TWiki > MASSBUG > Advocacy > CommonWeal	TWiki webs: Main | TWiki | Sandbox
	MASSBUG . { Home | Projects | News | Calendar | Membership | Advocacy | Contacts | About | Changes | Index | Search }

AUSTRALIAN COMMONWEAL GOVERNMENT

21 June 2007

As glaciers melt and rivers dry up, coal-fired power stations multiply

"...China is well aware of its impact on climate change. Its Himalayan glaciers are melting at an unprecedented rate, its deserts are encroaching on cities in the north-west, and rivers are drying up as a result of temperature rises and over-exploitation. According to the Worldwatch Institute thinktank in Washington, Chinese air pollution from coal-burning cost its economy more than $63bn (£31bn) in 2004, or roughly 3% of GDP. But China argues that even with its surging economy, it is a relatively minor villain. The carbon footprint of the average Chinese last year was only a quarter of an American, or half that of a Briton...

John Sauven, director of Greenpeace, said: "Responsibility for China's soaring emissions lies not just in Beijing but also in Washington, London and Tokyo. The west has moved its manufacturing base to China knowing it was vastly more polluting than Japan, Europe or the US.""

Guardian

More... http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,330052641-108142,00.html

China building more power plants

""...Responsibility for China's soaring emissions lies not just in Beijing but also in Washington, Brussels and Tokyo," said Greenpeace UK director John Sauven.

"All we've done is export a great slice of the West's carbon footprint to China, and today we see the result.

"Let us not forget that the average Chinese emits just 3.5 tonnes of CO2 per year, whereas Britons emit nearly 10 tonnes and Americans 20 tonnes.

"The West moved its manufacturing base to China knowing it was vastly more polluting than Japan, Europe or the US," he added.

"No environmental conditions were attached to this move; in fact the only thing manufacturers were interested in was the price of labour.

"This trend kept the price of our products down but at the cost of soaring greenhouse gas emissions. Long term, this policy has been a climate disaster.

"We should export clean energy technology to China to increase low carbon and renewable energy take-up so the products we import have a smaller carbon footprint.""

BBC

More... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6769743.stm

Sun King pours energy into hunt for bright sparks

"THE search for the next Sun King has begun. The first, a former Sydney scientist, Zhengrong Shi, earned the title after founding a solar cell company in China that rapidly made him Australia's fifth wealthiest man and China's third.

At the weekend Dr Shi, 44, was back in Sydney with officials from Wuxi City, near Shanghai, who want to find up to 30 more talented scientists and entrepreneurs to repeat his success. He also delivered a message to the Prime Minister about renewable energy.

Wuxi was behind Dr Shi's meteoric rise in 2001 after its government lured the University of NSW photovoltaics graduate to the city with an offer of $6 million to set up Suntech Power, now China's largest manufacturer of electricity producing solar cells...

Dr Shi said Suntech would like to manufacture solar cells in Australia, but he told the Prime Minister over dinner last week that more government policies were needed to promote renewable energy.

"I said, 'Prime Minister. Australia has got so much sunshine. We should be more aggressive. The average Australian people, they really love to use solar power. All they need is an incentive'."

Dr Shi said Australia should emulate countries such as Germany, which has stimulated solar energy use with a feed-in tariff scheme, where a higher price is paid for renewable energy supplied back to the electricity grid.

The Howard Government, however, used its majority in the Senate last week to reject a call from the Greens for a senate committee to investigate such a scheme..."

More... http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/06/24/1182623748450.html

Are Shorter Work Hours Good For the Environment: A comparison of US and European energy consumption.

"... there is political pressure within European countries to adopt a more American labor model. If Europeans did in fact give up their shorter work weeks and longer vacations, they would consume some additional 25 percent more energy. Translated into carbon emissions, this would have enormous consequences for those countries that have signed and ratified the Kyoto Protocol. Over the 1990 levels, the EU-15 emitted 8 percent more carbon dioxide in 2002, despite clear commitment to reduce emissions to 8 percent below 1990 levels by 2008-12. Thus, the EU-15 must cut emissions by 14 percent from 2002 levels. However, if EU-15 workers had consumed 25 percent more energy and consequently emitted 25 percent more carbon dioxide in 2002, they would have had to cut emissions by more than one-third from that level to meet their commitments to Kyoto...

...The American model is still portrayed in the international business press as the one to emulate. The environmental consequences of developing countries choices could be very serious."

