cheaper and cleaner. “The Federal and State Governments have failed to prevent unnecessary spending on new electricity poles and wires,” Senator Milne said. “Make no mistake, several state governments want to maximise profit from their electricity assets. Selling less electricity is not in their interest which is why reform of the energy market is too slow and why intervention is vital.”
“We need an independent agency to provide information, analysis, advocacy and financial support to help remove the barriers to cheaper and cleaner energy options.”
Senator Milne said the proposal has been costed by the Parliamentary Budget Office and will cost $405 million to run each year.
The case of over-investment in the grid was one taken up by Oliver Yates, the CEO of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which has $10 billion in funds to invest – for a commercial return – in emerging renewable technologies, and which is likely to be a major catalyst of big solar and other significant renewable projects.
Yates said that the $40 billion spent on the grid in recent years had provided a “miserable” outcome for consumers. A study to be released soon by the CEFC will conclude that a minimal amount had been spent on demand management – despite numerous studies saying that these could have saved billions of dollar in investment, and thousands of dollars to individual households.
“Rather than writing off expenditure … there is a real risk that these costs will get pushed onto retail and commercial customers that produce electricity,” Yates said. This would be bad for the solar industry. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/politics-of-solar-milne-hunt-and-the-cefc-22212
Greg Hunt and the Liberal Coalition’s plans to sabotage renewable energy
Politics of solar: Milne, Hunt and the CEFC, REneweconomy, By Giles Parkinson 24 May 2013 “……The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) this week released its investment policies, which include as a rough guideline a minimum $20 million investment by the agency, and targeting projects of around $200 million.
But the CEFC is now the subject of a fierce political battle, with the Coalition repeating its vow to not just disband the CEFC, but also to dishonour contracts entered into by the CEFC, and to repatriate money not spent by the time the “caretaker” period ahead of the September poll begins on August 12.
Coalition climate spokesman Greg Hunt spoke to the audience about the need for investment certainty and removing sovereign risk, but the Coalition’s two biggest policy proposals – removal of the CEFC and having yet another review of the renewable energy target in 2014 – are creating just that…..
Hunt was asked three times to clarify his position on the RET, and whether that included support for the 41,000GWh target. To which he replied each time, “we are committed to the 20 per cent target, and have proposed no changes.”
But despite his desire to have “investment certainty”, he reiterated the Coalition’s preference to have a 2-yearly review rather than a four yearly review recommended by the Climate Change Authority – and endorsed although not yet legislated by the government. It is this very prospect of yet another review in a year’s time – and the fear of a more favourable response to the utilities’ demands to lower the fixed target in response to falling demand – which is currently stalling investment.
He also repeated his intention to disband the CCA, as well as the various clean technology programs which had been facilitating investment in rooftop solar and energy efficiency programs on commercial rooftops – a program that has been warmly embraced by the manufacturing sector…. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/politics-of-solar-milne-hunt-and-the-cefc-22212
Wikileaks Party- official registration open for comment until June 24
WikiLeaks Party closer to registering SMH, May 22, 2013 Paul Osborne, AAP Senior Political Writer The WikiLeaks political party is a step closer to being registered in Australia.
The Australian Electoral Commission on Wednesday published the constitution of the WikiLeaks Party and opened up the party’s official registration for public comment until June 24. WikiLeaks website founder Julian Assange plans to run for the Senate in Victoria at the September 14 election…. The WikiLeaks Party aims to run Senate candidates in Victoria, NSW and Western Australia.
Among the party’s objectives in its constitution are to “do all that is necessary to secure, develop and protect human rights and freedoms” and to hold governments, unions and corporations accountable for their actions.
The 10 names on the party application do not include Mr Assange. …. http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-national/wikileaks-party-closer-to-registering-20130522-2k03g.html
Tony Abbott’s determination to destroy action on climate chnage
Liberals’ plan to dismantle carbon laws BY:GRAHAM LLOYD, ENVIRONMENT EDITOR The Australian May 18, 2013 TONY Abbott would prepare for a double-dissolution election within five months of taking office if parliament blocked the repeal of the carbon tax, under a 12-month action blueprint to transform the nation’s environmental laws….( subscribers only) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/liberals-plan-to-dismantle-carbon-laws/story-fn59niix-1226645695162
Coalition parties anti-wind energy, hypocritical about renewabl eenergy
Coalition dances around renewables commitment – again REneweconomy, Giles Parkinson 18 May 13, Joe Hockey refuses to endorse support for renewable energy, saying he had only just received the Budget Papers. Meanwhile, Coalition politicians are said to have signed up to speak at an anti-wind rally outside Parliament House. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/coalition-dances-around-renewables-commitment-again-84662
Tony Abbott’s claims about scrapping carbon tax – need scrutiny
Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? Fact check: will scrapping the carbon price lower electricity prices? The Conversation, Dylan McConnell, 18 May 13, Tony Abbott has said he will scrap the carbon “tax”, leading to a fall in electricity prices.
