any ETS is both an emissions floor and an emissions ceiling

19 06 2009

I’ve updated my thinking on the importance of Richard Denniss’ exposition of the futility of voluntary action under the CPRS.

I think Denniss’ expression of this reality of the CPRS as proposed was a reasonably novel perspective. The fact that it represents a ceiling as well as a floor for abatement is not something I’d really seen stated explicitly before. But it’s not a flaw of the CPRS per se, it’s how any ETS works. In fact, in many ways it’s kind of the point.


Read the rest of this entry »

Rudd government already worse than Howard?

18 06 2009

Perhaps that should be ‘in general’, but I was thinking primarily of climate change policy and fostering renewable energy in particular. Now that Wong has so ‘masterfully’ tacked the expanded 20%-by-2020 RET (expanded MRET) bill to the fate of the CPRS legislation, it seems both will fail to pass the senate. Certainly in this round, and possibly this year.

So that would be no ETS — no carbon price — and no RET despite being elected on a platform promising strong action in both regards.

I personally think it’s becoming increasingly likely that we are going to a double-dissolution. The Greens will never support the CPRS even remotely close to it’s current form (see Christine’s poignant words of wisdom) and I can’t see how either the Coalition nor Labor can back down from their entrenched positions. And of course now we’ve got Fielding being duped by those bastions of scientific objectivity, The Heartland Institute. (Still, probably wasn’t a tough sell.)

How can the CPRS bill get up before 2010 at this rate? And if the RET bill isn’t changed, that ship sinks too.

Not that I’m saying anything insightful here; I’m mostly just demonstrating I’m still kicking…