Scientists advise Soil Carbon farming unviable - time to bury the Coalition Direct Action Climate Plan

Latest Scientific advice from University of Melbourne researchers says that The potential for carbon sequestration in Australian agricultural soils is technically and economically limited. This scientific report, published in Nature on 12 July 2013, should truly bury the Liberal National Party reliance on soil carbon sequestration for 60% of their Direct Action climate plan. It simply won't work.

Most of the rest of the Coalition Climate Plan revolves around urban tree planting and reverse auctions to pay polluters to reduce carbon emissions, both of which are also very problematic and costly responses, likely to be ineffective in mitigating emissions by 5% on 2000 levels by 2020. This all adds up to the Coalition Climate Plan being a huge crock. Something to say you are doing when you are actually doing nothing.

CO2 carbon capture process mimics Sea Urchin

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a thorny and costly problem which scientists are still coming to terms with for a technological solution to mitigating carbon pollution and climate change. But what if we mimiced nature, as indeed scientists at Newcastle University in the UK have done in understanding how the simple sea urchin, a thorny little marine creature, uses nickel to turn carbon dioxide in the sea to calcium carbonate for making their exo-skeleton.

This is another demonstration of the importance of preserving biodiversity: for the insights it can give us in understanding the world around us and assisting in breakthroughs in biological, chemical and pharmaceutical processes. Unfortunately for the sea urchin warming oceans reduce sea urchin sperm longevity impacting the fertilisation process which may lead to sea urchin population decline in the future.

Capturing carbon and long term sequestration is a costly industrial process that currently uses substantial energy and resources. Carbon sequestration is presently only working in pilot programs. Usually CO2 is captured and pumped underground under pressure in depleted oil and gas fields. But there is also a risk of leakage that would substantially lessen any carbon reduction gains made. Earthquakes causing fractures and leakage are also a concern. While there are many pilot CCS plants in operation round the world, industrial scale CCS plants are still a coal mining company's dream.

Several alternate methods for carbon capture and storage (CCS) are being researched and have been proposed as possible answers. See Scientific breakthrough: Remove CO2 from pollution and atmosphere for alternate fuel (Jan 2012) and Award for ground breaking research in capturing Carbon Dioxide (Aug 2010). For a discussion on Carbon Capture and Storage and seismicity see Carbon capture and storage and the Melbourne Earthquake (June 2012)

So a method of extracting waste carbon from coal fired power stations and chemical plants and converting it to a stable mineral form like Calcium or Magnesium Carbonate seems like a no brainer. Especially if it can be done cheaply and efficiently at commercial industrial scale.

Not enough water: food production, carbon sequestration and climate change

A new study has found that there is not enough freshwater to meet the anticipated competing demands of water for food production for the global population of about 9 billion by 2050 and water for optimal growth of biomass for carbon sequestration for climate mitigation. As food production is essential, the authors of the study conclude that large scale carbon sequestration may not be realistic as a major method of climate mitigation, and we may need to rely more on direct reduction of emissions.

We rely on freshwater to drink daily, to bathe in and flush our toilets with; but also for growing our veggies and crops; to grow feed for our animals; for healthy riparian and aquatic habitats and ecosystems; for our forests and wild places to sequester carbon dioxide as biomass carbon sinks. But increasingly we are approaching boundaries and limits on the amount of freshwater available and the trade-offs involved in competing uses.

Carbon capture and storage and the Melbourne Earthquake

Melbourne: Did the earth move for you last night? It did for me. Melbourne experienced one of the strongest earthquakes for many many years. Now consider what it might do if we had a couple of billion tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) geo-sequested beneath Southern Victoria and under Bass Strait. Because that is what Premier Ted Baillieu and Federal Resources and Energy Minister Martin Ferguson have planned.

Update: Related article from theConversation: Earthquakes and mining – how humans create seismic activity

Forest soil carbon release a vicious Global Warming feedback loop say researchers

Global warming is likely to accelerate release of forest soil carbon say researchers. This is another climate feedback loop. Rising temperatures are likely to accelerate forest soil carbon decomposition leading to more CO2 released into the atmosphere, compounding global warming. Rather than these forests acting as a carbon sink, warmer temperatures may make them a major source of greenhouse gas emissions further contributing to global warming warn the researchers.

"Our results suggest that large stores of carbon that built up over the last century as forests recovered will erode with rising temperatures," said Susan Trumbore of the Max Planck Institute for Biogeochemistry and University of California at Irvine (UCI), who led the research team.

