Category Archives: Greening Australia

The imported book fiasco in Australia

Posted on by
Reply

Time Labor was brought to book | – suhit’s posterous

Given this week’s decision to maintain regulatory protection for Australian publishers from imported books, these politicians may find themselves paying up to 30 per cent more than readers in other countries, but then that’s the price of an economic policy that panders to vocal special interest groups at the expense of the wider community.

The decision – and Cabinet was reportedly deeply divided on the issue – means Australian publishers will retain a 30 day exclusivity period within which, if they decide to publish a specific title, they will not be subject to competition from often cheaper overseas imports.

This is nothing short of a special tax on books, and would appear to fly in the face of the pro-education rhetoric in which the Government so likes to cloak itself. Furthermore, the decision totally rejected recommendations from the Productivity Commission and also knocked back a compromise proposal from Competition Minister Craig Emerson.
[...]

In terms of books, if a title isn’t available here because an Australian publisher hasn’t picked it up or it’s far cheaper overseas, then in the digital age there’s always the likes of Amazon – which doesn’t pay Australian taxes or employ Australian workers. The imported books fiasco is a stark illustration of the fact that when it comes to continuing the process of reforming and modernising the Australian economy that began with the Hawke and Keating governments, and continued through the Howard years, the Rudd Government has to date been found sadly wanting.

via news.com.au

This is most ridiculous. In terms of losses, consumers in Australia will spend about $200 million per year because of this decision. These kinds of decisions by the Rudd government makes you wonder how they can manage the carbon reduction scheme. Their ability to pander to vocal interest groups is scary.

Update: An interesting history of the law in question which was enacted by the Britishers to help British publishers.

Carbon trading and the US Dollar

Posted on by
Reply

The collapsing US dollar is playing havoc with ETS projections. Governments that had been hoping to make extra revenue by selling carbon permits will now lose money, which means less cash available for subsidies to the developing countries.

That was exposed by this week’s Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook from the Australian Treasury.

In the past six months the Rudd government’s CPRS has gone from being a net contributor to revenue to a big cost – mainly because of the rising Australian dollar.

The CPRS was a $208 million benefit to the budget; now it’s a $1.2 billion cost over the forward estimates (to 2012-13). Over 10 years the net cost is now $2.5 billion.

In 2013-14, according to Treasury’s new forecasts, revenue from the sale of permits will total $12.1 billion and the cost of assistance measures will be $13.7 billion – a $1.6 billion budget hole.

The MYEFO says: “While world carbon prices have remained stable, the appreciation of the Australian dollar has resulted in the A$ carbon price estimate for 2012-13 falling from A$29 per tonne in the 2009-10 Budget to A$26 per tonne. A lower A$ carbon price assumption directly lowers the amount of revenue that is expected to be collected from the sale of CPRS permits.”

via Carbon trading in the dollar doldrums – Alan Kohler – News – Business Spectator.

Tesla Roadster breaks world record at the Global Green Challenge in Australia

Posted on by
Reply

Simon Hackett rode the Tesla pure electric roadster across Darwin to Australia, more than 3000 kms. Here are his results.

Internode Tesla Roadster at a petrol station in Adelaide on the last event dayHow would you like your car to achieve the equivalent of 1.6 Litres per 100 km (US 150 MPG)?

Would you like to do that while paying between AUS$69 and AUS$126 for your energy costs (including a surcharge to buy 100% GreenPower), to take you 3147 kilometres from the top of Australia to the bottom?

(or to put it another way: between 2.2 and 4 cents per km over that entire distance using GreenPower)?

We’ve just demonstrated that its possible – if the car is a pure electric vehicle.

Related articles by Zemanta

Leith Sharp

Posted on by
Reply
Harvard University
Image via Wikipedia

While working in the Greening job I learned a lot in terms of systems and inspiration from Leith’s work at Harvard. She has done some amazing stuff at a bureaucracy like Harvard.

She was the first paid environmental officer on the Kensington campus when still a student and after graduation was hired to “green” the university, which she did for five years.She pushed for sustainable solid waste disposal, worked with the state transit authority to cut commuting times to the campus, and ran a greenhouse gas challenge, an environmental living program so people could learn how to live sustainably, and a “green office” program.

By the time she took up a Churchill Fellowship in 1999 there were eight staff, funded by grants from not-for-profit groups, and government and university funding.When she set off to study international trends, she discovered “we were the ones leading, and instead of me learning from everyone else’s programs I used to get invited to present the UNSW case study.

It was exciting to be asked but on the other hand I was devastated to realise that no one had the answers in the higher education sector.”She spoke at Harvard and was recruited to create and run a program aimed at the enormous task of greening the campus.Her initiatives at Harvard are estimated to be saving $US7millon annually and have set the pace in the US higher education sector. Sharp has plenty of practical advice on inculcating the cultural change that must support technical measures such as equipment upgrades, lighting and insulation improvements, and making it self-funding.

via Harvard visitor Leith Sharp sharpens focus on sustainability | The Australian.

Simon Hackett in the Global Green Challenge

Posted on by
Reply

Simon said he would put the Tesla through its paces in the six-stage journey, covering distances from 300km to 700km per day. “We’re simulating the recharging infrastructure by putting a generator on the back of a truck and sending that out ahead of the car to be at the recharge point we want,” he said.

