Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Chamberlains - complete legal services for business

Greens stick their oar into emissions reductions

By johnboy - 2 March 2012 68

The Greens’s Shane Rattenbury has announced the Green’s preferred path to reaching the ACT’s stated target of cutting greenhouse emissions by 40% in the next 8 years.

Of the 5 options outlined, the Greens favour Pathway 2, which combines building efficiency measures, sustainable transport, energy-from-waste and renewable energy.

“Pathway 2 comes closest to delivering the kind of structural changes needed to ensure a sustainable future for Canberrans,” Greens climate change spokesperson, Shane Rattenbury MLA, said today.

Commenting on the remaining four pathways, the Greens cautioned against over-reliance upon carbon offsetting and gas.

“Current offset markets are highly volatile and don’t deliver long-term structural change. It is ludicrous to suggest that we should meet our mitigation goals by offsetting alone, yet one of the Government’s proposed pathways does just that.

“As for gas, the Greens are concerned about the rise in gas’ popularity catalysing an increase in the environmentally damaging practice of coal seam gas (CSG) extraction.

“Gas features prominently in the strategy, but there is no mention of how the gas would be sourced. With the rapid growth of the CSG industry, and the serious questions it raises, the environmental benefits of gas are not as clear cut as many people think.

“No-one seems to have clicked that gas facilities’ 30-40 pay-back times are not compatible with ambitious 2020 cuts. Compare this with wind, which could become a zero-cost fuel within the next decade.

“Renewables are also not being given their full glory in any of the options. We have great potential for local large-scale and distributed renewable energy generation yet the Government seems to prefer gas.”

As such, the Greens are encouraging the Government to consider increasing its Renewable Energy Target to stimulate greater local renewable generation.

The Greens’ full submission is available.

What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments
68 Responses to
Greens stick their oar into emissions reductions
1
breda 11:42 am
02 Mar 12
#

“Compare this with wind, which could become a zero-cost fuel within the next decade.”

Zero cost? You mean, pixies will build the windmills, fairies will pay the landowners, leprechauns will build the transmission infrastructure and elves will do the maintenance? And this invasion of supernatural beings will occur over the next ten years?

PS – windmills and associated infrastructure are built from concrete, steel and a range of other fabricated products. Regrettably, the manufacture of these products is not able to be done using wind power.

Idiots.

Report this comment

2
Jethro 1:17 pm
02 Mar 12
#

breda said :

Idiots.

The same word could be used for people who deny the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.

Report this comment

3
welkin31 1:32 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Yes and the IPCC which pulls together the work of – “…the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.” – a consensus propped up by $Zillions of taxpayer funds – that same IPCC has made an art form for decades of trivializing the role of the sun in our climate.

Report this comment

4
pajs 1:54 pm
02 Mar 12
#

welkin31 said :

Yes and the IPCC which pulls together the work of – “…the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.” – a consensus propped up by $Zillions of taxpayer funds – that same IPCC has made an art form for decades of trivializing the role of the sun in our climate.

You do realise that this is a myth? That we’ve been recently going through a period of lower total solar irradiance, while temperatures have increased?

Maybe have a look at what the science says, via http://www.skepticalscience.com/solar-activity-sunspots-global-warming.htm

Report this comment

5
Jim Jones 2:34 pm
02 Mar 12
#

welkin31 said :

Yes and the IPCC which pulls together the work of – “…the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.” – a consensus propped up by $Zillions of taxpayer funds – that same IPCC has made an art form for decades of trivializing the role of the sun in our climate.

Yep, it’s a scam. All the world’s scientists are engaged in a gigantic conspiracy against the rest of us.

The only ones that aren’t afraid to tell the truth are right-wing shock-jocks and people that work for oil companies.

Report this comment

6
housebound 2:46 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Windmills don’t grow on trees. Someone has to make them.

Climate skeptics and believers alike should be able to agree on that one.

Report this comment

7
Diggety 3:34 pm
02 Mar 12
#

““Renewables are also not being given their full glory in any of the options. We have great potential for local large-scale and distributed renewable energy generation yet the Government seems to prefer gas.”” -Shane Rattenbury

The reason Governments (ones taking a pragmatic approach) prefer gas over renewables is because:

– capital costs ($/kWe installed) are lower
– CO2 abatement costs ($/ton) are lower
– electricity costs ($/kWh) are lower

The Greens are clueless when it comes to the costs and capabilities of renewable technologies. Renewables (geothermal, wind. solar thermal & solar PV) need more development to address their drawbacks. And there is not much allocated for that in the carbon tax plan.