Global CO2 emissions reach record high for 2011 Warns IEA

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has just reported another increase in CO2 emissions for 2011 to a new record high of 31.6 gigatonnes (Gt), an increase of 1.0 Gt on 2010, or 3.2%. Last year the IEA reported a record high of 30.6 Gigatonnes during 2010, with Greenhouse gases increasing 6 per cent, one of the largest annual increases on record.

According to the IEA, global energy-related emissions in 2020 must not be greater than 32.6 Gt to be consistent in limiting warming to 2ºC. We are traveling very close to global greenhouse gas pollution limits. "The new data provide further evidence that the door to a 2°C trajectory is about to close," said IEA Chief Economist Fatih Birol. According to the IEA coal accounted for 45% of emissions, oil 35% and natural gas 20%.

Scientific breakthrough: Remove CO2 from pollution and atmosphere for alternate fuel

An improved method of removing carbon dioxide (CO2) cheaply from industrial smoketacks and even scrubbing the air has been discovered which may help in stabilising climate and reducing carbon emissions. Resolving the huge problem of climate change and global warming is going to take significant action on many levels. This new technology, if it can be rapidly developed and commercialised, may prove extremely useful in reducing carbon emissions and ultimately helping our society to become carbon negative. But the scientists have gone a further step and propose turning the captured carbon dioxide into an alternate stable fuel called renewable methanol to assist in resolving the peak oil petroleum resource depletion problem.

Coastal ecosystems suffer 100 fold decrease in capacity to store carbon mitigating climate change

The carbon sink capacity of urbanized river estuary and coastal environments to mitigate climate change has reduced by 100 fold according to scientists from the University of Technology Sydney. The Scientists used core samples from Botany Bay in Sydney to reconstruct the sedimentation changes in the past 6000 years, highlighting the changes in the ecology. The plant samples in the sedimentation changed as rapid industrialisation occurred around Botany Bay during the 1950s.

"We have effectively gone back in time and monitored carbon capture and storage by coastal ecosystems, finding a 100-fold weakening in the ability of coastal ecosystems to sequester carbon since the time of European settlement. This severely hampered the ability of nature to reset the planet's thermostat." said Dr. Peter Macreadie, University of Technology, Sydney Chancellor's Postdoctoral Research Fellow.

Forests play a major role as carbon sink say scientists

The world's forests remove over one quarter of current annual human carbon emissions from the atmosphere each year, the equivalent of about 2.4 billion tonnes of carbon according to the latest published scientific research. An international team of scientists, including from the US Forests Service and the Australian CSIRO, have quantified the greenhouse gas carbon sink provided by the world's tropical, temperate and boreal forests.

"This is really a timely breakthrough with which we can now clearly demonstrate how forests and changes in landscape such as wildfire or forest regrowth impact the removal or release of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2)," says Dr Pep Canadell, CSIRO co-author of the paper: A Large and Persistent Carbon Sink in the World's Forests. "What this research tells us is that forests play a much larger role as carbon sinks as a result of tree growth and forest expansion."

Queensland's Coal addiction - talk by Guy Pearse

While browsing youtube I came across this presentation - Queensland's Continuing Carbon Addiction - by Dr Guy Pearse, a research fellow at the Global Change Institute of the University of Queensland, delivered on October 28, 2010.

Carbon pollution subsidies outstrip climate change funding

New analysis done by the Australian Conservation Foundation shows that while funding and subsidies for solar power and climate change related programs has increased by $500 million per year, subsidies and concessions for fossil fuel carbon pollution related activies soared by $1.5 billion per year, 3 times as much.

Arctic Permafrost thawing raising CO2 levels

Global warming is not going away, and over coming decades will worsen through the earth passing tipping points for carbon feedback mechanisms. One such tipping point is the thawing of arctic permafrost which will release huge amounts of carbon dioxide and further accelerate climate change. A new study has found that up to two thirds of permafrost is likely to disappear by 2200, much of it in the next 100 years, as a result of warming arctic temperatures resulting in the release of an estimated 190 gigatonnes of carbon into the atmosphere.

Forests are not commodities - REDD under fire for narrow focus on carbon storage

A new report from some of the world's top experts on forest governance has criticised various international climate change accords including REDD (Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation) and REDD+ for their narrow focus on carbon storage which has failed to stop rampant destruction of the world's most vulnerable forests and often acted to further marginalise indigenous peoples.

Award for groundbreaking research in capturing Carbon Dioxide

A University of Sydney researcher has received an award for ground breaking work into capturing carbon emissions - research important to mitigating climate change by reducing atmospheric carbon pollution. Dr Deanna D'Alessandro, a post-doctoral fellow based in the School of Chemistry at Sydney University, was awarded a L'Oréal Australia For Women in Science Fellowship for her research on ways to capture and release carbon dioxide, hydrogen and other gases using molecular sponges.

