3 March 2015

ACT Government leads nation on climate change action

| Canfan
Join the conversation
19

Canberra’s environmental watchdog has given the thumbs up to the ACT Government’s response to climate change in the region, Minister for the Environment Simon Corbell and Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment Robert Neil announced today.

The commissioner today released his report into the government’s implementation of the ACT’s climate change policy, which provides an assessment of the ACT’s steps so far to reduce emissions and adapt to future climate change.

The report found that government policy, combined with greenhouse gas reduction targets, has positioned the ACT among the world’s most progressive jurisdictions in terms of mitigating the impacts of climate change.

“I am pleased that this report recognises the considerable progress of the ACT in implementing some of the world’s most progressive emission reduction targets,” Corbell said.

“The ACT Government will study the challenges and opportunities presented in this report and make a formal response later this year.”

Neil said the ACT Government was responding to the challenges and opportunities posed by climate change through its targets of 90 per cent renewable energy use by 2020 and 40 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions below 1990 levels by 2020, which were the most ambitious legislative targets of any state or territory in Australia.

“For the territory to continue adapting to climate change and leading a sustainable future it is vital that climate change policies, including AP2 and the actions it contains, remain contemporary and are continually reviewed and updated,” Mr Neil said.

“There is still a long road ahead. Climate change is, and will continue to be, one of the biggest challenges facing governments around the globe. I look forward to continuing to work with the ACT Government on the implementation of strategies to address climate change.”

ACT Government policies have already positioned the territory at the forefront of climate change adaptation and mitigation in Australia. A solar reverse auction and a wind reverse auction have resulted in more than 240 megawatt capacity of renewable energy being secured for the ACT.

Combined with the 45 megawatt capacity of household rooftop solar already operating in the ACT, the large-scale solar and wind farms commissioned through the reverse auctions will supply about 40 per cent of the ACT’s electricity needs by 2017.

The cost of meeting the 90 per cent renewable energy target is expected to peak at about $4.67 per household per week in 2020 before diminishing afterwards. This cost is offset by savings through government mandated programs like the Energy Efficiency Improvement Scheme.

AP2: a new climate change strategy and action plan for the Australian Capital Territory is the second action plan and update to the ACT Climate Change Strategy: weathering the change (Action Plan 1 2007–2011).

The policy contains a set of actions designed to achieve the ACT’s legislated 2020 greenhouse gas emissions reduction target.

The Office of the Commissioner for Environment and Sustainability’s Implementation Status Report: A report on the implementation of AP2: a new climate change strategy and action plan for the Australian Capital Territory is available at www.environmentcommissioner.act.gov.au/

(Simon Corbell media release)

Join the conversation

19
All Comments
  • All Comments
  • Website Comments
LatestOldest

JC said :

dungfungus said :

switch said :

rommeldog56 said :

I just love it nowdays when people, especially politicians – try to make the cost of living increase they pile onto ratepayers/residents seemingly weekly now, sound like just a little increase by quoting it as per day. I wonder when they will revert to quoting increases by the hour?

Can’t say I have much time for Senator Ricky Muir, especially the way he got elected, but his maiden speech certainly hit the nail on the head with this point: “To everybody sitting in this chamber, if you think $20 a week is nothing, or just a pack of cigarettes or a few beers, you have never lived in the real world”

Why isn’t there an emissions tax on cigarette smoke? It’s about the only pollution that is known to kill people.

There is. It’s about 63c per cigarette. Ideally the filthy things should just be banned but guess the tax rate is sending a price point message to the public.

Oh there are plenty of emissions that are proven to kill people so not sure where you get the idea that cigarettes are the only known source. Though not sure the point of your post because climate change is all about pollution killing the planet not people directly.

I think your version of the “pollution tax” on cigarettes is not specifically a pollution tax – please tell me if I am wrong.
I mean, the 63c per cigarette is paid up front whether the fag is used or not. The Gillard carbon tax was paid in arrears based of known consumption.
Funny how a price point message for cigarettes is acceptable but the proposed bulk-billing co-payment is not.
My point was cigarettes are a known killer but “climate change” doesn’t.

dungfungus said :

switch said :

rommeldog56 said :

I just love it nowdays when people, especially politicians – try to make the cost of living increase they pile onto ratepayers/residents seemingly weekly now, sound like just a little increase by quoting it as per day. I wonder when they will revert to quoting increases by the hour?

