RSS Entries ATOM Entries

Australia’s 2020 carbon pollution reduction potential

Posted in Visions by Devin Maeztri on September 15th, 2008

The abstract was recently listed on Australian Policy Online. To see the original document visit Australia’s 2020 carbon pollution reduction potential

Australia’s 2020 carbon pollution reduction potential
The Climate Institute and McLennan Magasanik Associates
Posted 02-09-2008

The newly developed Australian Emissions Reduction Model can be used to identify the technologies and strategies needed to meet a user defined emission reduction target. This policy brief provides a preliminary snapshot of one scenario of how Australia could achieve a 25 per cent reduction in emissions below 1990 levels by 2020.

To read the full document visit: Australia’s 2020 carbon pollution reduction potential – full document

Facebook Twitter Email Linkedin Stumbleupon

Tags: , , ,
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

2 Responses to “Australia’s 2020 carbon pollution reduction potential”

  1. Alex Houlston Says:

    September 16th, 2008 at 3:27 pm

    I believe the most sensible way we can adapt to climate change is also the most sensible way of abating it, i.e. making our homes, offices and commercial buildings energy efficient and correctly designed for their climate.

    All the current (national) political arguments over costs appear blinkered, as they can’t get past worrying about existing industries, whilst ignoring the glaringly obvious benefits of developing sustainable, technological answers to the world’s problems and marketing them to the rest of the planet for the next couple of centuries – as opposed to selling more coal for a couple more decades… short-sighted, fearful politics tends to rule nowadays apparently.

    Human based responses are just as important. If the general public understood the full environmental benefits of energy efficiency, plus the long-term impact on their back pockets – as they are beginning to in regard to their cars – we would be half way there.

    Thankfully I believe we have reached critical mass and the general public is becoming fully aware of the problems and wants to assist in the answers, no matter the cost(coincidently, it seems the politicians are at the samne stage, too).

  2. Ian Says:

    November 13th, 2008 at 5:03 pm

    In reading the report I am happy to see that is was very conservative. In reading most of the CET reports etc details have not been conservative and seem unrealistic. This is probably the first realistic way we can reduce our emissions.
    I would like to respond to a few points.
    1. Livable Cities – I don’t think our governments really care about this. Look at the new pollution tax NSW has just imposed, We really need improved public transport (Not just buses) in all our cities. This also means Subways, High speed trains, Electric trains between majour cities for transport (These can also be used to transport electricity on the Grid between cities if planned properly) and as stated reducing public transport costs and having reduced rates for families if traveling in groups.
    2. Waste – Australia does nothing to recycle organic matter including food scraps, after living in Korea Food scraps are recycled separately and this should be considered. More recycling must take place and fast food outlets need to also do this by providing separate bins for items. We can learn from other countries that recycle everywhere. This is important in reducing landfill and reducing forest clearing for paper goods.
    3. International Trading – I think we need to go further here. We need to start taxing imports where the supplier does not manufacture using green processes, we force local industry to do it so lets have a green tax (or carbon tax) on imported goods that are not manufactured in a green process. This would include goods from countries that use high carbon emission technologies there could be a standard carbon figure applied to the goods, ie Plasma TV’s from Korea are probably made from a reasonably green process compared to TV’s from China, so to offset the carbon emissions in these imported goods the TV’s from China would have a higher Carbon tax applied. This will also help level the playing field for Australian businesses who are forced to use green technologies.

    My comments to people that think the industry won’t suffer in AU if CET is implemented. This is just being stupid. Everyone said industry wouldn’t suffer when reducing tarrifs on the clothing industry, where is the clothing industry in Australia DEAD, you have cheaper clothes to thank for it, but reduced jobs. These businesses have moved offshore and all that is left in AU is the salespeople who sell the goods. Wait until India or China become engineering centers, there will be no engineering jobs left in AU. (Think it won’t happen – I am training India now to take over 5 engineering jobs already, they will be ready to do engineering for AU march 2009). We need to find a balance in protecting Australian interests and implementing CET can tip this balance and it needs to be thought out so that Australia is not seen as “Stupid Aussie Suckers” but rather innovative leaders that can help push other countries to becoming greener as well. Being the first does not do this, but being the first and penalising those that take advantage by moving offshore can do this.
    Just my 2 cents.