Jump to content

Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme - Winners-Losers


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 23
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

QUOTE (Barra @ Friday 25/07/08 08:28pm)

Gidday Barra... been progressively reshaping the portfolio....in between margin calls...to a gas bias in expectation that gas-fired will be core to any transition from coal towards superlow carbon sources....wind & geothermal.

Hence AJL my primary holding.... their very promising NSW Gloucester CSG project well-sited for late 2009 delivery of gas into Newcastle/Sydney market. Also have effective control of Sydney Gas who in JV with AGL control all of Sydney Basin CSG resources.

Alone the AJL gas assets are attractive but the profitable services side of the business is compelling IMO...as of yesterday (Mitchell Drilling purchase) they own/operate some 85 drilling rigs focussed on the coal & CSG sector with huge& growing orderbook...as clients Origin, QGC, BUL, AOE, ESG (BHP Xstrata),etc strive to prove up reserves ahead of planned QLD LNG projects.

A lot of holes to be drilled ASAP....This high demand is bringing good margins on drilling services as the various players compete for drill rigs.

Also AJL benefit as major suppliers of pipeline construction & water services. And a flagged spinoff of CSG assets within next 6-12 months has the potential to keep mkt interest & unlock value within AJL not so far realised in the sp.


Following the gas theme...Also holding


SGL....AJL have incentive to realise SGL's potential.

NXS - Longtom gas to E.Coast & Condensate/LNG reserves & prospects NW WA.


CFU...onsite efficient cogeneration of electricity/heat from gas via ceramic fuel cells. International focus mainly Europe & Japan due to Govt support for the concept.

As yet there is little talk about Oz applications despite the growing number of gas sources here. IMO there is scope to use the fuelcell units in combo with CSG, ie, it reduces the need for inefficient transmission lines to remoter communities and can supplement other renewable sources;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: Col Lector on Friday 25/07/08 09:39pm

do you reckon eastern states will impose a 15% or more domgas reservation like WA has done ?


if more gas is to be used for powergen then you cant have too much going offshore as LNG


as CSG companies are being valued on a LNG conversion basis a reservation would prick their bubble


KRudd and Penny seem to think that you can put a dome over australia so any emission cuts we make will benefit us. I dont think australia will be able to afford their delusions.


AJL does seem interesting -- positioning themselves well

CFU ? - have to read up on it - sounds good


I like ESG as well - aim to supply nsw - powergen mainly


wonder when Concentrating Solar Power will get some IPOs here






Link to comment
Share on other sites

In reply to: Col Lector on Friday 25/07/08 10:39pm

G'day Col lector


Finally bought into AJL - better late than never I hope. Should have taken the hint when you suggested them back at $2.50! Like you say the combination of being a csg drilling specialist , pipe layer and emerging csg player puts them in the solid position.


That ESAA report claims about a third of Australia's coal plant could be retired under the CPRS- meaning we will see something like 15000MW of new power plant built over the next 10 years to replace coal plant and meet demand growth. It basically says it is almost impossible to achieve in the timefram, but you'd have to think some firms are going to make alot of money trying! Assuming renewables could take care of a third of that (a big assumption), it means we're going to see something like about 20 500MW CCGT's built in the medium term. I wonder which infrastructure/ engineering groups are positioned to take a slice of all this?


RE the dome over Australia Db , I don't know if Rudd/Wong are deluding themselves about the prospects for our ETS to do anything about climate change , I think they just see the sense in taking some of the pain now to ensure we get a seat at the table for the post Kyoto negotiations. JMO but I reckon it makes sense to be moving on it now rather than risk becoming an international pariah. The post Kyoto negotiations in 2011 will more than likely involve a push to incorporate tariffs against nations who do not tax carbon as a means to force the laggards to get on board. If that happens then within 5 years there will be no avoiding the cost of it all anyway and it is better to make structural changes in increments imo.


