Carbon Trading: on in Australia, off in New Hampshire

Julia Gillard Picture — PM Julia Gillard - Image via Wikipedia

Australia appears to be ready to run down the Carbon Rabbit Hole, from the WUWT Tips and Notes page

Richard says:

February 23, 2011 at 7:20 pm

A PRICE is set to be put on carbon from July 1, 2012, under a deal announced today by Prime Minister Julia Gillard.

Ms Gillard has announced a two-stage process for pricing carbon, which will start with a fixed price period for three to five years and then shift to an emissions trading scheme with a “flexible” price linked to international carbon markets.

Ms Gillard said that the new deal would be the “cheapest and fairest way to cut pollution and build clean energy economies”.

She said she didn’t believe Australia needed to lead the world on the matter, but added it couldn’t be left behind.

Ms Gillard said she anticipated that the Opposition would “launch a fear campaign” on a “great big new tax”, but said she would “not take a step back” on the issue.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/pm-to-set-price-on-carbon-from-july-1-2012/story-e6freon6-1226011295526

===========================================================

pat says:

February 23, 2011 at 4:47 pm

The quickest “consensus” evah! and all in the name of “climate change” with never a mention of AGW:

24 Feb: ABC: Gillard to lay out carbon price policy

In the aftermath of last year’s election, Ms Gillard established a multi-party climate change committee to build consensus on what form a carbon price should take.

The ABC understands the committee has now come to an agreement and Ms Gillard will reveal more details at 11:30am AEDT…

The Government abandoned its previous emissions trading scheme last year after it failed to get it through the Senate.

This backdown is widely believed to have led to former prime minister Kevin Rudd’s slide in the polls, and his eventual sacking…

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/24/3147523.htm?section=justin

fyi, the former PM’s sacking is not “widely believed” to have been sacked over his failure to get an ETS through; in fact, the Opposition leader at the time, Malcolm Turnbull, lost his job for backing such a scheme. also note no member of the main Opposition party sat on the “multi-party” committee, and the Opposition is leading the incumbent party in the polls at present. our present Prime Minister promised there would be no carbon price if she was voted in and changed her mind the second she got in. plus the following is from just six days ago!

18 Feb: ABC: Carbon price deal is months away

The Government’s multi-party climate change committee, which is chaired by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and includes the Greens and independent MPs, held its fourth meeting in Canberra this morning.

Ms Gillard and Climate Change Minister Greg Combet were widely expected to unveil their preferred model after the meeting.

But the committee says no final decisions have been taken on how to price carbon or what assistance will be offered to industry and taxpayers.

It says the final design of the carbon price will only be decided when all the elements of the policy can be considered together, and that should happen in the coming months.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/02/18/3142797.htm?section=justin

=================================================================

Ric Werme writes about New Hampshire:

The New Hampshire House has passed a bill that would have NH withdraw from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, RGGI. Next step is Senate (maybe a stop at a Finance committee, and then the Governor. He may well veto it, but the house passed it 246 to 104. The senate will like pass it by a veto proof majority too.

All in all, looking promising!

http://dailycaller.com/2011/02/23/new-hampshire-smacks-down-cap-and-trade/

RGGI was supposed to segue directly into a national cap-and-trade system, and was designed by Lisa Jackson, now EPA administrator, when she ran New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection. The pitch to industry was that they could get a head start on buying cap-and-trade permits for two or three dollars each, and make a fortune when a federal bill passed with permit prices ten times that or higher. Now that a federal bill is dead, RGGI is a lose-lose for everyone except the politicians who get to spend the money and the special interests receiving subsidies.

The overwhelming veto-proof, bipartisan vote today means that New Hampshire is now on a path to doing something that looked impossible just a couple years ago — repeal a cap-and-trade program. In the process, it could deal the death blow to cap and trade both regionally and nationally.