Can’t say I have much time for Senator Ricky Muir, especially the way he got elected, but his maiden speech certainly hit the nail on the head with this point: “To everybody sitting in this chamber, if you think $20 a week is nothing, or just a pack of cigarettes or a few beers, you have never lived in the real world”

Why isn’t there an emissions tax on cigarette smoke? It’s about the only pollution that is known to kill people.

There is. It’s about 63c per cigarette. Ideally the filthy things should just be banned but guess the tax rate is sending a price point message to the public.

Oh there are plenty of emissions that are proven to kill people so not sure where you get the idea that cigarettes are the only known source. Though not sure the point of your post because climate change is all about pollution killing the planet not people directly.

switch said :

rommeldog56 said :

I just love it nowdays when people, especially politicians – try to make the cost of living increase they pile onto ratepayers/residents seemingly weekly now, sound like just a little increase by quoting it as per day. I wonder when they will revert to quoting increases by the hour?

Can’t say I have much time for Senator Ricky Muir, especially the way he got elected, but his maiden speech certainly hit the nail on the head with this point: “To everybody sitting in this chamber, if you think $20 a week is nothing, or just a pack of cigarettes or a few beers, you have never lived in the real world”

Why isn’t there an emissions tax on cigarette smoke? It’s about the only pollution that is known to kill people.

From these comments it seems that, even in the People’s Republic of Canberra, the climate scare is over.

Simon’s still spending outher people’s money on his enviro-socialist dreams however.

Proboscus said :

Australian oyster farmers have been keeping detailed records for nearly a century and they have said that the oceans haven’t risen and the water temperatures haven’t changed. But as long as governments keep paying “climate experts” to say what they tell them to say, then I guess we’ll keep getting the same propaganda year after year.

If you want to make a difference at the next ACT election and stop ridiculous decisions like this being made, remember that a voting for the Greens is really a vote for the Labor Party and they’re the ones who have been flushing your hard-earned down the toilet.

I think the majority of posts on this thread clearly favour oysters to tripe.

rommeldog56 said :

I just love it nowdays when people, especially politicians – try to make the cost of living increase they pile onto ratepayers/residents seemingly weekly now, sound like just a little increase by quoting it as per day. I wonder when they will revert to quoting increases by the hour?

Can’t say I have much time for Senator Ricky Muir, especially the way he got elected, but his maiden speech certainly hit the nail on the head with this point: “To everybody sitting in this chamber, if you think $20 a week is nothing, or just a pack of cigarettes or a few beers, you have never lived in the real world”

pajs said :

A few dollars a week per household for 90% renewables seems like a good start, and a decent example.

Thats about $250pa – probably for zero outcome – except for being a “leader”.

I just love it nowdays when people, especially politicians – try to make the cost of living increase they pile onto ratepayers/residents seemingly weekly now, sound like just a little increase by quoting it as per day. I wonder when they will revert to quoting increases by the hour ?

It may not sound like much per day when taken in isolation but added to all the other cost increases the ACT Labor/Greens Government has been piling on and taken in aggregate, it IS a lot. It’s not like that $250pa will be the only increase in electricity prices by 2020 either – its just an artificial increase – like a compulsory surcharge or a tax.

I also love the comment abut this new tax/surcharge “diminishing” after 2020. Yeah – by how much ? If u can quantify the cost increase – you must be able to quantify the cost decrease and lock that in to ACTEWs forward pricing – assuming that decrease, however small, will be passed on the consumers of course.

Ok – so its “green” but bugger pensioners, the disabled, self funded retirees, average wage earners and higer users like families. Who cares about them anyway. Go green – at all costs !

wildturkeycanoe said :

$4.67 per week won’t even get your roof top solar installation paid off in ten years, if it could I’d be buying a system right now and disconnecting from the grid.
The government’s “Mandated Programs” sounds to me like taxes that are required to be paid, nothing voluntary about that whatsoever. We will all get stung through our rates to pay for these targets.
So, whilst wealthy businesses, government and private purchasers get subsidized to put solar on their roofs and properties the rest of us watch as electricity prices get higher and higher. This is a natural product of supply and demand. If there are less people buying coal fired electricity, the retailers will have to bump up their prices to stay operational.
So by 2020 the ones who were wealthy enough to cash in on these incentives will be getting cheap power and the rest of us hard working and disadvantaged scum will pay through the nose to keep our heaters running in winter.
I just love how governments look after their mates, businesses and cashed up friends even when it is in the guise of doing something good for everyone, but neglect to tell the working class man how much worse off he will be.
Climate change, bah humbug.