Atmospheric CO2 is currently at 390 ppm (parts per million) and increasing. At our current business as usual rate of carbon pollution we should pass 400 ppm within 10 years. Research published in 2010 estimates that the CO2 level that will lead to collapse of the Greenland ice sheet is between 400 to 560 parts per million (ppm). (Skeptical Science - What CO2 level would cause the Greenland ice sheet to collapse?)

Environmentalists: Fuel Emission reduction policy well behind world's best practice

Policy Plans released by Julia Gillard and her Climate Change Minister Penny Wong for mandatory vehicle fuel efficiency standards and a $2000 rebate for trading in pre-1995 cars for new fuel efficient vehicles, were cautiously welcomed by environmentalists while being criticised for not going far enough and being funded by cuts to other climate change action programs such as Carbon Capture and Storage and solar energy. "Under this plan, Australia's fuel efficiency standards for new vehicles will be about a quarter of a century behind China's when they are eventually law. We must make our cars cleaner quicker." said Don Henry, Australian Conservation Foundation executive director.

Australian emission standards are currently voluntary. Under the envisaged mandatory standards emissions from light vehicles would reduce by 14 per cent by 2014 and 30 per cent by 2024 based upon 2008 emission levels. While Government modelling suggests a significant fuel saving - a typical motorist could save around $600 per year on fuel costs - the estimated amount saved could prove elusive due to the threat of peak oil to affect major increases in petrol prices in the next decade. The government has not released petrol price modelling to check their figures.

The car industry has welcomed the $394 million plan to give motorists a rebate on trade-ins between January 2011 and the end of 2014.

The Australian Conservation Foundation questioned why the 30 per cent emission reduction would not be introduced until 2024 when many countries already have mandatory fuel emission requirements. "Australians want healthier cities and more efficient cars, but the standards announced today are weaker than European standards and certainly not world's best practice," said Don Henry. "Europe, the United States, Japan, China, Taiwan and South Korea have all had mandatory fuel efficiency standards for new cars for years. China's new car fleet was already more efficient than Australia's in 2002."

Greens Climate Change spokeperson Senator Christine Milne welcomed the initiative but criticised the Government for cutting back renewable energy programs to fund it, and the lack of a carbon price mechanism being set to fund such initiatives. "Prime Minister Gillard's refusal to legislate for a carbon tax means that she does not have a source of funding for climate initiatives and it is completely wrong to take money out of Australia's renewable energy future to pay to take clunkers off the road." she said.

"The Greens would take the money from coal via a carbon tax, or from fuel excise, whereas the Prime Minister's rhetoric on climate change is becoming even more hollow as she prepares to attack the solar industry one again. Prime Minister Gillard seems to think that nobody cares if only two of the 52 applications in the solar flagship program are funded, but she will find that Australians do care about the solar industry and will not look kindly on this daylight robbery from the solar sector." said Senator Milne.

Sources

• Australian Labor Party Policy News, July 24, 2010 - New emission standards for cars
• Media Release - Australian Conservation Foundation, July 24, 2010 - Make cars cleaner quicker
• Media Release - The Greens, July 24, 2010 - Labor steals from solar to pay for old clunkers

How to achieve Zero Carbon Emissions by 2020

The public launch of the Beyond Zero Emissions report - Zero Carbon Australia 2020 - was delivered to an overflowing audience at Melbourne University last night. The report is one possible blueprint for acting on the challenge of climate change by converting the existing coal and gas fired carbon pollution dependent electricity generation to 100% renewables using only current commercial technologies in ten years.
Beyond Zero Emissions has utilised pro-bono research by academic specialists in solar technology, mechanical and electrical engineering and economics, over the last two years to produce this report. It shows how Australia could move from being one of the highest carbon emitters per capita to one of the lowest.

Why is this necessary?

Scientists have been saying Australia needs to reduce carbon emissions by 40 per cent by 2020: "the last Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report (2007) recommended that developed countries should reduce emissions by 25-40% on 1990 levels by 2020. Yet more recent evidence shows that only reductions at the top end of this range will be sufficient to avoid the worst impacts of climate change." said forty of the world's leading climate scientists in a statement initiated by WWF and released prior to the Copenhagen Climate summit in December 2009.

"The premise of a 10 year transition is based on 'The Budget Approach' from the German Advisory Council on Global Change. In order to have a 67% chance of keeping global warming below 2oC above pre-industrial temperatures, on a basis of equal allocation of emissions on a per-capita basis, it would be necessary for the USA to reduce emissions to zero in 10 years. Australia has the same per-capita emissions as the USA, and would need to pursue the same goal," the plan says.