While RGGI can survive the loss of a small state like New Hampshire, it could probably not survive the loss of a large state like New Jersey, where a repeal effort is picking up steam fast, with at least 37 co-sponsors.

Data to be collected by Glory will help scientists improve our ability to predict Earth’s future environment and to distinguish human-induced climate change from natural climate variability.

0 0 votes

Article Rating

137 Comments

Patrick Davis

February 24, 2011 5:08 am

“David says:
February 24, 2011 at 4:04 am”
Born in Wales, migrated to Aus at 4. Into polotics (Backstabing) from an early age apparently.
“amicus curiae says:
February 24, 2011 at 4:52 am”
No idiot at all. A cunning politician. Shame on the people, who put her there (Fools), don’t matter to “her, moving forward”.

Robert of Ottawa

February 24, 2011 5:12 am

SideShowBob says @ur momisugly February 24, 2011 at 1:21 am
Ultimately a fuel tax is a good thing I think in this day and age… it’ll help persuade people to choose more efficient products.
Yes, Bob, and a food tax to combat obescity …. brilliant!

johanna

February 24, 2011 5:14 am

kbray in california says:
February 24, 2011 at 1:19 am
Some of Ms. Gillard’s (et al) statements:
[snip]
Mr Windsor (another govt. leader) said he believed something should be done about climate change globally and indicated his vote would be influenced by what action was being taken outside Australia.
————————————————————-
Tony Windsor is not a ‘government leader’. He is an independent, one of 3 (2 independent and one Green) who hold the balance of power in the lower House, and hence the government to ransom.
After 1 July, the Greens will hold the b.o.p. in the Senate as well. That is why the country is being lumbered with these stupid policies. If the conservatives were in the driver’s seat, they would have exactly the same problem. The only way to change it is for the government to call a double dissolution (ie of both Houses) and hope that the electorate will deliver one party or the other a convincing majority. Since that means risking losing power, they are reluctant to do that. So, for the moment, we are stuck.
However, the Australian public tends to be pragmatic rather than ideological, so the months ahead will be interesting. It is not beyond the bounds of possibility that some of the Labor MPs and Senators who think this policy is rubbish will cross the floor to defeat it. Watch this space.

Ripper

February 24, 2011 5:20 am

Crikey! they are pushing this through even faster since the move to have the Auditor General audit the Temperature record.

Bruce Cobb

February 24, 2011 5:20 am

Though not a done deal yet, I’m proud to be a New Hampsherite right now. We hold the first primary here, with an excellent track record for picking winners. If RGGI goes down in this state, and a chain reaction occurs, ultimately destroying the program altogether, that would be huge. We are, after all, the “Live free or die” state.
Lynch, of course will probably veto it, assuming it makes it through the Senate. This could be a big fight, with both regional and national implications. Lynch is currently opposing it on economic grounds, but we’ll see how long that lasts. From the Concord Monitor:
“Lynch said yesterday that he opposes the withdrawal because it will result in New Hampshire ratepayers paying higher costs for electricity without receiving any benefits. Because electricity is sold regionally, New Hampshire ratepayers would still have to pay the higher rates even if the state withdrew, but it would not get money back for energy-efficiency projects.”
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/241983/house-get-state-out-of-carbon-pact

Ric Werme

Editor

February 24, 2011 5:27 am

Gee, I feels like people consider Oz more important than NH! (Just New Hampshire, not the Northern Hemisphere.) Ah well, I agree too, at least given the current state of climate politics.
I’ll likely come up with a simple web page to track progress of RGGI legislation and related stuff and mention it occasionally here as warranted.

Patrick Davis

February 24, 2011 5:33 am

“Steve says:
February 24, 2011 at 4:43 am”
When did the Irish Govn’t end free coal (For pensioners)?

David

February 24, 2011 5:56 am

Wonder what price the Gillard government will ‘fix’ carbon at for the next five years..?
Same as the Chicago one before it went down the toilet – 5c/tonne..?
Can’t see how it can be anything else – as the EU market is still suspended due to fraud (unless of course she wants to invite all the fraudsters in Eastern Europe to rub their hands with glee…)..