Centre for Economic and Policy Research

More... http://www.cepr.net/documents/publications/energy_2006_12.pdf

Effective Speed: Car Costs Are Slowing Us Down - Paul J Trantor

"...Our effective speeds (as well as trip speeds) by car are likely to decline significantly over the next decade and beyond. Car running costs are likely to increase as traffic congestion grows and the oil vulnerability problem worsens (Bentley, 2002). Research by the Bureau of Transport Economics indicates that by 2015, Canberra will be the only city which can expect to be congestion free, while "congestion costs in Brisbane will exceed those in Sydney and Melbourne" (Newton, 2004). Under congested traffic conditions, fuel consumption is "approximately twice that under free-flow conditions" (Newton, 2004). Thus not only will in-vehicle speeds be lower in the future, but running costs will be much higher than they are now. Perhaps by 2015, our effective traffic speed will be back to the 1850s situation, when Thoreau recognised that walking was faster than motorised transport.

Conclusion

The concept of 'effective speed' should be seen as one (of many) ways in which to highlight the ineffectiveness of private motor vehicles as a form of mass transport, as well as highlighting the superiority of public transport (and cycling). The concept is simple, even though calculating 'effective speeds' for specific situations may be complex. Given that 'speed' is so highly valued in our society, if motorists can be shown just how slow they are 'effectively' moving, they may start to question their love affair with the car, and consider changing their transport behaviour in ways that will lead to a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

A Final Caveat

Having argued in this paper that the car does not save us time, I should end this paper by noting the dangers of an obsession with speed and with 'saving time'. If we wish to develop sustainable and livable cities, we should be developing cities where people have good access to local services and facilities, ideally within walking and cycling distance or within easy reach by public transport. Cities do not necessarily need 'faster' transport. They need transport that does not destroy our environment and which supports the development of a strong community..."

Australian Government - Australian Greenhouse Office

More... http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/tdm/publications/effectivespeeds.html

More... The Australian Greenwash Office - Sustainable Transport

Will our beaches disappear: post Queens Birthday weekend swells this is a legitimate question.

"When you look at the pictures of Collaroy/Sth Narrabeen after the recent storm swell you can’t help but ponder the above question.

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change draft report that was leaked to the Sydney Morning Herald earlier this year listed The Collaroy/Narrabeen stretch among the most vulnerable in oz.

A sea level rise of just 20 centimetres combined with a one in 50 year storm would erode the dunes and push the shoreline back by more than 100 metres.

The potential economic loss if such a dramatic change to the shoreline occurs in this area alone would blow out to hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.

Then think Byron Bay, Wamberal and any other particularly vulnerable stretch of beach you can think off and start multiplying the numbers.

On top of the expected increase in extreme storm events, ( as a result of global warming ) start thinking about the rapidly melting Greenland ice sheet..."

Coastalwatch - bringing the coast to you

More... http://www.coastalwatch.com/news/article.aspx?articleId=204&cateId=3

The Home Front

"...MALCOLM TURNBULL, FEDERAL MINISTER FOR ENVIRONMENT: ... I mean do you want to do you want to go out and say to people: nobody can have a computer turned on at home; nobody can have a large screen television set? Is that, now is that a policy that you would recommend? I certainly wouldn't.

People want to use more energy. What we want to encourage is for people to use more energy efficiently, and so giving people ideas, alerting them so they become more aware is a vital part of the campaign for a more efficient use of energy.

JONATHAN HOLMES: The Government will shortly spend millions on a website and a direct mail campaign to raise that awareness.

But there are dozens of similar websites out there already – from state governments, energy retailers, and green NGOs. The information's available if we want it, but our bills just aren't high enough to make us care.

TRISTAN EDIS, BUSINESS COUNCIL FOR SUSTAINABLE ENERGY: People spend more on grog and cigarettes than they do on electricity and gas. Trying to spend huge amounts of money on advertising campaigns involving people like Don Burke is not going to drive the sort of change that we need. People just don't want to worry about it, they only care about it when it's not there.

JONATHAN HOLMES: One mechanism it seems is on the way - the much heralded Emissions Trading Scheme. But so far, neither major party has set a near term target for greenhouse gas emissions, let alone for reducing our household electricity use, and emissions trading on its own is unlikely to change our habits.

ALAN PEARS, ENERGY EFFICIENCY CONSULTANT: The key issue here is that emissions trading really targets the big emitters. Then the energy generators will be effectively passing on, you know, whatever their overall cost of compliance is. But it will be a relatively small percentage change in people's energy bills.

JONATHAN HOLMES: No-one pretends it will be easy to change the state of mind of a nation that's enjoyed cheap energy for a century. There's no shortage of rules and rebates. What's lacking is a coherent national strategy, and a challenging long-term goal..."

Read the full program transcript from Jonathan Holmes' report into energy efficiency in Australian households, "The Home Front".

Reporter: Jonathan Holmes

Date: 25/06/2007

More... http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s1961538.htm and http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/content/2007/s1961230.htm

-- GilbertGrace - 21 Jun 2007

Parents: Advocacy

Copyright © by the contributing authors. All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors. Ideas, requests, problems regarding TWiki? Send feedback