A Socialist View from Outside the Box

In Australia, more people believe in human enhanced climate change than don’t… even liberals… (Apart from Nick Minchin and a handful of his followers…) the question isn’t if its real, its what we should do about it that’s got the debate going…

The Liberal plan will see Millions of Trees planted to sequester carbon which on its own is not a bad idea but given the number of trees cut down each year around the world its not going to achieve much by way of carbon reduction.

Part of the Liberal plan is to create several clean energy plants to compete with coal driven facilities but several questions are raised about this.

Competing with coal is not the answer, reducing coal use to complete eradication is required within the next 15 to 30 years to have any impact on carbon dioxide reduction. Building clean energy facilities is only going to create another pathway to wealth for a handful of industry heavies.

Funding the Liberal coalitions plan is also questionable. It has been suggested the Liberal policy will cost Tax payers an average of $750 per year with these funds coming from the general coffers. Raising the question about what services are going to miss out on funding as a result. This $750 year could add a lot a child’s Education, could fund additional nurses in hospitals or repair or rebuild failing transport channels, roads and other infrastructure around the country.

The Green/Labor Carbon price is the only logical alternative to reducing carbon emissions through Market based incentives driven by the additional cost of fossil fuel energy with the addition of the carbon price.

The carbon price also allows for additional funding in addition to the federal budget to construct the required clean energy plants as well as compensate consumers at a retail level for any increases in prices after the carbon price is added.

Humans are not the ONLY cause of Global Warming but there are only certain things we can alter – typically the things we have caused or initiated. We can’t plug volcanoes or alter the distance between the earth and the sun that is obvious.

Historically, Trees eliminated excess CO2 as it was produced (mainly from Volcanoes). Unfortunately we are also the cause of deforestation at the same time as producing more carbon dioxide. In other words we are cutting down the filtration system that has historically reduced CO2 levels.

If I could insert a graph here it would show a decline in trees and an increase in CO2 emissions. Planting more trees will help eliminate CO2 when the levels decrease, but we have to get the current and anticipated future levels down first. The best way of doing that is to slow down the use of Fossil Fuels and increase the use of Wind and Solar energies.

Its a simple solution really and one that the C onservatives would jump on if only these renewables produced the same income as Coal & Oil (which are in diminishing supply).

There are other things that cause Global Warming… Methane for example. Bovine Gas is one of the main causes of this.

I have read some research where trails were undertaken on several ways of either preventing wind from cattle (caused by a complex digestive system). Some research has tried to capture this gas where cattle had to wear contraptions around their stomachs while a valve was inserted through the wall of the stomach… more realistic trials have included medication to reduce the amount of gas cattle make. But the key is that research is being undertaken.

Pricing Carbon is a good tool for reducing CO2 emissions because it provides incentive to change to renewable Energy options while providing an Income source to invest in those renewables.

The carbon debate continues to rev up in Australia as we get closer to there being a Price on CO2.  I made the following reply on an online forum for a political party against pricing Carbon (the same party who repeatedly call it a tax)…

Most people on both sides of the debate concede we need the NBN to advance future technologies. Where the political difference is one party wants it to be a Private Venture the other is getting on with it and using public funds.

Unfortunately the overall opinion is most if not all Private companies will not touch it because of the initial cost and length of time required to see a return for investors (that doesn’t mean we don’t need it, only that the lengthy ROI is stopping private enterprise from getting it started).

Oil has reached its peak and supplies are going down hill fast – Coal not far behind it. If alternative energy sources are not found within the next 20 – 50 years we are going to have a lot of cars and nothing to run them.

War has already been going on in the Middle East for decades fighting over oil supplies. If we don’t find alternatives soon we are going to be up shit creek without a paddle.

Like the NBN the expense of researching and moving to cleaner energy options is beyond the ROI strategies of most companies. Therefore the money has to come from somewhere for public investment into research and construction of wind, solar, wave and other alternative energy sources.

I guarantee if the Government put a Price (or Tax if you prefer) on dirty cars tomorrow, we would all be driving the cars that looked like they just came out of the showroom – because no one wants to pay a tax and will do what ever they can to avoid it.

Likewise, with a Price on CO2 we will do whatever we can to move to cleaner technologies, reduce CO2 in the atmosphere and reduce the need for fossil fuels.

If we have to have a “Tax” (read- Carbon Price) why Tax Soap, When Dirt (CO2) is the Problem ?

If we put the Price on the Dirt, we will do everything we can to clean it up!