Frank K.

February 24, 2011 5:59 am

Proud New Hampshire citizen here…thankful my state government is leading the way in removing the insane burdens imposed by our climate elites…

February 24, 2011 6:08 am

Carbon trading can be such fun in the abstract. I can still remember former Vice President ALGORE rationalizng his extravagent life-style by reminding a reporter that he purchased carbon offsets. Bingo! The wealthy can just write a check. Of course his huge carbon footprint remains floating somewhere in the ether. I think it was at that point 2 years ago that Joe Sixpack woke up to the scam. Wealthy entertainers from DiCaprio to Cate Blanchett could fly in thier Learjets, live in 15000sq ft McMansions, and drive $400,000 foreign sports cars in good conscience. But what about the family of 5 living in a 1500sq ft bungalow and making ends meet on $40,000 a year?

Patrick Davis

February 24, 2011 6:09 am

“Saaad says:
February 24, 2011 at 5:07 am”
Its called democarcy…..once every few years! Sadly the “few” “win”.

Charles Nelson

February 24, 2011 6:38 am

I love Australia and it’s people (it’s my home) so it pains me to have to say this…but here goes anyway; no other nation has been subjected to such a concerted, determined and well organized propaganda campaign. Compared to the Australian Broadcasting Corporation the BBC sounds like a bastion of even handed common sense on the subject of AGW.
I think I know why too. The ‘Green’ movement here has deep roots, and to be fair to all concerned, being ‘green’ is the closest thing there is here to true patriotism and love of country. Who in their right mind could give their alleigance to a venal, corrupt political class, or a remote vaguely degenerate English Royal family?
Unfortunately for the Australian people this fundamentally honourable inclination was hijacked by the Global Warming fraudsters…and again given the vast, slow climatic cycles that Australia is subject to, it was an easy sell. After fourteen years of increasing drought it wasn’t hard to convince people that climate change was real. Of course the cycles have turned now and most people have realised that this beautiful and bountiful land is not at any ‘tipping point’ or on the verge of calamity.
Let’s hope we have time to stop this taxation insanity and then weed out the scum (and I mean that) who have lied and dissembled for so long, for money and self aggrandisement. Let’s hold them to account, it shouldn’t be difficult, they are on the record.

R. de Haan

February 24, 2011 6:45 am

The Communists lost the Cold War.
They are committed to win the Hot War.
Prime Minister Julia Gillard is a convinced Communist.

Perry

February 24, 2011 6:53 am

In certain circumstances, I do believe it is possible to judge a book by its cover, especially after glancing at the first few pages. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julia_gillard
C,mon, Australia, any okka is way better than that.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Okka

Henry chance

February 24, 2011 7:19 am

Australia feels guilty at having so many minerals and so much to export. A tax or penance will make them feel all better.
BHP just spend 4.5 billion in US for Natural gas. (Pelosi says gas is not a fossil fuel)

fenbeagle

February 24, 2011 7:21 am

Meanwhile in Hampshire UK the Huhnatic has his wind folly free power base, but has other ideas for the rest of the UK….
http://fenbeagleblog.wordpress.com/

SideShowBob

February 24, 2011 7:27 am

@ur momisugly Steve
But that’s exactly the whole point of a ficken carbon tax Steve! to ultimately lower energy bills by making people choose more efficient products. Poorer people can be compensated from the tax revenue … I mean Christ where do you people think the money is going? Into some kind of black hole never to be seen again!
Look energy prices are going up that’s a fact and – they’ll keep going up because of peak oil – because our energy use is unsustainable do you understand? Is that fact sinking through to people yet or do we need $140 priced oil again?

