Antinuclear

In an email to supporters, the thinktank’s strategic director and former Greens staffer, Ben Oquist, one of a number of people involved in bringing Gore and Palmer together, defended the move as a step forward, despite PUP’s unchanged resolve to repeal Australia’s carbon pricing scheme after the Senate resumes next week.

PUP will now use its balance of power votes in the Senate to retain the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Climate Change Authority and the renewable energy target.

“Six months ago it seemed certain that the Abbott government would succeed in its plan to scrap the RET, the CEFC and the CCA,” Oquist wrote.

“[The institute’s] research has long shown that the RET has been the key mechanism driving investment in clean energy production … It has had more impact than the carbon price at zero cost to the government. Billions of dollars in investment was being put at risk by the Abbott government’s determination to unwind the scheme.

“The Palmer-Gore announcement has reset climate policy and politics. Keeping the CCA, the RET and the CEFC is much more than most expected from PUP. We have avoided a big step backwards … [it] also reframed the debate about carbon pricing – it’s hard to suggest carbon pricing is some form of left-wing, economy-wrecking conspiracy when a billionaire mining magnate supports it.”

Oquist says it “would have been preferable for PUP to have delayed a vote on the carbon price repeal by sending it to a committee. It would have been preferable for them to amend the existing carbon price to move straight to the floating price [due to start next July]. The fact is that the PUP senators and Clive Palmer think that their voters expect them to vote it down, and that’s what they intend to do.”

Government backbenchers have been pushing for the RET to be watered down (it currently requires 41,000 gigawatt hours of power to be sourced from renewables by 2020) on the grounds that it pushes up power prices. Before the PUP announcement senior government sources were suggesting the scheme could be closed to new entrants after the government’s own review of the scheme, chaired by the businessman and self-professed climate sceptic Dick Warburton. More recently backbenchers have been pushing for a less drastic scaling back.

ACIL Allen modelling done for the government’s review shows the current target will increase the average household bill by an average of $54 a year between now and 2020, but will reduce bills by a similar annual amount over the following decade compared with what they would be if the RET were repealed.

The modelling used assumptions highly unfavourable to renewable energy, including that coal and gas prices would remain almost unchanged until 2040.

Separate modelling for the Clean Energy Council by Roam Consulting – with different assumptions about gas prices – found that bills would be $50 higher by 2020 if the RET were repealed, compared with it being retained.

And polling has revealed that Australians overwhelmingly want the renewable energy target to be retained or even increased.

The polling, done for the Climate Institute, shows 72% of Australians want to keep or expand the RET.

The Coalition went to the election promising to keep the RET, which underpins investment in energy sources such as wind and solar, but said it would review the fact that the policy was exceeding its original goal of delivering 20% renewable energy by 2020 because of falling electricity demand.

Warburton, a veteran industrialist and the chairman of the Westfield Retail Trust, described his views on climate science in a 2011 interview on ABC.

“Well, I am a sceptic,” he said. “I’ve never moved away from that. I’ve always believed sceptical. But a sceptic is a different person than a denier. I say the science is not settled. I’m not saying it’s wrong. I’ve never said it’s wrong, but I don’t believe it’s settled.”

The Liberal Party’s Federal Council on Friday night unanimously endorsed a policy motion put up by Bass Liberal MHR Andrew Nikolic to remove consumer and competition law exemptions for eco-charities. He argued that environmental groups should be treated the same as corporations under the act, and that tax deductibility for donations and reduced fees for court action should be removed.

He said there were 583 approved environmental groups under the act, and 13 of these were allowed to receive tax-deductible donations. “I am seeking to remove exemptions so environment groups are not above the law,” Mr Nikolic said. “Part of taking this forward now requires ministers in the state and federal government to act together to remove the exemption.”

Mr Nikolic’s motion follows moves by the state government to repeal the Tasmanian forest peace deal and clamp down on forest protesters through tough new laws involving hefty fines and three-month mandatory prison sentences.

Wilderness Society spokesman Vica Bayley said the latest move would not only hit community groups but the industry groups that the government had pledged to protect.“The Liberals have torn down the only collaborative and constructive thing going and replaced it with draconian measures,” Mr Bayley said.

“It’s a backward step and demonstrates that they believe that their policies will fail and the state will descend back into conflict.”

He said amendments to consumer and competition law would increase the level of controversy and contention in forestry in Tasmania as the government would be seen as one that wanted to block dissenting voices.

Broadcast: 25/06/2014

Reporter: Sarah Ferguson

Greens leader Christine Milne welcomes Clive Palmer’s opposition to abolishing the renewable energy target and the climate change authority but thinks he may be having it ‘both ways’ on his emissions trading suggestions.