On renewable the Gov't dropped the ball by not allocating some funding in this years budget. Next year should be different , but best case the renewable energy players won't see any grants until the end of 2009 which is a bit of a joke as it leaves the onus on our suddenly risk averse capital markets. As such I don't know if we will see too many new solar projects get off the ground in the near future. Depends if there is anything concrete in the White Paper about how much money will flow where . Maybe if they specify how much money is on offer a few solar companies will spring up to get positioned?





Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 11 months later...

is our leader going to the Copenhagen show ? Copenhagen


The worldÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s war on carbon emissions isnÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢t going well. In just six months, the UN sponsored Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change will seek to launch a worldwide anti-carbon strategy with teeth. Billed by alarmists as ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“the last chance to save our planet,ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ all the signs are that Michael Jackson has a better chance of recording new material than Copenhagen has of delivering a meaningful international accord.




In May, India and China demanded 1 percent of the developed worldÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s GDP be committed to developing nations, by way of atoning for past carbon emissions


Atonement :biggrin: - carnival of the insanities - moonbats


little hope of agreement on anything of any real value



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

All aboard the carbon bandwagon


Robin Bromby | October 21, 2009

Article from: The Australian


"NOT that I'm biased or anything," says Geoff Evison, "but I think it's the greatest investment opportunity of a lifetime."


He is talking about the opportunity presented by fears of climate change or global warming, fears that the planet is choking, humans are ruining the world.


Of course, that bit about bias is Evison with tongue firmly in cheek. But he's deadly serious about the second part of that quote. So serious that his Arkx Carbon Fund has scrapped plans to raise $250 million and instead it is now putting a ceiling of $2 billion on what it hopes to manage some time in the future. That is still some way off, as Arkx still has to get the first $250m through the door. But the dream has grown.


Evison and his team are well and truly on board the carbon bandwagon.


That team includes former Colonial First State boss Chris Cuffe, ex Russell Investment Group director Stephen Roberts and first Citigroup Australasian equity research director Tim Buckley, not to mention Evison's co-managing director Lisa Wade.


His argument -- and it seems irrefutable -- is that the sheer weight of emissions mandates either already imposed or in the wings across North America, Europe, Australia and elsewhere is so great that huge quantities of financing are going to be involved. (However, it won't be an uninterrupted process: for example, there are reports that Germany's new government will cut solar subsidies to trim its budget.)


Evison is not just talking about trading various carbon emission derivatives. There is a huge push on the energy front, with a big switch to renewables. Arkx is thinking not just your odd wind farm here and there but the huge challenge in the US to wean that country off its $US700bn import bill for Middle East oil by investing in new energy sources.


So far Arkx has 27 companies in its portfolio, with an average market capitalisation of $US4bn. "We look for companies with proven technologies and positive cash flows -- not start-ups," he adds. Those investments include China's BYD Co, based in Shenzhen. It started as a battery maker but in 2002 moved across into building automobiles. It now produces a plug-in hybrid car. The compact F3 sedan has been China's top selling model for the past three months, and Evison expects BYD to move into fully electric cars and become China's largest automaker by 2015.


"We're not talking Noddy cars here, we're talking proper cars."


Another holding is the Arizona-based First Solar, which is building a 2gW solar power plant in China's Inner Mongolia autonomous region, an installation that will cover more ground than Manhattan and cost $US2bn.


Also held is Spain's Iberdrola, which claims to be the biggest wind farm operator in the world. This month it commissioned Arizona's first wind farm with 43mW capacity, a project that followed a 149mW wind farm in North Dakota.


Another fund with the same aim is CVC Sustainable Investments, but it has more of an Australian focus.


CVC Sustainable's portfolio includes Wind Corporation Australia, which has a small wind farm near Lithgow, NSW, with others planned; Pro-Pac Packaging and its biodegradable packaging products; Biodiesel Producers, making fuel from tallow and waste cooking oil; The Environmental Group, which has products for controlling air pollution, treating waste water and other technologies; HydroChile, an Australian company that is looking to build small run-of-river hydro schemes in Chile; and DoloMatrix, with its consultancy services for waste management and remediation of contaminated sites.


The fund's investment analyst, Jo Hume, believes that wind energy is going to be the big winner as Australia sets its sights on having 20per cent of its electricity coming from renewables by 2020. "Wind is the lowest cost large-scale renewable energy source available to Australia," she says.