Both the Labor and Opposition parties are aiming at only a 5 per cent emissions reduction by 2020. This falls far short than what the scientists say is required.

Without any action to set a carbon price electricity prices are set to surge due to the business uncertainty around setting a price for carbon. The audience was told that with business as usual it is estimated $100 billion will be invested in electricity sector in Australia over the next decade. New coal fired power plants may find problems being financed due to the uncertainty. Energy producers are more likely to add gas turbine peaking plants which are cheap to build but expensive to run.

A Climate Institute report produced by researchers and business partners recently estimated that uncertainty around whether government will place a price tag on pollution that will cost the economy and consumers $2 billion a year in higher electricity prices. (ABC interview with John Connor from Climate Institute: No ETS means higher electricity prices: study)

Transitioning to Renewable Energy is realistic and achievable at moderate cost

By comparison, economic modelling shows the Zero Carbon Australia 2020 could be implemented for a total cost of about $370 billion, or $37 billion per year - about 3 per cent of GDP per year for 10 years. Included in this cost is a major extension and upgrade to the electricity transmission grid to make it more efficient. Upgrading the existing transmission infrastructure may also help avoid future bush fires caused by poor maintenaince reminiscent of the Black Saturday bushfire in Victoria.

With the exception of the Bass strait link there was been little work upgrading the electricity transmission grid since the 1970s. The cost of building the transmission grid is estimated at 25 per cent of the total project costs.

It could become a 21st century equivalent of the Snowy Mountains Scheme creating up to 80,000 jobs from installation of renewable energy generation at the peak of construction, and over 45,000 jobs in operations and maintenance that will continue for the life of the plant. Such a scheme would also generate up to 30,000 jobs in manufacturing wind turbines and heliostats.

Many of these jobs could be created close to existing coal fired power stations to provide an opportunity to transition the existing workforce. Such a project would also provide Australia with a manufacturing capacity to export renewable technologies to the region and the world.


The Zero Carbon Australia 2020 report shows us one possible mix of current commercial technologies to realise the goal of zero carbon emissions by 2020. Other plans may choose a different mix using slightly different technology. Emerging renewable technologies such as wave, tidal and geothermal have been explicitly excluded from this plan but may well play an active role as these technologies are developed and commercialised.

The plan calls for 40% renewable energy from wind generation, 60% from large scale concentrating solar thermal power with molten salt storage for 24/7 baseload operation, and backup from Hydro-electric and biomass power generation. The plan specifies sites around Australia that are selected for their wind availability, solar incidence, economy of scale, transmission costs, technical efficency, and geographical diversity: 23 sites for wind, and 12 sites for Concentrating Solar Thermal (CST). The plan is based only on existing commercial technology.

Transferring from coal fired electricity generation will require large public and private investments. To assist this a carbon price needs to be set. An emissions trading scheme - Cap and Trade - is open to volatility which produces market uncertainty for business investment decisions as shown by the European Emissions Trading Scheme.

In a question from the floor about setting a carbon price, one of the speakers said what was needed was a combined system where a carbon tax sets a floor price for carbon pollution, with an emissions trading scheme setting a cap on pollution and issuing permits which can be bought and sold. This would provide a stable floor price to base long term business decisions on, while also setting an upper level on total carbon pollution allowed and letting the market determine the price for pollution permits.

So Australia transitioning to an electricity sector based on renewables with zero carbon emissions by 2020 is possible and achievable for a realistic cost.

Impediments to implementing such a nation building scheme includes the lack of political leadership and will from both sides of politics. Our politicians are also being influenced by lobbyists from the very powerful existing coal and electricity industries. These companies have enormous clout and influence on both State and Federal politicians. The relatively small solar and enewable sector just cannot match the funding and power of the fossil fuel industries. To a question from the floor about how we can bring about this change, one of the speakers said we need people power - the electorate needs to tell our politicians in an unambiguous way of its support for action on climate change and transitioning to renewable energy such as this plan.

There was question from the floor about the funding of Carbon capture and storage (CCS). The speaker from the Melbourne Energy Institute said that the research and development of CCS was also required for countries that will continue to rely on coal fired power generation, and as a process to eventually reduce carbon in the atmosphere by sequestration.

I came away from this launch heartened. Thirty five years ago I helped set up a demonstration solar hot water system on the lawns of parliament house in Canberra. Alternative and renewable technology was dismissed as the margin, especially by politicians then. Will our political leaders listen now? I hope so, especially if you support Beyond Zero Emissions ongoing work and tell your Federal and State politicians that we need to transition to a zero carbon pollution economy and society.

