Comments on: Et tu, Rudderless?

By: John Humphreys

John Humphreys — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 20:40:27 +0000

Ronda — there are plenty of estimates of the appropriate “pigouvian tax” for the environmental consequences from carbon. If they were introduced then coal would still be cheaper than most alternatives — with the possible exception of nuclear.
We need to see the evidence that the current (or a more dramatic) policy will actually provide any benefits. Then we need to look at the potential costs. We need to bare in mind other ways to achieve our goals, and see if those are cheaper. And we need to do all of this rationally because future generations are not impressed by rash, illogical policy-on-the-run that leaves them worse off.

By: Politicians and Plagues

Politicians and Plagues — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 17:23:51 +0000

John
I firmly believe that had Rudd gone for a 25% reduction in CO2, the coral reef ecosystems of the GBR would have had a greater opportunity to remediate the damage done by anthropogenic pollution.
There is very compelling evidence that farming is harming the Great Barrier Reef. The Queensland farms have been damaging the reefs because of increased run-off of agricultural sediments, nutrients and chemicals which have reduced coral cover and biodiversity in recent years.
The conclusions of two scientists from the Australia Institute of Marine Science found a casual link between agricultural pollution, low coral biodiversity, and poor re-colonization of the reef. An example from their experiment is that hard coral biodiversity were in greater abundance, almost double, on reefs that were far from agricultural areas than the reefs that were closer.
Additionally, it was also found that coral cover and biodiversity decreased as the dose of pollutants increased (Nowak, 2003.) Overall this research has led to the conclusion that farming in this area and the pesticides and fertilizers used are a major health risk for the coral and biodiversity of the reefs.
And the prolific use of hydrocarbon based agricultural chemicals should cease. Furthermore, industrial pollution from agriculture is not the only hazards in which the GBR must struggle to defend itself.
In Australia the big polluters have had free reign to plunder and pollute our ecosystems. Much of atmospheric CO2 was initially another destructive chemical before being burnt. All organic chemicals burn to CO2. Several industrial chemical emissions are also teratogenic, mutagenic and carcinogenic â€“ all dumping on our fragile ecosystems and seriously impacting on human and animal health.
Recommended guidelines for hazardous industrial emissions are largely ignored by sycophantic successive governments.
In addition, pollutant industries are given carte blanche in this country to emit tonnes of benzene, arsenic, cyanide, chromium 111, lead, nickel, mercury, dioxins etcetera with impunity while heads of EPAâ€™s refer to the perpetrators as â€œclients.â€ I understood that the only client appropriate for EPA’s was the environment.
The industrial barons will continue to have their way, thanks to Mr five percent Rudd but ultimately, the next generation will learn that money canâ€™t be eaten â€“ errrrrâ€¦..though perhaps that advice could be refuted by our industry aligned, bureaucratic bunglers:
http://savingiceland.puscii.nl/?p=929&language=en

By: ronda jambe

ronda jambe — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:13:46 +0000

John, the costs and benefits have to take into account (and the science of measuring environmental costs is in its early days) the long-term damage to the environment. If the true costs of burning coal were internalised to the economics, coal electricity plants would become uneconomical overnight.
No environment = no economy. That is a no brainer. The real and more subtle challenge is to spread the costs of the transition fairly and honestly. To date, the polluters have had a free ride. Until we face that truth, we can’t move forward, and you and I will pay the price instead. Our children will curse us.

By: ronda jambe

ronda jambe — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 09:07:06 +0000

gulp. That dose of reality from WA has my head spinning. It is a clear outline of the range of environmental threats and the lack of action. We don’t hear enough about how bad things are around the country. Except perhaps from the ABC and Background Briefing. Where are the wise leaders? Where is the public outcry? Can’t we all see what is coming?
Thanks for the sad information, maybe someday soon we will all wake up, but I do fear it is getting too late.

By: Politicians and Plagues

Politicians and Plagues — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 18:02:03 +0000

Well Ronda, I for one believe your predictions are conservative. Rudd’s shown himself to be a dropkick in environmental matters but in the West, Premier Barnett will be rejoicing.
It matters not that the Swan river is facing ecological collapse or that the river will be dead in ten years, as predicted by former head of EPA, Wally Cox, who attributes the demise of the river to farmers’ emissions of animal waste and fertilisers and home gardeners’ penchant for having the best garden in the street. Yet farmers deny any responsibility and are protesting against a proposed ban of the current highly soluble and destructive fertilisers.
Again, the current Premier has delayed a fishing ban which would have assisted in restoring juvenile lobster (all but vanished,) dhufish, pink snapper, bald-chin groper and red snapper in WA waters.
WA must now endure the neglect of successive governments who have idly stood by while salinity is now engulfing the equivalent land mass of 19 football fields per day.
Almost three-quarters of Australia’s migratory and resident shorebirds have disappeared over the past 25 years, a recent 2008 study has revealed.
And a large-scale aerial survey of eastern Australia by researchers from the University of New South Wales reveals that migratory shorebird populations were once much larger and have plunged by 73 per cent between 1983 and 2006.
During that same period, the populations of Australia’s 15 resident shorebird species have dropped by 81 per cent, according to the study, published in the scientific journal Biological Conservation.
Again in WA, mass bird and animal deaths continue because of irresponsible mining operations and other pollutant industries.
Now WA National MP, Terry Redman, believes that flogging off farm land to interested, Middle Eastern investors would be a good idea.
H..e…l…p! Where can I get those anti-depressants?!!

By: John Humphreys

John Humphreys — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 11:36:01 +0000

In this post, are you implying that those problems (death of great barrier reef, melting ice-caps etc) would not happen if Rudd had picked a 25% target?
Your post is noticable for two things. First, it is clearly fear-mongering (we’ll all be ruined). Second, it shows a total disregard for whether the policy will achieve more benefits than costs.
If you care about the next generation, surely you should only introduce public policy that has more benefits than costs.
Ultimately, the next generation can’t eat good intentions.

By: ronda jambe

ronda jambe — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:54:05 +0000

Well, Rossko, I don’t see anything depressing in my blog. A little bit of truth-telling, is all, and an encouragement to take democratic and peaceful action.
Actually, a news report today says that anti-depressants are the most common drug prescribed to young women in Australia, so maybe the myth of endless consumerism has got them down.
But you can be a nay-sayer like the rest, if that makes you content with our current state of governance.
My understanding was that Rudd promised leadership, and now he is doing the opposite. Ostriches of the world, unite!

By: Patrick B

Patrick B — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:17:38 +0000

Rossko,
Do the world a favour and keep your assine comments to yourself. Actually I reckon that any action is probably too late. Even without global warming the world was in fairly bad state environmentally. I think Ridley Scott painted realistic picture, not dead but very sick. That said we humans are cursed with hope so we always give it a try, usually a 5 minutes to midnight.

By: Rossko

Rossko — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 11:07:48 +0000

Ronda
What a depressing picture you paint; do Gaia a favour – switch off your house lights, send the cat to the RSPCA, terminate your Greenpeace subscription and commit suicide. Only then can the remaining sane adults wonder how we allowed our children to get so terrified of the future and why we didn’t earlier buy shares in pharmaceutical companies that make anti-depressants.