The most telling part of the Rudd Governments deferral of efforts to reduce Australias greenhouse emissions is that it wont even look at the issue again until 2012. In other words, it is unlikely Labor will actually do anything in its next term, even though it leaves open the suggestion it might do something in 2013.
You can now download the book Economia as a pdf file.
See the tag at the top of the page.
It is almost universally believed that reducing Australia�s carbon emissions will be very expensive and therefore our economy will be disadvantaged if our emission reductions get ahead of the rest of the world, but it is not true.
I just sent this to On Line Opinion. It may take a week for it to be posted, if they like it.
Are On Line Opinion readers interested in innovative solutions to major problems? Or do they (you) just want to defend old positions, or have an argument? Or what?
I ask these questions because there have been several pieces recently that present quite innovative ideas or perspectives on solving the economic crisis and/or global warming. Yet four such articles attracted a total of 15 comments. (They are Remaking the economy, 4 comments; Energy Rewards to stimulate the economy, 2; The need for indirect action on climate change, 3; Sustainability will not be sidelined, 6)
[This is punchier than the version I posted 23 March, which was for a different Senate enquiry.]
The Government fails completely to appreciate the urgency of the climate situation, which must be seen in terms of dominos and tipping points. The first big domino seems to be tipping now, and there may soon be no way to prevent or reverse catastrophic warming.
The Government also fails completely to appreciate the opportunity to rapidly reduce emissions while creating an economy that can secure Australians wellbeing indefinitely.
This submission focusses on reframing the policy discussion. It is intentionally brief. Details are irrelevant unless the problem is properly framed.
The greatest and most immediate threat to our global environment comes from our use of fossil fuels to power our consumer-capitalist industrial system. However we already know how to dramatically reduce our energy use without seriously compromising our quality of life. In fact we may save money even as we save the Earth.
I tried this on The Monthly magazine over a year ago, twice. Some of it is a little dated, but the essence is not. It covers not just the science and the economics (already unusual), but the nature and culture of science, and the feedbacks that so alarm scientists at present. They didn’t deign even to acknowledge receipt of course. OK, so their writing is excellent, but mine’s not so bad. And if that’s their primary criterion then they’re only providing a form of entertainment, however sophisticated.
There is a discernible pattern in the trajectories of many vanished societies and empires. Their lives were not long, graceful arcs with a gradual rise, a plateau and then a slow decline. Rather, their demise was sudden, and their greatest accomplishments came just before their collapse. The grandest Mayan temples were built near the end of the Mayan civilisation. The pattern of such societies was acceleration into sudden disaster.
BetterNatureBooks 