You can download the full report as a PDF (8.5MB) or download or purchase a glossy printed copy from The Melbourne Energy Institute, Melbourne University for $30

See also Indymedia story, 28 June 2010: Renewable energy target: 20 by 2020 or zero emissions by 2020?


Takver is a citizen journalist from Melbourne who has been writing on Climate Change issues and protests including Rising Sea Level, Ocean acidification, Environmental and social Impacts since 2004.

Renewable energy target: 20 by 2020 or zero emissions by 2020?

At the same time on Friday as Trade Minister Simon Crean was signing the deal to export brown coal to Vietnam, Climate Change Minister Penny Wong issued a press release welcoming the passage of the enhanced Renewable Energy Target and Building Energy Efficiency legislation through the Federal Parliament. One could interpret Penny Wong's PR as a greenwashing response to the Beyond Zero Emissions launch on Wednesday for a Zero Carbon Australia 2020 Stationary Energy Plan of zero emissions.

"The Renewable Energy Target will ensure 20 per cent of Australia's electricity supply in 2020 will come from renewable sources." Penny Wong said. The bill splits the Renewable Energy Target into two parts from 1 January 2011: small scale systems such as solar photovoltaic panels and solar hot water systems on residential housing; and large scale projects like wind farms, commercial solar and geothermal.

But will 20 percent of electricity supply from renewables by 2020 be enough to forestall the impacts of climate change?

In a blog post Tony Mohr, climate change manager from the Australian Conservation Foundation called the legislation an important step towards a cleaner future for Australia but said much more needed to be done. "The government has agreed to fund just two of the 52 projects that applied for funding under the Solar Flagships program. These are 52 proposals for real projects that would make the kind of shift we need, but none of them will get support from the current Renewable Energy Target." Tony Mohr said, "Australia could join other leading countries like Germany by increasing the share of electricity to 40 per cent by 2020."

But the Zero Carbon Australia 2020 initiative goes further. "The premise of a 10 year transition is based on 'The Budget Approach' from the German Advisory Council on Global Change. In order to have a 67% chance of keeping global warming below 2oC above pre-industrial temperatures, on a basis of equal allocation of emissions on a per-capita basis, it would be necessary for the USA to reduce emissions to zero in 10 years. Australia has the same per-capita emissions as the USA, and would need to pursue the same goal," the plan says.

The Zero Carbon Australia 2020 synopsis calls for 40% renewable energy from wind generation, 60% from large scale concentrating solar thermal power with molten salt storage for 24/7 baseload operation, and backup from Hydro-electric and biomass power generation. The plan specifies sites around Australia that are selected for their wind availability, solar incidence, economy of scale, transmission costs, technical efficency, and geographical diversity: 23 sites for wind, and 12 sites for Concentrating Solar Thermal (CST). The plan is based only on existing commercial technology.

The plan has received support by a variety of academics and scientists. Associate Professor Keith Lovegrove, Leader Solar Thermal Group at the Australian National University said "The ZCA report analyses one particular scenario of renewable energy technology choice based on available solutions, in considerable depth. It successfully shows in detail that 100% renewable energy is both technically possible and economically affordable. Clearly other renewable energy technology scenarios are also possible, that only serves to strengthen the overall conclusion about viability. The group is to be congratulated for their efforts."

The plan has been costed at $370 billion, or about 3 per cent of GDP per year for 10 years. It could become a 21st century equivalent of the Snowy Mountains Scheme creating up to 80,000 jobs from installation of renewable energy generation at the peak of construction, and over 45,000 jobs in operations and maintenance that will continue for the life of the plant. Such a scheme would also generate up to 30,000 jobs in manufacturing wind turbines and heliostats.

The Beyond Zero Emissions plan was launched in Canberra by Senators Christine Milne (Greens), Judith Troeth (Liberal), and Nick Xenophon (Independent), just as the backroom talks to replace Kevin Rudd were taking place. So the news on Thursday was all about Australia's first female Prime Minister, Julia Guillard.

Matthew Wright, Beyond Zero Emissions Executive Director said at the launch "It's time for the Australian parliament to a implement a climate and energy policy agenda to repower our economy with 100% renewable energy by 2020. Concentrated solar thermal technology is capable of generating renewable electricity 24 hours a day and credible climate and energy policy will encourage the rapid deployment of the technology in Australia. This should be a priority for Australian governments,"

Australian Greens Deputy Leader, Senator Christine Milne, said: "We can and must aim to power Australia with 100% renewable energy as soon as possible if we are to truly tackle the climate crisis. This Zero Carbon Australia plan is an extremely valuable contribution which all in the parliament should be looking at very seriously, particularly as we are currently debating renewable energy legislation in the Senate."