Moreover, finance is readily available for wind because it is a proven technology. This means you can raise debt and not have to rely almost entirely on equity funding, as with some of the more recent renewable energy technologies.


After that, she thinks the big growth areas are businesses that instal solar water heating in homes and those selling photovoltaic panels to go on roofs so that householders can generate their own electricity.


With some of the companies held by CV Sustainable, you -- or your self-managed super fund -- can make direct investments: Pro-Pac (ASX:PPG), Environmental Group (ASX:EGL) and DoloMatrix (ASX:DMX) are listed on the Australian Securities Exchange. They're not the only listed opportunities. Just last week, for example, Carbon Conscious (ASX:CCF) signed off on a deal with BP. Carbon Conscious, which aims to plant mallee eucalypt trees on the less viable tracts of Australia's wheat belt regions as a means of sequestering carbon dioxide, will work with the oil major to plant 10million trees. BP is handing over $2.5m and both companies will benefit from the carbon offsets from the planting over the next 15 years.


Those plantings will occur next year, but BP has an option to invest more in Carbon Conscious for the 2011 and 2012 planting seasons, once regulatory certainty is established with the federal government's planned Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.


This follows an earlier deal, back in July, between Carbon Conscious and Origin Energy which -- if all the trees are planted over a three-year period -- would be a forest sink project involving $169m.


As the company points out, carbon forest sink plantings offer the only present domestic opportunity for large emitters to offset their carbon production other than through the government's auction scheme for carbon permits. Some estimates are that planting trees will allow sequestration spending of $10 a tonne of carbon, a cost lower that buying carbon credits.


The other listed Australia's largest provider of dedicated carbon sink plantings is CO2 Group (ASX:COZ). It is going down the same path, signing up the big emitters. One such deal involved Woodside Petroleum exercising an option in June under which CO2 will plant about $75m in new forest carbon sink trees. The two companies signed up in 2007 to operate a carbon offset program that would operate over 50 years, worth as much as $100m. CO2 will also plant mallee eucalypt trees in Western Australia.


If you buy the story that wind power is the way to go, then there is a growing listed opening here. One such is CBD Energy (ASX:CBD), which is soon to complete a small wind farm on New Zealand's remotest settlement, the Chatham Islands, and is planning two big such projects in NSW. In recent weeks it has bought into a plan to build a 50mW wind farm at Adjungbilly on the northwestern rim of the Snowy Mountains (this would power 15,000 houses and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 2.4m tonnes over its lifetime) and has just received an all-clear report on the environmental impact of a 70mW installation at Shannons Flat near Cooma.


Not only will the company be able to sell the power, but the wind farms will generate tradeable Renewable Energy Certificates.


New entrants emerge on a frequent basis as the carbon bandwagon gathers pace. m2m Corp (ASX:MCL), which older investors will remember from the days of the ASX's less than successful second board, now lives on the main board and does business in telecommunications and broadband zone. That was until last week when it bought unlisted Carbon Planet, a business providing carbon footprint analysis and remediation advice through accounting firms. The idea is to gain access, through the accountants' client lists, to companies that need to address the new carbon reduction era.


Funds or direct equity investment? It's a choice that has to be made, with the usual arguments (spreading your risk on one hand, keeping control of your money on the other).


But there is going to be some big money involved, one way or the other. As the World Bank reported earlier this year, during 2008 there was a doubling of the carbon credit marketdespite the global financial turmoil.


And there enough plenty of acronyms to keep Kevin Rudd delighted -- among them are EUAs (European Union allowances), EU ETS (European Union Emission Trading System), CDM (Kyoto's Clean Development Mechanism), not to mention our own CPRS and RECs.


For the individual investor, there's a big learning curve ahead. Not only do you have to get your head around the whole carbon issue, but you have to keep tabs on all the potential investment plays in renewables and clean energy, from the wind power and coal-seam gas of today to the wave power and hot rock geothermal of the future.


But it is all about money in the end.