Kevin_S

February 24, 2011 7:36 am

I was wondering if anyone in Oz has done a little digging into this woman’s connections and relationships and how those around her, if not herself, will benefit from this idiocy?
As far as taxing gas/oil to push people to alternatives, what alternatives? Nothing out there is economically viable except gas/oil and until oil truly becomes far more expensive, not by government taxation/regulation, to extract and refine there will not be any viable alternative and having the government try and push people away from the cheapest source of energy does nothing but induce pain(economic) and hardship. Where there no lesson learned form the US governments misguided foray into the housing market? When the government intervenes, problems that would be small, relatively, and short lived become massive and longer lived. Look into how the US fared during the Great Depression. Check the Japanese “Lost Decade.” Heck, just look at the U.S.’s current inability to get out of this recession.(Regardless of what the “experts” say, this recession isn’t over.) People want alternative sources to gas/oil, then get the government out of the way and allow the market to decided what the next great source of energy will be for the populace, rather than have the government pick who wins and who loses, because when that happens we all lose.

DD More

February 24, 2011 7:46 am

Gee can one sell you Aussie’s some of the $0.05/ton CCX credits that went on sale in Chicago a while back for a big profit?

Vince Causey

February 24, 2011 8:00 am

SideShowBob says @ur momisugly February 24, 2011 at 1:21 am
“Ultimately a fuel tax is a good thing I think in this day and age… it’ll help persuade people to choose more efficient products.”
And persuade manufacturing to relocate to where energy is cheaper, like China, where the state actually has a fuel subsidy.
Do we really want governments deciding how efficient appliances should be, by way of energy taxes? A market economy uses price signals to govern the way it uses resources. As for the comment that if oil reaches $200 per bbl it will somehow be worse for the US than Europe despite the fact that the ticket price in Europe will be higher than in the US

Vince Causey

February 24, 2011 8:04 am

…As for the comment that if oil reaches $200 per bbl it will somehow be worse for the US than Europe despite the fact that the ticket price in Europe will be higher than in the US, I cannot follow the logic. Perhaps you suggest that price rise in the US would be proportionately more than in Europe, and that is what will hurt. It would be a short term shock, but in the long term, the Europeans would suffer far more as they would be forced to divert a larger proportion of their income into energy.

Steve in SC

February 24, 2011 8:30 am

Is it just me or does this woman bear a striking resemblance to Nancy Pelosi?????????

pat

February 24, 2011 8:42 am

Sheer obstinate stupidity.A contrived carbon scheme to be followed by an international market in a non-existent product,ie, the non-production of goods or energy. Insanity.

Mike Haseler

February 24, 2011 8:50 am

Patrick Davis says: February 24, 2011 at 4:11 am
“Haven’t you learned yet? The literal translation from Greek words which form the English word “politician” almost literally translates to “lie to the people”.”
That would make sense … after all who is it that keeps telling us that “democracy is the free choice of which politicians are to lord it over us” (I paraphrase)
What democracy really means, is not having politicians but literally having ordinary people in power:
“it is thought to be democratic for the offices to be assigned by lot, for them to be elected is oligarchic,”(Aristotle, Politics 4.1294b)
The rule of the people has the fairest name of all, equality (isonomia=democracy), and does none of the things that a monarch does. The lot determines offices, power is held accountable, and deliberation is conducted in public. (Herodotus)
What these show very clearly is that selection by lot was considered democratic, showing that democracy referred to system of committees, selected by lot which ran Athens. Elections were clearly considered anti-democratic, so politicians are undemocratic!
which takes us nicely back to your statement:
“The literal translation from Greek words which form the English word “politician” almost literally translates to “lie to the people”.”

kbray in california

February 24, 2011 9:01 am

[[ kbray in california says:
February 24, 2011 at 1:19 am
Some of Ms. Gillard’s (et al) statements: ]]
Below is the link to the article that I neglected to include in my original comment edit…
http://au.news.yahoo.com/latest/a/-/latest/8899361/carbon-price-to-start-july-2012-gillard/
Hope you Aussies can move this proposal to the circular file again.