SARAH FERGUSON: Yes, but not with our major trading partners, not with the US, not with China, not with Japan and not with South Korea, so it is something different.

CHRISTINE MILNE: Well, that’s the problem with Mr Palmer: I’m not sure how much he understands or whether this is a cynical ploy to make it look as if he wants emissions trading whilst actually abolishing the (audio problems) … or whether his amendments would apply to the existing scheme and that’s where he needs to come out and clarify his position. …….

Clive Palmer has thrown into chaos Tony Abbott’s plan to abolish the carbon tax, demanding the Prime Minister instead create an emissions trading scheme that would swing into action when Australia’s major trading partners adopt similar measures.

A day before Mr Palmer sits down with Mr Abbott to discuss the federal budget and the government’s signature pledge to repeal the carbon tax, the erratic Palmer United Party leader was joined by former US vice-president Al Gore to announce his position on a suite of climate change legislation.

Mr Palmer said his trio of senators would move to enshrine in law a guarantee that energy producers pass on to households the benefits of repealing the carbon tax, while they would also move to block the government’s plans to scrap the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and potentially wind back the Renewable Energy Target, which mandates 41,000 gigawatt-hours of electricity be produced by large clean energy sources by 2020.

The abolition of the independent Climate Change Authority would also be opposed.

Mr Palmer said his party would move to legislate an emissions trading scheme with a starting price of zero dollars.

”The government and the parliament of the day have the ability to set the financial parameters of the [emissions trading] scheme based on the action of our leading trading partners such as China, the United States, the European Union, Japan and Korea,” he said.

In a later interview on ABC’s Lateline, Mr Palmer made clear that repeal of the carbon tax was contingent on energy producers refunding to consumers the benefits of the repeal of the tax.

But it would not be contingent on the other measures Mr Palmer proposed on Wednesday night, such as the proposed emissions trading legislation.

The proposal to introduce the ETS in the Senate would be attached to the bill that would repeal the Climate Change Authority and the PUP would attempt to have that passed by the Senate.

“We want a scheme that is conditional upon other countries and doesn’t become operable until those countries do that, introduce a similar measure,” he said.

Mr Palmer also said his party had not adopted a final position on whether to oppose or support the abolition of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency……..

Mr Palmer said his discussions with Mr Gore had helped him reconsider the ”important issues facing Australians and the rest of the world”.

The PUP leader said the government’s Direct Action policy was ”a waste of money” and should not be implemented when Australians faced other unfair budget measures………

PUP ally Ricky Muir, of the Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party, and other cross-bench senators John Madigan and Nick Xenophon are looking closely at the merits of renewable energy. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/shock-and-gore-clive-palmer-shows-his-hand-20140625-3atpd.html#ixzz35ndf8vLk

Tim Buckley, a former head of equity research at Citigroup, once spent his days doing financial modelling for conglomerates like Wesfarmers, which has a coalmining business.

When you talk to them privately, they say to do the right thing while the government is doing the wrong thing is actually going to cost our business.

Now he works for the US-based pro-renewable energy group Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. One of his projects is demonstrating why spending $40 billion on coalmines and infrastructure in Queensland’s Galilee Basin doesn’t make financial sense.

His aim is to convince superannuation funds, lenders and governments that funding infrastructure for the projects would be a bad long-term investment and they should focus on energy sources with more promising futures, such as solar and wind………

‘Evidence’ top miners know

He says BHP Billiton’s decision to stop investing in new coal projects and Rio Tinto’s $US1 billion ($1.05 billion) sale of its Clermont mine in Queensland are evidence that even the top miners recognise the way the world is heading.

He would like to convince the big four banks to stop lending to coal­miners, but says that is unlikely under the current government.

“When you talk to them privately, they say to do the right thing while the government is doing the wrong thing is actually going to cost our business,” he says. “They say it will damage their political standing in Canberra.”……..

‘Evidence’ top miners know

He says BHP Billiton’s decision to stop investing in new coal projects and Rio Tinto’s $US1 billion ($1.05 billion) sale of its Clermont mine in Queensland are evidence that even the top miners recognise the way the world is heading.

He would like to convince the big four banks to stop lending to coal­miners, but says that is unlikely under the current government.

“When you talk to them privately, they say to do the right thing while the government is doing the wrong thing is actually going to cost our business,” he says. “They say it will damage their political standing in Canberra. : http://www.smh.com.au/business/carbon-economy/swapping-picket-lines-for-pinstripes-meet-the-new-face-of-anticoal-activism-20140624-3aqeu.html#ixzz35ngwl0eW