I have attempted to asummarise the disgraceful CPRS situation as succinctly as possible:

1 OBJECTIVES - WHAT IS NEEDED

1.1 Reduce the greenhouse gasses (GHGs) produced by human activities to between 25% and 40% by 2020 and by 80% by 2050, based on 1990 emissions. (International Panel on Climate Change, 2007 Report, Working Group 3, pp 15, 16).
This is required to restrict global temperature rises to no more than 2°C above the temperature existing before the start of the Industrial Revolution thus restricting GHG concentration to a maximum of 450 parts per million and avoiding uncontrollable global warming with catastrophic impacts on humans and the entire ecology of the planet.

1.2 The rate of rise of GHG emissions must cease between 2015 and 2020 and must decline steeply thereafter. The Copenhagen Diagnosis, (p 9), see: http://copenhagendiagnosis.org/

1.3 In the year 2000 48% of GHG were produced by electricity generation and transport (Stern Review, Executive Summary, Long, p V). To effectively meet the 2050 target the amount of GHG emissions from electricity generation (which will also have to power much of transport as we are at “peak oil” now) must not exceed 0.08 kg/kWhr. [Fossil fuel fired GHG generation is between 0.101 – the best carbon capture and storage (CCS – but see point 3.3 below) and 1.690 kg/kWhr. Renewable energy and nuclear have GHG emissions in the range of 0.003 to 0.059 kg/kWhr, see: http://gabe.web.psi.ch/pdfs/Annex_IV_Dones_et_al_2003.pdf

THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT”S RESPONSE

2.1 The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) proposes a 5% reduction in GHG emissions from Australia, with the possibility of increasing this target “if the rest of the world gets on board”.

2.2 The CPRS makes polluters pay for GHG emissions but has also granted free permits to the biggest polluters and pays the coal industry $7 billion over a 10 year period to protect employment in these industries. Total industry assistance will be $120 billion by 2020.

2.3 The federal government has also committed $2.4 billion to the development of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies.

WHY THE GOVERNMENT’S RESPONSE WILL EXACERBATE GLOBAL WARMING

3.1 From point 2.1 above it will not meet the IPCC target, Objectives 1.1 or 1.2 above.

3.2 From point 2.2 above – since coal fired generation in particular will be relieved of making any real changes for the next 10 years Objectives 1.1 and 1.2 will not be met. Objective 1.3 will not be met as continued investment in fossil fuels will deprive low-pollution power generation of funds.

3.3 A particularly frank report by WorleyParsons to the Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute (http://www.globalccsinstitute.com/downloads/Status-of-CCS-WorleyParsons-Report-Synthesis.pdf) points out that the earliest that CCS could possibly be commercialised in any quantity will be 2030 (pp 25, 121) and there are seventeen “Extreme” risks that could inhibit successful achievement of CCS in the quantities required. In addition governments will have to underwrite third party liability in respect of carbon dioxide gas escapes in perpetuity as commercial insurance will not be available. (pp 110, 122). Financing of CCS development, as point 2.2, above is simply a fig-leaf to give the appearance that fossil fuel power generation is viable in a carbon constrained world. It is not and Objectives 1.2 and 1.3 will not be met.

In summary, the federal Government (and Opposition’s) CPRS delivers maximum assistance to the largest polluters guaranteeing windfall profits for the next 20 - 30 years as there will be little scope for real GHG minimising industries to develop. They will probably need the windfall profits to pay out the inevitable claims for damages that will follow continued global warming and catastrophic loss of life, property and damage to the environment and ecology. (I can’t wait to see the outcome of the future Population of Bangladesh vs Peabody Coal legal action.)

THE REAL RESPONSE NEEDED

4.1 A global commitment to develop renewable energy and some nuclear power (but not in Australia as we have plenty of renewable energy) – and yes renewable energy can provide base-load power (Mills, David R & Morgan, Robert G, “Solar Thermal Energy as the primary Replacement for Coal and Oil in US Generation and Transportation”, pp 4, 5, at: http://ausra.com/pdfs/ausra_usgridsupply.pdf). This will need to be developed on a “war” or “man on the moon in 10 years” basis with a global commitment to achieving GHG reduction targets.

4.2 A proper global carbon cap and trade (C&T) system which prohibits poorer nations from selling their natural carbon sinks to foreign entities (because they will need them for their own use).

4.3 Contributions from any C&T scheme to industrial processes should only be made to those processes that have the possibility of achieving below the average required GHG emission required in 2050.

4.4 Assistance to households from any C&T scheme should be limited to the poorest households or those on fixed incomes.

4.4 A commitment to progressively close coal-fired power plants and some less efficient gas-fired plants.

4.5 A commitment that no expansion of existing or development of new coal mines or coal loading facilities will be permitted. (The jobs will easily be taken up in minerals mining and renewable energy development. Methane can be extracted from coal mines and can be burnt in limited quantities provided that the biggest polluters cease their activities.)

4.6 The medium to long term energy solution will be a mix of solar thermal, geothermal and hydrogen because they are available in the massive quantities homo sapiens needs with minimal environmental damage and development costs can be amortised globally over thousands of years.

THE BOTTOM LINE

As the UK’s Stern Report makes clear proper global GHG emissions initiatives will cost us and our children some 1% to 2% of GDP per annum during our lifetimes but is will save our children and grandchildren from costs consequent upon catastrophic climate change of some 6% - 20% of GDP per annum in perpetuity.

The Australian Federal Government’s CPRS is guaranteed to cost us 1% to 2% of GDP per annum now and future generations will pay the 6% - 20% penalty for ever.

John Bushell