Essay by Eric Worrall
The Sydney Morning Herald has accused Australia of siding with Russia, China, Brazil and Saudi Arabia to sink a a Pacific Islands proposal for a $100 / ton of carbon levy on marine shipping emissions.
Australia sides with China, Russia in bid to sink Pacific nations’ climate plan
By Nick O’Malley
July 3, 2023 — 5.00amLondon: Australia has been criticised for siding with China and Russia to oppose a popular plan from a group of Pacific Island nations to tackle carbon emissions from the shipping industry.
…
An ambitious proposal conceived and championed by Pacific Island nations including Solomon Islands and Marshall Islands — which has one of the world’s largest shipping fleets registered to its flag — would introduce a $100 per tonne levy on maritime emissions in order to make cleaner fuels cost-competitive with the dirtier heavy fuel oil that is the industry standard.
But The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald spoke to three sources present in closed preliminary discussions who said opposition to the proposal has hardened among a group of about 20 nations including China, Russia, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Australia. This masthead has seen documentation that confirms their accounts.
…
Though Australia has voiced support for aligning the industry with Paris Agreement climate targets of holding warming to 1.5 degrees, the sources said it remained opposed to the shipping levy as proposed by the Pacific nations. Alternative proposals could also be debated and it is not clear which, if any, Australia might support.
…
Read more: https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/australia-sides-with-china-russia-in-bid-to-sink-pacific-nations-climate-plan-20230630-p5dky1.html
What a surprise, nations which depend on long distance international shipping have opposed a measure which would shut down international shipping.
All this would be a non-issue if greens relaxed their opposition to nuclear energy. If shipping companies were allowed to install nuclear power plants on cargo ships, there would be no maritime emissions to tax.
And of course such a tax administered by the Solomon Islands would be above scrutiny.
amiright?
Scrutiny perhaps…Screwinme for certain
The Green Blob is essentially Luddite. After all, why do you need all those evil possesions?
Maybe all the the modern convenience’s manufactured by FF’s should be taken away from Pacific Island nations to wake them up to just how important they are for the health and well being in modern society.
I suspect the plan is for goods to be delivered for free, paid for by the tax and their claims of climate hardship.
Perhaps they should consider just taxing all the cargo ships that take food, oil, and other essentials to their own islands.
I’m sure their citizens would love to pay the extra, on everything.., to save their islands from getting bigger.
Well those Pacific Islanders better get used to being under Chinese control for real . A little “ belt and road”
Or, rather, the China-Solomon Islands defence framework which allows PLA warships to dock and refuel/replenish there, allows the Solomon Island govt to request Chinese military support for ‘unrest’ and allows China to deploy military there to protect its’ interests. All for just a $730 million payment to the Solomon islands govt. Nope, nothing to see here, move along.
Having failed to get any of the promised money for supporting AGW the Islanders are attempting to collect it themselves and ace out the middlemen who have been keeping what little there is for themselves.
Yes, they’re the live version of Josh’s cartoon “Where’s my money?“.
I think for once Australia is trying to do something good for them . Pacific islanders tend to be a little naive and get taken advantage of and end up in a worse position. I think some of the islanders are already falling prey to CCP representatives offering gifts or easy credit. “ Yea we ‘ ll build a ya a sea wall and a dock etc etc “ just sign here”
See my post about the 2022 China-Solomon Island defence framework. I think Australia is shocked that the Solomon islanders have already caved to Chinese overtures.
This Pacific Island proposal is equivalent to highway robbery. Good that Australia joined the expanding BRICs in opposing. It is also scientifically bassackwards.
The maritime industry uses either bunker oil or diesel as fuel, the diesel not desulferized as ‘clean’ road diesel now is in the US.
So the marine engine emissions comprise mainly two things: CO2 and SO2. The SO2 forms cooling aerosols, and the resulting ‘acid rain’ matters nothing to highly buffered ocean pH. Cooling SO2 aerosols are one way climate models are tuned to best hindcast.
So the Pacific Islands have no standing to worry about anything.
Sorry, Rud!
I hope you are right but I’d hesitate to applaud Australian politicians just yet.
It could well be that they have dreamed up something even worse.
Eventually, the young, metropolitan Aussies will learn a very hard lesson about their GangGreen politicians. But Albanese and the rest will have done some REAL damage by then.
Of course, a “fair” emissions tax would also take into account the length of the voyage.
At some point, green taxes and regulations are going to break the bank, and some maverick countries will start ignoring selected ones, make more money, and the whole scheme will fall apart. The decisions to reclassify nuclear power as green, to allow coal, and this one, are all cracks in the dykes.
Yea , the whole thing is ridiculous , just one more tax on our goods for no reason. I was off topic of course; just been lamenting to loss of western naval influence in the region. Eventually China will have all those islands with all the military and geopolitical ramifications and no tears shed over AGW
Nuclear ships are a thing as the Navy
Make all ships nuclear any nation that refuses to accept them tough no trade for you
Lets see how committed they are
Ostensibly the Pacific Islands claim to be vulnerable to the rising sea level.
The sea level has been rising at a more or less constant rate since at least 1850 long before human CO2 emissions were significant.
Even if Pacific Islands were at risk, even reverting to wind power probably would not make much difference to the rate of SL rise.
So, gee, who ends up paying for this levy to cut international trade and Jack up the costs of goods? Yeah
I wonder what the reaction would be if a complete ban on the use of petroleum based transportation (Aviation and Maritime) to the agrieved nations were to be imposed?
Aside note from time to time I look at the excellent tide guage data from the Australian Met Burueau and I can not discern any rise in seal level at the Solomon Islands.But then I am not a “Climate Scientist”
Monthly sea levels for SOLOMON ISLANDS (bom.gov.au)
So even the SMH can be correct occasionally!
Yea. A bit like a stopped clock.
A true international disaster. They would have to come up with some even harder to sell starting point for their longer term plans to take over entirely.
More taxes never solved a damn thing.
> What a surprise, nations which depend on long distance international shipping have opposed a measure which would shut down international shipping.
but wait:
> An ambitious proposal conceived and championed by Pacific Island nations
I call b*llsh*t on “conceived”.
What is surpising is that the Pacific Islands nations that depend very much on that same shipping for almost everything they consume were conned by the usual suspects into championing something that will only increase the cost to them of those goods.
.
I suspect they are still hankering for ‘climate reparations’ of sufficient generosity to cover any increased costs.
The main issue here for any country with sensible leaders, is giving foreign nations the authority to levy taxes on other countries, based on economic activity that occurs far from their own shores.
Whatever the circumstances or particulars, any leader which grants a foreign nation the authority to levy taxes on that leaders’ country or economic activity, is letting the camel’s nose under the tent flap in a way which could likely only be undone by a war.
Sensible leaders? The one species that really has been driven near to extinction by ‘climate change’, at least in the West.
Tax the tourism to those islands instead and they would soon shut up.
That is what carbon taxes are intended to do….tax tourism and make it more expensive to ship goods to those same islands….so that somebody in a big city can get mass transit and a heat pump discount…but really, shouldn’t that make them scream ?
So, apparently somebody in AUS is actually awake. Want to collapse world economy? Price shipping out of business. What a bunch of ‘tards that are running OCEAN DEPENDENT SHIPPING Pacific Island governments.
Any island nation (Oz, UK, NZ etc.) relies on shipping for the bulk of its imports and exports. It therefore seems quite logical to oppose a carbon tax on cargo ships. Cruise ships, on the other hand…