A cool $100 Million to keep Canberra Cool

Kramer 29 July 2007 25

On Friday Jon Stanhope announced the ACT Govt’s intiatives to combat climate change.

So is Jon just blowng hot air? or is this finally some sensible ideas coming from the CM?

Here are the main points (copied straight from the media release):

– renewable energy targets, requiring all electricity retailers to source 10% of their energy from renewable sources by 2010 and 15% by 2020;
– a requirement that electricity customers be offered a green product as their first choice, meaning that Canberrans will need to ‘opt out of’, rather than ‘opt into’ green energy;
– progress towards carbon neutrality in all government buildings, and a $1 million revolving loan facility to allow agencies to pursue that goal;
– $20 million over 10 years to improve energy efficiency in government housing;
– $20 million over 10 years to help schools become carbon-neutral;
– a $1 million fund to help community and not-for-profit groups improve the energy performance of their premises and to promote energy efficiency to their stakeholders;
– differential stamp duty for drivers who buy low-emission vehicles;
– more than $1 million for efficient lamps in street lights, delivering a saving of more than 1100 tonnes of greenhouse gases a year;
– a feed-in tariff, so that renewable energy fed back into the grid from micro-generation is credited at a higher rate than energy bought from the retailer;
– a commitment to make public transport a real and viable alternative to car travel for more Canberrans, with further actions and investment to be announced once a number of current inquries and consultancies have been completed;
– the complete renewal of Canberra’s urban forests;
– the planting of a million new trees;
– and free bus travel for bike riders using bus bike racks.


What's Your Opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
25 Responses to A cool $100 Million to keep Canberra Cool
Filter
Order
Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 9:51 am 31 Jul 07

Yeah, that makes perfect sense:

1. Piss off voters
2. ???
3. Profit, because something happens at 2 that makes sure Actew can rig the election, and all that “protection” pays off.

F8cktards.

Thumper Thumper 9:04 am 31 Jul 07

Word is a new dam is now in planning to be started in 2008 or 2009 on the Molonglo.

Anyone substantiate that rumour?

Ralph Ralph 9:01 am 31 Jul 07

And without getting off their arses and building a new dam.

Maelinar Maelinar 8:57 am 31 Jul 07

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO CHE

Maelinar Maelinar 8:55 am 31 Jul 07

RESPECK CHE

Thumper Thumper 11:04 pm 30 Jul 07

Hear hear che….

che che 6:25 pm 30 Jul 07

I think Stanhope is looking after his mates at Actew by not encouraging people to get water tanks. He can keep the system of fear and reprisal of water restrictions without encouraging people to do anything about it.

RuffnReady RuffnReady 3:22 pm 30 Jul 07

BigDave, anthropogenic climate change is a fact. We are dumping over 2,000,000,000 tons of CO2 more than the global carbon cycle can assimilate EVERY YEAR (which is also exacerbated by widespread deforestation), have been for 50 years, yet you don’t think that’s changing the atmosphere? Also, the rate of change observed in the climate over the last 30 years exceeds that of natural cycles by 100 times. Want to know more, try reading at realclimate.org (a site manned by climatologists from all over the world), or go to your local uni and talk to an expert in the field.

As for solar cycles, they closely approximated temperature changes until about 40 years ago when temp and solar output suddenly diverged and have ever since. Climatologists will tell you that debate is over.

Either way, justbands nailed it. The global economy is enormously addicted to fossil fuels, which are due to run out this century… what happens then? How do you run the 1,000,000,000 vehicles across the globe, how do you produce the electricity that enables everything we do, eat, consume, etc?

We are living way beyond our means in terms of the carrying capacity of our environment, and unless we start to reduce our impact now, the crunch (environmental and economic) is coming.

pierce pierce 2:44 pm 30 Jul 07

Didn’t Ralph eat his crayon? Or was that the glue?

Irritating as the anti-green trolls might be Woody, it’s probably a waste of time to sledge them if they won’t even produce some kind of argument.