Report this comment

8
Solidarity 3:49 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Gotta say it, yet again.

Nuclear.

Report this comment

9
Ben_Dover 3:55 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Jim Jones said :

Yep, it’s a scam. All the world’s scientists are engaged in a gigantic conspiracy against the rest of us.

The only ones that aren’t afraid to tell the truth are right-wing shock-jocks and people that work for oil companies.

That’s a rather silly comment.

Report this comment

10
Smeg 4:26 pm
02 Mar 12
#

I struggle to see how people can write this off as stupid. It seems to me that the greens simple look move us to a type 1 civilisation. Everyone stuck on the concept of fossil fuels (yes gas is a fossil fuel) is still living in a type 0 civilization and needs to wake up.

Gas is just a replacement for the issues of current fossil fuel it is destined for the same failures as oil and coal. ie making it a dirty place to live.

It’s the equivalent of stabbing yourself with a spoon rather than a knife. It will take a little longer but the outcome is the same and it probably hurts more.

Zero cost does not imply that it will cost nothing to make the power but that it will cost the government nothing to support it as it is currently subsidized to make it cost the same amount as fossil fuel. When enough research has actually been done this should equalize and make a situation where it costs the same or less. Due to no requirement other than minimal upkeep.

The issue most people fail to see is that new energy sources cost capital to build in the first place. Fossil fuel mines and power plants did in the beginning too. But that is old technology. We need new tech to push us into a type 1 civilization.

Report this comment

11
welkin31 4:33 pm
02 Mar 12
#

I wonder if the Greens realize that gas turbine power such as that proposed for Dalton is needed to safeguard smooth operation of the grid from the erratic contribution from wind power.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-news/dalton-fired-up-over-power-plant-20120226-1twmw.html#ixzz1nYClUu3G
The need for this compensation is growing as our great and wise Govt oversees the expansion of wind power.

Report this comment

12
SnapperJack 4:42 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Jim Jones said :

welkin31 said :

Yes and the IPCC which pulls together the work of – “…the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.” – a consensus propped up by $Zillions of taxpayer funds – that same IPCC has made an art form for decades of trivializing the role of the sun in our climate.

Yep, it’s a scam. All the world’s scientists are engaged in a gigantic conspiracy against the rest of us.

The only ones that aren’t afraid to tell the truth are right-wing shock-jocks and people that work for oil companies.

Climate science? More like Climate Scientology.

Report this comment

13
affordable 5:16 pm
02 Mar 12
#

all the worlds scientists ( 100% ? ) involved in a conspiracy, probably not, but I bet they are all after more funding as they sure got it right when they said no more rain a few years back when we were going to drink sewerage water

Report this comment

14
Jethro 5:34 pm
02 Mar 12
#

Solidarity said :

Gotta say it, yet again.

Nuclear.

Solidarity – I’ve been open to the idea of nuclear. However, the more I have looked into it, the less convinced I’ve become. The financial costs of establishing nuclear simply don’t make it feasible. Not to mention, it isn’t actually carbon neutral.

Report this comment

15
Jethro 5:42 pm
02 Mar 12
#

SnapperJack said :

Jim Jones said :

welkin31 said :

Yes and the IPCC which pulls together the work of – “…the very vast scientific consensus on the causes of our changing climate.” – a consensus propped up by $Zillions of taxpayer funds – that same IPCC has made an art form for decades of trivializing the role of the sun in our climate.

Yep, it’s a scam. All the world’s scientists are engaged in a gigantic conspiracy against the rest of us.

The only ones that aren’t afraid to tell the truth are right-wing shock-jocks and people that work for oil companies.

Climate science? More like Climate Scientology.

Yes. The culminated efforts of thousands of scientists over a period of decades, in which they rigorously collate and assess data and test AGW against other possible theories to explain our changing climate is EXACTLY the same as a cult started by a science fiction writer.

Report this comment

1 2 3 5

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2016 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.

Search across the site