As Evison of Arkx, a fund that's as environmentally aware as you can get, puts it: "We're not about saving the environment, we're focused on returns."


However, he adds an all-important rider. "But there is no contradiction between the two."


That means that an investor can have the peace of mind and conscience of both saving the planet and, with luck, making a pile of money.


And if it turns out this whole climate change concern is a furphy (and there's a chance that it is), then no harm done. You've done your bit, made your pile.


Whichever way it goes, the planet is safe, and you've got a bank balance as big as your carbon footprint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

G'day db76,


Not sure if you have seen this interview with Lord Monckton By Alan Jones. Interesting interview. Don't know if Monckton is being an alarmist or not.


Is the Copenhagen treaty about creating a world government? Alan Jones talks to Lord Monckton, British climate change skeptic, who says the Copenhagen treaty is about creating a world government. This interview was conducted late in October, and has attracted a large amount of worldwide attention.






Beware the UN's Copenhagen plot


SHAME on us all: on us in the media and on our politicians. Despite thousands of news reports, interviews, analyses, critiques and commentaries from journalists, what has the inquiring, intellectually sceptical media told us about the potential details of a Copenhagen treaty? And despite countless speeches, addresses, interviews, doorstops, moralising sermons from government ministers, pleas from Canberra for an outcome at Copenhagen, opposition criticism of government policy, what have our elected representatives told us about the potential details of a Copenhagen treaty?


With just over 40 days until more than 15,000 officials, advisers, diplomats, activists and journalists from more than 190 countries attend the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, we know nothing. Nothing about a climate change treaty that the Rudd government is keen to sign and one that will bind this country for years to come.


Of course, there is no final treaty as yet. That is what they are hoping to finalise in Copenhagen. But there are 181 pages that make up the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change dated September 15, 2009: a rough draft of what could be signed in Copenhagen. And yet, not one member of the media or political class has bothered to inform us about its contents as an important clue to what may happen in Copenhagen. The shame of that state of affairs started to trickle in last week.


Full Article:-



Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Carbon will crush manufacturing

YesterdayÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s carbon price announcement from the Prime Minister was, at heart, another manifestation of AustraliaÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s Dutch disease ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ that is, the hollowing out of domestic industries as a result of booming resource exports.

If a material carbon tax really is imposed on July 1 next year, and commodity prices and the Australian dollar have not corrected by then, manufacturing will be devastated.

In fact this whole carbon emissions issue is looking more and more like either a national emergency as great as any we have faced, or a reason for concerted national procrastination.

Australia has perhaps the greatest carbon abatement task of any nation in the world and it is rapidly getting bigger. If we actually do something serious about it, which has become more likely with the growing political power of the Greens, domestic industry will have to be rescued or it will be crushed.

Yet on current government policy and the best, most recent, official projections, Julia Gillard had no choice but to make yesterdayÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s announcement. And as my colleague Giles Parkinson wrote yesterday, it is as momentous as any previous structural reform to the Australian economy ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¦ if it happens.

Government and opposition policy is for an unconditional 5 per cent reduction in carbon emissions from 2000 levels by 2020. Government policy also requires 15 per cent reduction if ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“major economiesÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ agree to comparable reductions and 25 per cent if thereÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s global action sufficient to stabilise greenhouse gases at 450 parts per million. The Greens policy is for a 25 per cent unconditional reduction.

On February 9, the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency released new projections for Australian emissions in 2020. These showed that without further policy action, emissions in 2020 would now be 24 per cent above 2000 levels.But theyÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢re supposed to be 5 per cent below.

The official emission projection that the government is now working on is therefore 690 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalents in 2020. The level in 2000 was 558 Mt. Minus 5 per cent of that is 530 Mt, which in turn is 23 per cent below the 2020 projection.

The task moves to 15 per cent if ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“major economiesÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ do something, in which case the reduction task from the 2020 baseline rises to almost one-third.

The document issued by the Department two weeks ago said: ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“Growth to 2020 is dominated by emissions associated with the extraction and processing of energy resources driven by strong export demand.

ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“Fugitive emissions from coal mines and oil and gas projects, as well as direct fuel combustion emissions from LNG projects, account for almost half of the growth in Australia's total emissions from 2010 to 2020.

ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“While in previous decades, emissions from electricity generation have accounted for the majority of growth in emissions, from 2010 to 2020 they are projected to increase by only 6 per cent (or 12 Mt CO2-e), much lower than the historical growth rate. This is primarily due to the increased electricity generated by renewable technologies, promoted by the Renewable Energy Target.ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ

So AustraliaÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s greenhouse gas problem is switching from brown coal electricity generation to coal and gas exports, thanks to a combination of the RET and ChinaÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s demand for energy.

The abatement policies of both the government and the opposition (such as they are) focus almost entirely on domestic electricity generation and transport ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ the government through a tax on carbon and the Coalition through ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Â¦ÃƒƒÂ¢Ãƒ¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…âہ“direct actionÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’â€Å¡Ãƒƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚ÂÂ, which involves paying the Latrobe Valley generators to shut down or switch to natural gas ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ a very expensive and dodgy option, although it has the key benefit of allowing Tony Abbott to condemn LaborÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s great big new tax.

The fact is, however, that the Coalition will also have to impose a great big new tax in order to fund its direct action, especially in the light of the latest emission projections.

The only hope for Australia to escape the fate of a huge increase in costs, and a loss of both employment and wealth, is if world demand for coal and LNG weakens, either because of action elsewhere ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ mainly China ÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã‚¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬Ãƒâ€Â¦ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢â‚¬Å¡Ã‚¬Ãƒâ€¦Ã¢â‚¬Å“ to reduce fossil fuel power generation, or because of another global recession.

Right now, IÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢d say the latter is the more likely. With inflation now on the move because of rising oil and food prices, and some kind of serious fiscal adjustment inevitable in the United States, another recession is on the horizon.


AustraliaÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢s terms of trade and national income would also collapse again, but at least we wonÃÆâ€â„¢ÃƒÆ’ƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¡Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¬ÃƒÆ’¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢Ã¢â€š¬Ã…¡Ãƒâ€šÃ‚¬ÃƒÆ’…¾Ãƒâہ¡ÃƒÆ’‚¢t have to tax electricity and transport quite so much and destroy our domestic industries quite so quickly.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Let's put this Carbon Tax into a bit of perspective for laymen!


ETS is another tax. It is equal to putting up the GST to 12.5% which would be unacceptable and produce an outcry.


Read the following analogy and you will realize the insignificance of carbon dioxide as a weather controller.


Here's a practical way to understand the Labor Government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.


Imagine 1 kilometre of atmosphere and we want to get rid of the carbon pollution in it created by human activity. Let's go for a walk along it:

  • The first 770 metres are Nitrogen.
  • The next 210 metres are Oxygen.
  • That's 980 metres of the 1 kilometre. 20 metres to go.
  • The next 10 metres are water vapour. 10 metres left.
  • 9 metres are argon. Just 1 more metre.
  • A few gases make up the first bit of that last metre.
  • The last 38 centimetres of the kilometre is carbon dioxide. A bit over one foot.
97% of those 38cm is produced by Mother Nature. It's natural.


Out of our journey of one kilometre, there are just 12 millimetres left: about half an inch.


That's the amount of carbon dioxide global human activity puts into the atmosphere.


Of those 12 millimetres Australia puts in .18 of a millimetre. Less than the thickness of a hair. Out of a kilometre!


As a hair is to a kilometre, so is Australia's contribution to what the Labor Government calls Carbon Pollution.


Imagine Brisbane's new Gateway Bridge. It's been polished, painted and scrubbed by an army of workers till its 1 kilometre length is surgically clean. Except that the Labor Government says we have a huge problem, the bridge is polluted: there's a human hair on the roadway. We'd laugh ourselves silly.


There are plenty of real pollution problems to worry about.


It's hard to imagine that Australia's contribution to carbon dioxide in the world's atmosphere is one of the more pressing ones. And I can't believe that a new tax on everything is the only way to blow that pesky hair away.


Pass this on quickly while the ETS is being debated in Federal Parliament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Create New...