In his budget reply speech he stated: We will abolish the carbon tax – because that’s the quickest way to reduce power prices and take the pressure off cost of living and job security.
But will removing the carbon price really lower electricity prices, and if so, by how much?…….
wholesale costs only account for around 37% of retail electricity prices. Other major components of retail prices are transmission costs,
distribution costs (“poles and wires”), and retail costs (which include costs like the Renewable Energy Target).
Over the same period transmission costs went up 27%, distribution by 11% and retail costs by 17%. These components are independent of the carbon price, and account for the majority of hikes in retail electricity prices.
It’s worth remembering too that even without the carbon price, electricity prices are predicted to rise. Climate Change Authority
research suggests that without the carbon price, the rise would with be slightly smaller, with retail electricity prices just 6% lower. .http://theconversation.com/fact-check-will-scrapping-the-carbon-price-lower-electricity-prices-14408
Tony Abbott’s doubtful claim about axing Australia’s Clean Energy Finance Corporation
Clean energy head disputes Abbott’s ‘green savings’ BY:LAUREN WILSON, The Australian May 18, 2013 A ROW has erupted over whether the Coalition could save money by axing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, with the head of the green bank disputing Tony Abbott’s claims that about $400 million a year could be banked by abolishing the fund.
The opposition committed the Coalition, if elected in September, to scrapping the $10 billion CEFC, which provides commercial and concessional loans for companies investing in renewable energy and energy efficiency programs…..subscribers only http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mining-energy/bank-head-disputes-abbotts-green-savings/story-e6frg9df-1226645636342
Nuclear and Uranium Related Expenses in Australia’s Federal Budget 2013
Nuke Dump – $35.7m over 4 years National Radioactive Waste Management — securing a site and First Stage business case to “secure suitable volunteer site” and undertake initial scoping and design work, establish a Regional Consultative Committee and First State business case. (p253 bp2)-
Counsellor in New Delhi – $3.1m over 4 years to continue posting a Resources, Energy and Tourism Counsellor in New Delhi – is this to do with Uranium??
ANSTO = $38.7m for decommissioning High Flux Nuclear Reactor and $8.1 m for increasing costs of running OPAL Nuclear Reactor (nuclear fuel and electricity) Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation — additional funding for decommissioning and nuclear waste management activities
ARPANSA = $ 7.8 m over four years Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency — improving Australia’s capacity to deliver effective radiation protection and nuclear safety to enhance capacity to issue new licences and undertake compliance, upgrade Yallambie and to address workplace health and safety issues. 5.1 m to be recovered through revising licencing fees and testing fees.
Rum Jungle radioactive decontamination funds = 1.5 this year.
More detail on these nuclear-related expenses in the Budget: Continue reading
Australia’s Budget – a mixed result for clean energy – but Abbott’s agenda would be worse
Budget 2013-14 And Renewable Energy http://www.energymatters.com.au/index.php?main_page=news_article&article_id=3739, 15 May 13, Australia’s Clean Energy Council has expressed disappointment in last night’s Budget, stating more than $600 million of funding for clean energy projects has been put in jeopardy.
While acknowledging a tough set of financial circumstances for the country and ambitious new projects such as the NDIS requiring funding, the CEC says chopping and changing clean energy program funding unsettles investors.
A deferral of $370 million in funding to the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) over three years from 2014-15 is causing some concern as the CEC says the process for returning that funding to ARENA’s budget beyond 2020 is unclear.
$260 million of funding for energy efficiency programs and large-scale solar was also cut; the latter being $160 million of unallocated solar flagships funding which was to go to the ill-fated Solar Dawn project.
However, it wasn’t all bad news. The Clean Technology Programs did not receive rumoured cuts and $58 million of unspent funds in 2012-13 has been reallocated to 2017-18. $160 million of funding has been brought forward to 2014-15 to provide earlier access to funds for industry.
Greens leader Christine Milne was particularly scathing of the Budget. In an email with the subject line of “weaker, dumber, meaner”; Ms. Milne said the Government’s cuts to renewable energy funding constituted “back-flipping on their commitments to the Clean Energy package made with the Greens”. Ms. Milne also said “This budget is bad but Tony Abbott’s extreme agenda would go even further.”