So Climate Change Minister Penny Wong and the Australian Parliament gave us on Friday the plan for 20 per cent renewable power by 2020, but what we really need is something much more. Zero Carbon Emissions have shown that reducing stationary carbon emissions to zero is feasible, it just depends on the political will and leadership.

Climate Adaption Conference

The zero emissions plan comes as Australia prepares to host the first international conference held in Australia to discuss the science and options for adapting to climate change, due to begin June 29 on the Gold Coast.

Conference chairs National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF) Director Professor Jean Palutikof said "The science tells us that climate change is happening faster than we thought and that the 'window' for us to adapt and prepare is smaller than we thought. Australia is already experiencing the effects of climate change and is likely to be one of the most severely affected amongst developed countries."

"Regardless of what mitigation actions we take now as a nation or globally to cut greenhouse gas emissions, it is too late to 'mitigate our way out of the problem' - we will need a mixture of adaptation and mitigation measures." said Jean Palutikof.

CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship Director Dr Andrew Ash said more than 1000 scientists and decision makers from developed and developing countries were expected to attend. "The impacts from climate change will be felt first and most severely in developing countries, and international co-operation is required to ensure developing countries have the tools and resources they need to adapt."

============================================

Matthew Wright from Beyond Zero Emisions explains the plan to reduce Australia's carbon emissions to zero by 2020 in a series of 5 youtube videos. here is the first one:




Takver is a citizen journalist from Melbourne who has been writing on Climate Change issues and protests including Rising Sea Level, Ocean acidification, Environmental and social Impacts since 2004.

Two year Interim Carbon Tax as a compromise to break Senate Deadlock?

Two weeks ago the Greens took up one of Professor Ross Garnaut's suggestions of an interim carbon tax until the nation finalises its carbon emissions reduction strategy. Given the current political deadlock in the Senate, the proposal has received the support of Garnault saying it is "'another politically practical way forward".

The proposal is for an interim two year carbon tax of $23 per tonne carbon tax, and $5 billion for households assistance to invest in renewable energy and energy efficiency. The scheme could begin as soon as July 2010 and would apply only to the 1000 worst polluters in Australia.

"The Greens stand ready, willing and able to work with Mr Rudd and Minister Wong to make the emissions trading scheme workable, but we cannot and will not support a scheme which, as it stands, is nothing more than multi-billion dollar smoke and mirrors." said Greens Climate Change Spokesperson Senator Christine Milne.

The Government's legislation is due to be reintroduced for a third time this month and faces defeat from the Coalition benches for going "too far", and from the Greens for being "too compromised" by too many concessions and free permits to the polluters.

Negotiations between Climate Change Minister Penny Wong and the Greens are continuing. To achieve passage of legislation through the Senate the Government requires another 7 votes: the Greens have 5, then there is Independent Senator Xenophon (who may be sympathetic), and Family First Senator Steve Fielding (strongly tending towards climate change skeptism), or Senators from the Coalition to cross the floor.

"Our interim proposal is designed to be strengthened as time passes, while the CPRS is impossible to strengthen without tens of billions more dollars flowing to polluters."

"The CPRS will not and must not pass in its current form, but this interim proposal has a real chance. Let's seize it and get Australia moving towards the zero carbon future." concluded Christine Milne.

The Australian Conservation Foundation also welcomed the proposal. "Climate change needs big, innovative solutions rather than a piecemeal approach. The bottom line for climate policy is the ability to achieve deep cuts in emissions, and an effective carbon price passes that test." said Tony Mohr, ACF Climate Change Program Manager.

"Businesses want a green light to invest in clean technology, and Australians want a green light on emissions cuts. Both need a price on greenhouse pollution." Mr Mohr said.

Sources:

• Australian Conservation Foundation Media Release - Jan 22, 2010 - Greens proposal for price on pollution welcomed


• Greens Media Release, Jan 22, 2010 - Future tax system must deliver safe climate


• Greens Media Release, Jan 25, 2010 - Greens welcome Garnaut backing

Takver is a citizen journalist from Melbourne who has been writing on Climate Change issues and protests including Rising Sea Level, Ocean acidification, Environmental and social Impacts since 2004.

Greenwash: Investors push Governments for Cap and Trade Action

Australian, European and U.S. investor groups representing $13 trillion in assets said in a statement issued at a meeting at the UN in New York on Thursday "we cannot wait for a global treaty," They called on the U.S. Congress and other global decision-makers "to take rapid action" on carbon emission limits, energy efficiency, renewable energy, financing mechanisms and other policies that will accelerate clean energy investment and job creation.

Why the strong push from the Investment sector for Government Climate Action? It could be just altruism. But, as always the devil is in the detail. In this case, the push is for carbon trading - Emissions Trading Schemes like Kevin Rudd's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), often referred to as Cap and Trade.