“The idea is to demonstrate that if you have the appropriate recharging infrastructure on the highway system, you can drive at normal highway speeds and treat it just like any other car. We’re asking that if the recharging infrastructure is available, can the car cut it? Can you drive one from Darwin to Adelaide and make it? My aim is to prove that point – and this is the perfect event for it. This event is about proving whether you can do that with alternative energy cars.”

image001

Simon Hackett, as he sets off to break the world distance record for a production electric vehicle

And he has put in an innovative way to track the real time progress of the car.

image003

 

Australia should go nuclear if it is serious about carbon reduction

Posted on by
3

Robert Gottliebsen in Business Spectator:

21st century nuclear plant

While much of the rest of the world embraces nuclear technology as part of a mix of measures to reduce carbon emissions, Australia stands virtually alone among the majors in turning its back on the nuclear options while at the same time supplying most of the other nations with uranium.

But I don’t think Penny Wong will need to be reminded by the Chinese of Australia’s odd position because, as I will explain below, there is a dramatic community change taking place.

I am indebted to The Australians contributing editor Peter Van Onselen for explaining what actually happened at the Bali carbon conference and reminding me that 19 of the G20 countries have nuclear power in their energy mix or are planning the construction of reactors. There is only one G20 country that turns its back on the nuclear option – Australia.

I have been saying this for more than 18 months now that if Australia is serious about carbon than nuclear is the way to go. With Australian’s only ready to pay about $10 a month more on energy and no other base load solution comes near nuclear right now this is the way to go.

I think the Australian public will change their mind in the next couple of years.

Lowy poll: Climate change opinion in Australia is changing

Posted on by
1

Climate change opinion changing

In 2006, 68% of Australians said ‘global warming is a serious and pressing problem. We should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant costs’. Since then support for this position has dropped by 20 points with 48% of Australians now feeling this way, while support for the more intermediate response ‘we can deal with the problem gradually by taking steps that are low in cost’ has risen.

Our poll last year asked people about their willingness to pay to help solve climate change. We found (see chart below) that most people were only prepared to pay $10 or less a month extra on their electricity bill if it would help solve climate change. Not that much. 

Cleantech Networks in Australia

Posted on by
Reply
Australia, Perth: Solar ambition
Image by kool_skatkat via Flickr

Cleantech is the biggest potential for Australia to take part of the low-carbon future and enable production in the country rather than consumption.

My friend, John O’brien is doing is bit to popularise clean tech.  He is the MD of Australian Cleantech and has been running a very successful networking event in Adelaide. Now he has taken it to the big boys in Sydney by recently launching the Sydney Cleantech Network where he reports that about 150 people attended.

John provides examples of the companies which gave a 2 minute presentation.

Five companies then did ‘two minute pitches’ explaining their products and services and detailing their upcoming funding requirements. The companies were:

- CMA Corporporation – A leading integrated Australian-based recycling group that provides products and services to customers across three continents.

- Acoustica – Commercialising the world’s best “Green” Noise Barrier – Quietwave® Captive Membrane Technology.

- T3Energy – Developer of both a solar space heating and super-insulated building technologies will reduce energy consumption in homes by up to 80% while offering a competitive and compelling alternative to conventional homes.

- Azure Energy – The Azure Energy ALI system produces seven forms of energy from Solar Energy, in all weather conditions

- Universal Power Storage – Universal Power Storage (UPS) has the only invention in the Massive Electrical Storage (MES) space that can potentially deliver the largest scale electrical storage system in the world: rectifying the largest market failure in the electricity market – base load storage.

Companies need money and expertise to develop in Australia and then conquer the world; if not Australia will lose valuable people and future jobs to other countries.

A low carbon opportunity for Australia

Posted on by
Reply

The proposed amendments put forward by the Greens are not outlandish in the international context. The minimum 25 per cent abatement target is no more than what is put forward by the European Union and Japan, and somewhat less than the 40 per cent cut announced by the heavily oil-dependent Norway, who see such a reduction as the greatest economic opportunity for their country.

The Greens’ proposed accelerated push to renewables and energy efficiency would merely be playing catch-up to most of the developed world and China, the treatment of trade-exposed industries and the energy utilities is similar to that proposed by Professor Ross Garnaut, the limiting of international credit purchases is consistent with that proposed by the US and which is current policy in the EU, and the treatment of voluntary action on emission reductions and the FBT is just plain common sense.

More than that, what the Greens propose is what has been lacking in this country to date – a national carbon policy that actually sets a path on how Australia should de-carbonise. As one prominent consultant noted: “If you don’t think that’s a good idea, then the amendments are terrible. “

But you don’t have to believe just the Greens to appreciate the scale of change that must occur even within the next decade, either as a result of the world’s attempts to tackle climate change or of its failure to do so.

The International Energy Agency, in a document it prepared for the recent Bangkok climate talks, called for an “ambitious, robust global agreement in Copenhagen, which will credibly deliver substantial emissions abatement.”

A resources heavy industry, a consumption mentality and a small country away from most of the world is Australia. But if we can develop a low-carbon intensive production capability it would provide new growth to the economy and create a better future for Australia.  Irrespective of the real effects and needs of climate change this would be a good policy.

via Head-in-the-sand economics – Giles Parkinson – News – Business Spectator.

Small but powerful

Posted on by
Reply

Ceramic Fuel Cells has developed a small $6,000 home generator that has an 85 per cent power/heat conversion rate. A normal large power station has a 40 per cent power conversion rate. Ceramic’s high conversion figures have fascinated a whole range of European and Japanese power utilities who can see that the units can slash greenhouse emissions and halve the amount of gas required to generate home/office electricity and heating. And as the energy is produced in the home or office there is no transmission waste, although surplus electricity can be sold back to the grid.

via Small but powerful – Robert Gottliebsen – News – Business Spectator.