Don’t forget about retirees on fixed and falling incomes who are hoping the climate is warming because that will mitigate heating bills.

Australian oyster farmers have been keeping detailed records for nearly a century and they have said that the oceans haven’t risen and the water temperatures haven’t changed. But as long as governments keep paying “climate experts” to say what they tell them to say, then I guess we’ll keep getting the same propaganda year after year.

If you want to make a difference at the next ACT election and stop ridiculous decisions like this being made, remember that a voting for the Greens is really a vote for the Labor Party and they’re the ones who have been flushing your hard-earned down the toilet.

wildturkeycanoe8:08 am 07 Mar 15

$4.67 per week won’t even get your roof top solar installation paid off in ten years, if it could I’d be buying a system right now and disconnecting from the grid.
The government’s “Mandated Programs” sounds to me like taxes that are required to be paid, nothing voluntary about that whatsoever. We will all get stung through our rates to pay for these targets.
So, whilst wealthy businesses, government and private purchasers get subsidized to put solar on their roofs and properties the rest of us watch as electricity prices get higher and higher. This is a natural product of supply and demand. If there are less people buying coal fired electricity, the retailers will have to bump up their prices to stay operational.
So by 2020 the ones who were wealthy enough to cash in on these incentives will be getting cheap power and the rest of us hard working and disadvantaged scum will pay through the nose to keep our heaters running in winter.
I just love how governments look after their mates, businesses and cashed up friends even when it is in the guise of doing something good for everyone, but neglect to tell the working class man how much worse off he will be.
Climate change, bah humbug.

pajs said :

A few dollars a week per household for 90% renewables seems like a good start, and a decent example.

But it achieves nothing.

The Government’s greenhouse emission targets rely on more specific targets such as the Government’s 2012 election commmitment to achieve a 10.5% adult public transport commute mode share by 2016.

The 2004 Sustainable Transport Plan aimed to increase the public transport mode share to 9% by 2011, but between 2005 and 2011 it fell slightly to 7.8%.

Since 2011 the number of people catching ACTION buses has increased, but the population has grown faster. The public transport mode share is on track to drop to 7.6% by 2016.

The good news is that, if you believe Capital Metro’s Business Case, the public transport mode share is already 11%. Problem solved with the stroke of a pen!

rubaiyat said :

Yeah I don’t pay taxes because what difference can my money make?

…and taking a dump in the Cabinet Room, what the heck, if I don’t someone else will!

False equivalence.

Paying your taxes is required by law for the whole of Australia and does make a clear and quantifiable difference to the functioning of the Australian government. The correct comparison would be making taxes voluntary. Would you then pay your taxes even though your neighbours weren’t paying, and had no intention of paying theirs?

And I don’t know why you want to take a dump in the cabinet room, but be my guest, that’d be hilarious.

Yeah I don’t pay taxes because what difference can my money make?

…and taking a dump in the Cabinet Room, what the heck, if I don’t someone else will!

A few dollars a week per household for 90% renewables seems like a good start, and a decent example.

Yay, I feel all warm and fuzzy inside whilst making absolutely zero difference to the onset or effects of climate change.

That’s how we’re supposed to respond right?

The Labor-Greens leading with other peoples money. Seems pretty easy to do.

wildturkeycanoe10:21 pm 05 Mar 15

And the A.C.T contributes how many millionths of percent to the global output? A drop in the ocean won’t change a thing, when the rest of the world does nothing [if in fact there is such a thing as global warming, I only got to use our pool for about a week this year, so cold…Brrrrr]

Queanbeyanite9:00 pm 05 Mar 15

OK Simon, how many degrees celsius lower will it now be in 2100?

Go…

Daily Digest

Want the best Canberra news delivered daily? Every day we package the most popular Riotact stories and send them straight to your inbox. Sign-up now for trusted local news that will never be behind a paywall.

By submitting your email address you are agreeing to Region Group's terms and conditions and privacy policy.