I can understand that these people want the Government to set the rules for climate action and reducing carbon use - this gives the market predictability and stability for basing investment decisions on. But these same people have a vested interest in another financial market - the carbon market. It's another way for them to make money. All well and good, except if it fails, so does the prospects for avoiding dangerous climate change.



The meeting was the Investor Summit on Climate Risk, a meeting of 450 global investors at the United Nations that included UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, United States Special Envoy for Climate Change Todd Stern, billionaire investor George Soros, and former Vice President Al Gore.

Australia was represented at the meeting by the Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC) which represents investors of over $500bn across all sectors of the Australian economy, including many retail and industry superannuation funds.

The meeting called for a legally-binding climate agreement this year with comprehensive long-term measures for mitigation, forest protection, adaptation, finance, and technology transfer, including a global emission reduction target of 50-85% by 2050, consistent with estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

"Investors are poised and ready to scale up investments in building the low carbon economy, but without policies that create a stable investment environment our hands are tied," said Anne Stausboll, chief executive officer of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), one of larghe largest public pension funds in the USA with more than $205 billion in assets. "U.S. leadership is critical in this regard, including U.S. Senate action to limit and put a price on carbon emissions."

"What investors need most from national and state legislatures are transparency, longevity and certainty," said Kevin Parker, global head of Deutsche Asset Management and member of Deutsche Bank's Group Executive Committee. "Until the U.S. Congress passes climate regulation, America will be at a competitive disadvantage in the development of renewable energy and other climate change industries."

Al Gore, in his speech, drew upon a report that Investment Managers Still Lagging in Response to Climate Change Risks and Opportunities, pointed out that the vast majority of the world's largest investment managers are not factoring climate-related trends into their short- and long-term investment decision-making,

On emission reductions, the statement said "We call on developed countries to establish emission reduction targets of 80-95% by 2050, with interim targets of 25-40% by 2020. Developing countries should have clear action plans that deliver measurable and verifiable emission reductions compared to projected levels."

The statement called for "national regulators worldwide, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, to require companies to disclose to their investors material climate-related risks and the programs in place to manage those risks."

Excellent stuff! But keep in mind most of the people at this summit are part of the financial and investment establishment. They have a vested interest in market based policies to establish a carbon price - in the Cap and Trade Emissions Trading Systems in place in Europe and proposed for the USA and Australia.

Their statement calls for "governments to put in place market-based policies to establish a carbon price that will signal that investments in carbon-intensive projects may yield lower returns, that new and established zero- or low-carbon technologies can be deployed profitably, and that investment in clean energy infrastructure will yield sound returns."

They "call on governments to support robust, transparent, well-governed markets that include mechanisms for directing private financial flows to low-carbon development in developed and developing countries."

Yet an emissions trading system has great dangers of rorting and not sufficiently encouraging investment to low carbon or carbon neutral projects. Stopping government fossil fuel subsidies should be a major priority, and placing a tax on carbon where it is produced, with subsidies to low carbon alternatives and dividends to the population should be considered.



Friends of the Earth UK prepared a report on carbon trading in November 2009 - 'A Dangerous Obsession (PDF)' - in which they outline that carbon trading could be the next 'sub-prime' crisis.

'A Dangerous Obsession' focuses on the buying and selling of a new artificial commodity - the right to emit carbon dioxide - which the UK and other developed country governments want to see expanded into a massive worldwide market.

According to FoE UK the trade in carbon permits and credits, mainly based in Europe, was worth $126 billion in 2008 and is predicted to balloon to $3.1 trillion by 2020 if a global carbon market takes off.

Releasing the report in November Friends of the Earth's international climate campaigner and author of the report Sarah Jayne-Clifton said: "Pushing a world carbon market as part of a global agreement to tackle climate change risks a double whammy of financial and environmental disaster.

"Carbon trading is failing dismally at reducing emissions, yet allows speculators to grow rich from the climate crisis and hands politicians and industry a get-out clause for polluting business as usual.

"Science tells us rich countries must act first and fast to cut their emissions at home if we are to avert climate catastrophe - and support poorer countries with adequate public money to grow cleanly and adapt to the effects of climate change which they are already feeling.

"The credit crunch has taught us that Governments, not markets are best placed to safeguard our future - at this critical point in the fight against climate change Ministers must step in and lead the way with a new, direct approach to tackling carbon emissions to create a safe and green future for us all."

So what will Australia's CPRS do? Emissions won't begin to fall until 2033, according to Treasury modelling. And the reason they will fall then is the 'predicted' introduction of 'clean coal' technology and import carbon permits from developing countries. Sounds pretty shonky to me. Climate greenwash!