I for one would rather see a government taking action about a demonstrated problem than not so it can’t be a waste of money.

Onya Stanhope.

Ralph Ralph 1:13 pm 30 Jul 07

Take your pills.

Woody Mann-Caruso Woody Mann-Caruso 1:08 pm 30 Jul 07

I don’t get this climate change crap everyone seems to be shoving down our throats lately

That’s because you’re a retard, Big Dave. Science is hard, and so is math, but you’re forgiven because your “it has ever been thus” dribble makes it clear you’re either a pathological liar or some kind of pin-headed cretin who needs to be kept separate from the rest of us in case you breed. Here’s your crayon. Now sit in the corner with Ralph. Play nice.

Kramer Kramer 12:37 pm 30 Jul 07

I’m against the idea of being carbon neutral, it should be carbon NEGATIVE. People should doing more than just neutralising their carbon emissions, they should be improving the environment by making a net reduction in the atmospheric carbon levels.

justbands justbands 11:43 am 30 Jul 07

Whether or not global warming is a myth…does it matter? I really, really, REALLY can’t see the issue. What’s the harm in being more energy efficient & reducing our use/reliance on fossil fuels? Why do people get worked up about it? Global warming or not…fossil fuel usage is out of control, finite, expensive & damaging.

caf caf 11:42 am 30 Jul 07

hk0reduck: the 10-15% is a minimum, no matter how many “green power” customers they have – if the total amount of “green power” they sell happens to be more than that then they do have to buy enough to cover it. As mentioned here there’s an auditing mechanism to ensure that it’s all above board.

Ralph Ralph 9:57 am 30 Jul 07

No waste by 2010?

LG LG 9:21 am 30 Jul 07

I like the greenhouse gas reductions targets… great bit of politics by Jon…

Despite Labor party ‘policy’ (read jumping on the bandwagon) of a reduction by 20% by 2020 and 60% by 2050. Our leader has chosen 10% by 2020 but kept 60% by 2050.

As has been the case across the globe (see Canada as an example) – the people that set these warm and fuzzy goals are never in power when the due date hits. Looks great on a media release and then you don’t have to do anything to address the problem.

Thumper Thumper 9:14 am 30 Jul 07

Waste of money.

But at least we get to feel all warm and fuzzy and morally superior, as well as get praise from Bob Browne….

‘$20 million over 10 years to improve energy efficiency in government housing.’ Why not build some more bloody houses with this money! I’m sure people with no housing are wrapped that when they finally get a house after years and years they will know that it is state of the art energy efficient.

‘$20 million over 10 years to help schools become carbon-neutral.’ Carbon neutral is just a wank term that really means nothing. If you can buy and sell it then it makes no sense.

‘differential stamp duty for drivers who buy low-emission vehicles.’ Great, if you can afford a new vehicle.

The million trees planting is great idea.

‘the complete renewal of Canberra’s urban forests.’ Is this part of the one million or is this extra? Anyway, a good idea once again.

‘a commitment to make public transport a real and viable alternative to car travel for more Canberrans, with further actions and investment to be announced’ Sorry, can I stop laughing now. A ‘commitment’? Give me a break….

Ralph Ralph 9:02 am 30 Jul 07

waste

of

money

shame, stanhopeless.

Maelinar Maelinar 8:53 am 30 Jul 07

We are humankind, the right to control the climate is with us.

Terraforming 101.

BigDave BigDave 12:31 am 30 Jul 07

No, Myrmecia, what I’m saying is that good/bad weather, high/low temperatures, hurricanes etc. have all been happening since the year dot. Now all of a sudden, it’s been tagged with trendy names such as “climate change” or “global warming” when in fact it’s nothing of the sort. None of it can be claimed to be either of these made up notions. You can’t label any of it in those terms, it’s nature. Pure and simple.
But hey, maybe I’m wrong. 5 or 6 months ago we were baking, now we’re freezing. (Joke)

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top

Search across the site