For potential buyers of small scale rooftop solar arrays, their was neither bad or good news in the Budget – it’s business as usual.
On a somewhat related topic, carbon capture copped it in the cuts; with $662 million of uncommitted funds for the controversial Carbon Capture and Storage Flagships program being returned.
A full round-up of Budget 2013-14 winners and losers (renewable energy related and otherwise) can be viewed on ABC News.
www.politifact.com.au will rate politicians on truth or falseness in their facts
New website to rate politicians’ facts http://www.smh.com.au/it-pro/government-it/new-website-to-rate-politicians-facts-20130512-2jfyx.html#ixzz2TDuKyJyi May 12, 2013 A new political fact-checking website has launched with lofty plans to keep politicians honest and voters better informed. PolitiFact Australia says it will fact-check claims by MPs, parties, candidates and other influential figures. The website is the first international affiliate of Pulitzer prize-winning US site, PolitiFact.
It will rate political statements as true, mostly true, half true, mostly false and false. The US website calls this scale “Truth-O-Meter”. Ridiculous claims will be rated “pants on fire”. The US website says facts are checked by writers and editors “who spend considerable time researching and deliberating” the rulings. “We always try to get the original statement in its full context rather than an edited form that appeared in news stories. We then divide the statement into individual claims that we check separately.
“When possible, we go to original sources to verify the claims. We look for original government reports rather than news stories. We interview impartial experts.” The first fact-checks have delivered “mostly false” to Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s statement the coalition’s broadband plan will “cost households $5000 to get connected”. Opposition Leader Tony Abbott gets the same rating for his statement that “the carbon tax is adding $400 to the cost of every car manufactured in Australia”.
The site is headed by Peter Fray, the former editor-in-chief of The Sydney Morning Herald, published by Fairfax Media, owner of this publication.Mr Fray said PolitiFact Australia is a necessary addition to Australia’s journalistic scene because politics has become ”faster and noisier” and voters are overloaded with information.
The first step in any fact-check is to ask the source for details to support the claim, before seeking independent verification. ”We are here to help sort out the facts from the fictions … we are not really out to get politicians, we don’t think they are all liars. But we do think they should be accountable for what they say,” he said.
www.politifact.com.au went live overnight on Monday.
Climate Change is THE ISSUE in Australia’s September federal election
Why Labor should fight the 2013 election on climate change, The Conversation, Matt McDonald 10 May 2013,If climate change features prominently in the federal election campaign, it will almost certainly be driven by the Coalition. Under Tony Abbott, the Coalition has long smelled blood in the water on climate change and in particular the carbon tax. Abbott has stated repeatedly that the repeal of the carbon taxwill be his first order of government business if elected, while Coalition climate spokesperson Greg Hunt has claimed that the 2013 election will be a referendum on the tax.
But this is a risky strategy, and this is precisely why the ALP can and should consider taking on the Coalition on this issue, and taking up the challenge of making the election a referendum on the carbon tax.
First, public attitudes to the carbon tax are softening. Polling has indicated a steady decline in opposition to the carbon tax since it was first mooted. By the end of 2012 opposition to the carbon tax was still at around 56% but was continuing to decline.Complaints to the ACCC about the carbon tax dropped off substantially after three months in operation. Six months in the majority of Australians polled believed that the carbon tax had made no economic difference to their lives.
There is every reason to believe these trends will continue as the tax becomes more institutionalised. Some began to draw parallels to the GST: an unpopular tax but one that was gradually absorbed into the economy and everyday practises, and which stopped short of the economic Armageddon predicted by opponents.
Second, it seems to be working.
Greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation hit a 10 year low in early 2013, driven by increases in cost for wholesale electricity and an increase in the share of electricity provided through renewable sources. Both of these dynamics are attributable to the carbon tax.
If part of the reason for opposing or repealing the tax was that it didn’t work this is clearly undermined by the figures to hand so far. The carbon tax is also clearly helping Australia track towards its 20% renewable energy target, at present a bipartisan commitment. One recent industry analysis suggested that without the carbon tax and associated investment incentives in renewables, the Coalition couldn’t hope to achieve this target.
Third, industry wants it. Tony Abbott has long claimed that Australia’s economic competitiveness is being fatally undermined by the carbon tax. The trouble is, the leadership of many of Australia’s largest corporations support it….. http://theconversation.com/why-labor-should-fight-the-2013-election-on-climate-change-13865
1 This month
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
– go to https://nuclearinformation.wordpress.com/
Antinuclear 