Background

• Investor Network on Climate Risk, Jan 14, 2009 - Investors Representing $13 Trillion Call on U.S. and Other Countries to Move Quickly to Adopt Strong Climate Change Policies


• The Investor Statement on Catalyzing Investment in a Low-Carbon Economy (PDF). The Investor Statement was endorsed by four groups representing more than 190 investors. The groups are the Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC) and the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI).


• Investor Network on Climate Risk, Jan 6, 2009 - New Report: Investment Managers Still Lagging in Response to Climate Change Risks and Opportunities


• Friends of the Earth Australia Media Release, Nov 5, 2009 - carbon trading 'the next Sub Prime' - new report

Takver is a citizen journalist from Melbourne who has been writing on Climate Change issues and protests including Rising Sea Level, Ocean acidification, Environmental and social Impacts since 2004.

Australia shamed with a Climate Fossil award over carbon capture and storage

Competition for the Climate Fossil of the Day Award is very stiff at climate talks. The satirical awards are a popular event presented by Climate Action Network activists.Three ‘Fossil of The Day’ awards are given to the countries who perform the worst during the past day’s negotiations at UN climate change conferences. On day two of the Copenhagen Climate talks Australia has shared in a Second Place Award as part of the Umbrella Group for proposing at a Subsidiary Body for Scientific and Technological Advice (SBSTA) plenary that carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects should qualify as Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) projects.

Greenpeace False Hope Report on CCS (PDF) - May 2008 | Flickr Photoset



The Clean Development Mechanism generates carbon credits from projects in the developing world which are then sold to companies and countries who can claim pollution reductions against those credits.

The Umbrella Group is composed of Industrialized non-EU countries: Canada, Iceland, Japan, Kazakhstan, New Zealand, Norway, Russian Federation, Ukraine, United States and Australia. The chair of the Umbrella group is presently Australia. The Award citation says:

"The brollies have gotten used to subsidizing the coal and oil industries in their own countries-but do they really have to subsidize the same dirty companies in developing countries too? The CDM should be reserved for projects that move developing countries towards actual clean energy solutions. Umbrella Group, good luck capturing and sequestering your Fossil Award!"

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is not presently a viable technology for reduction of greenhouse gas emissions from coal fired power stations and is not expected, even by its proponents, to be commercially viable until at least 2020, and deployment of CCS at utility scale is not expected before 2030, by which time emissions need to have peaked and be rapidly reducing.

A 2008 Greenpeace report - False Hope: Why carbon capture and storage won't save the climate - says that CCS wastes energy by using between 10 and 40% of the energy produced by a power station. At this stage Safe and permanent storage of CO2 cannot be guaranteed with just minor leakage rates undermining any climate mitigation efforts. CCS could lead to a doubling of plant costs, and an electricity price increase of 21-91%., diverting money from sustainable solutions. There are significant liability risks posed by CCS including threats to health, ecosystems and the climate. It is unclear how severe these risks will be.

"Australia must stop pushing this clean coal pipe dream at Copenhagen," Damien Lawson, climate justice spokesperson, Friends of the Earth Australia said today.

"There are already enormous problems with the Clean Development Mechanism. Including carbon capture will only create more loopholes for polluters to claim credits. The Rudd government's own Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute says that it will take at least 20 years for any projects to be economically viable and that is only if the safety and technical issues can be overcome."

"Including CCS in the Copenhagen agreement will have the incredibly perverse outcome that would mean that companies who burn coal will be able to purchase reduction credits from companies that are burning coal with CCS in the developing world."

"This is further evidence that the big polluters, in particular the coal industry, are driving Australia's climate agenda." said Lawson.

In July 2009 Kevin Rudd launched the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute at a G8 event jointly hosted by the President of the United States, Barack Obama and Italy's Prime Minister, Silvio Berlusconi in L'Aquila, Italy. The Australian Government has committed A$100 million a year to support CCS work and a further A$2 billion to support the construction of CCS demonstration projects in Australia.

Sources:

* Prime Minister of Australia Media Release, July 10, 2009 - Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute launched
* Friends of the Earth Australia media release, Dec 9 - 2009 - Australia selling clean coal pipe dream at Copenhagen
* Greenpeace Report - May 2008 - False Hope: Why carbon capture and storage won't save the climate
* Fossil of the Day Award, Dec 8, 2009 - Fossil Awards Day 2: World's Shame Rains on Ukraine

Takver is a citizen journalist from Melbourne who has been writing on Climate Change issues and protests including Rising Sea Level, Ocean acidification, Environmental and social Impacts since 2004.