Forgetting cutting emissions - the carbon price package has a shorter term benefit for the government. There's one minister relieved that the carbon pricing package is locked in, and not for anything to do with emissions abatement.
Crikey media wrap: It's taken years of debates, discussion papers and fallen leaders, but yesterday the senate passed Australia's first carbon legislation.
Tont Abbott’s hyperbole has certainly attracted the headlines, but it betrays a curious tactic, writes Fergus Green, a lawyer and policy analyst specialising in climate change.
Carbon price package naysayers claim that China is doing nothing to limit carbon emissions. It is, but like Australia, has a long way to go, writes Richard Farmer.
Tony Abbott had this to say about the government's Clean Energy Future legislation yesterday:
Who would have thought that less than a year out from the start of Australia's carbon tax the nation's solar sector would be in disarray? James Thomson reflects on how our solar industry lost its shine.
Throughout 2011, Australia’s best-funded environment organisations have been united in support of the Labor government’s push to establish a carbon price. Not everyone thinks this is a good thing, writes Leigh Ewbank.
The claim that a carbon price will cause house prices to rise by $6000 is crap, writes environmental consultant Ben Rose.
It follows that, although the carbon tax will have a significant impact on our aggregate emissions of CO2, mainly through its impact on electricity generation and energy use by business, the average household will barely notice it, writes John Quiggin, an ARC Federation Fellow in Economics and Political Science at the University of Queensland.
Labor's carbon price package is far from perfect but Julia Gillard deserves credit not just for introducing an ETS but by modelling it as a shift in taxation. Britain and other governments ought to take note, says The Economist.