Australia has to go a long way to reserve a position for itself among the nations trying to tackle the problem of global warming in a responsible manner, with a global perspective. Its plans on global warming outlined recently have been received with mixed response, even by the people of Australia.
It is admitted that the greenhouse emissions if left unchecked would increase beyond measure in the next three decades. This is a question having a bearing on a huge range of activities; from individual lifestyle to operational behavior of large scale industries, all our activities make an impact on the environment of the world, mostly adversely. Now Australia has come out with its detailed long term plan to meet the challenges of global warming.
According to the announcement of government, a most comprehensive program of carbon trading will be fully functional in Australia in 2010. Outside Europe, this is the most noteworthy program. The objective is to cut greenhouse emissions by 5% of 2000 levels (minimum) by 2020. If other countries could work for a higher target, Australia could also step up its target easily.
Mr. Penny Wong, Australian Climate Change Minister is of the view that the global warming is a threat to economy and effective action is called for to deal with the situation. There is a growing awareness that in the absence of measures to safeguard environment the nation would be losing many vital industries and the job opportunities that go with it.
The cornerstone of the Australian Plan is a carbon emissions trading program to be introduced within two years. This brings within its fold one thousand of Australia’s top level companies, covering nearly 75% of greenhouse emissions. It is generally agreed by leading scientists that the greenhouse gases of carbon dioxide and methane cause the most damage. These two gases are produced mostly by burning coal and oil. The companies engaged in these activities will have to buy permit for each ton of carbon they emit.
The environmentalists are disappointed with what has been announced. In their expectation, a 25% cut of greenhouse emissions is the minimum the government should work for. They think that the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd should address the issue more seriously. Ray Nias of the environmental group WWF has warned that the nation would have to pay a heavy price later for the low targets fixed now. He has said, "It commits Australia to long-term climate change. It will make Australia's ability to negotiate global agreements very, very difficult. It is much lower than even we had imaged the worst case being."The disappointments manifested as public demonstrations as well. About 100 persons assembled outside Parliament House in the national capital Canberra to express their disappointment of Rudd's cuts while in Sydney more than 100 demonstrators rallied outside government offices.
New South Wales Greens lawmaker John Kaye said, "Today's protest is to tell Kevin Rudd that the Australian people didn't vote for five%."
Australia relies on coal for producing electricity. This increases its per-capita greenhouse emission. At the same time, the impact of global warming would also be greater on Australia; some scientists have pointed out that the occurrence of frequent droughts in recent years could be indicative of serious adverse effects likely to afflict the country because of global warming. Droughts focus on the plight of the farmers and there are some who argue that they should be exempt from the carbon trading program for a minimum of five years.
The Global Economic Crisis and its effect on Australian financial system have provided another argument against the environmental program. Many business stake holders have warned against adding burden on the organizations already struggling to pull on. Peter Anderson, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said, “It does beg the basic question and that is whether or not these costs can be borne by business in the first place at a time when Australia is going through an international economic firestorm and we need to come through that economic firestorm with a strong economy… And placing domestic stress on the economy is just going to make that more difficult."
The Prime Minister, however, has stood his ground, without seeming to be aggressive. He has justified the cuts as "a responsible course of action" necessary for the economy and for dealing with the environmental challenge of climate change. He has said, "The Australian government, given the global financial crisis, makes no apologies whatsoever for introducing responsible medium term targets to bring down our greenhouse gas emissions, capable of being built on in the future more ambitiously," he told reporters in remote Western Australia.
Source
It is admitted that the greenhouse emissions if left unchecked would increase beyond measure in the next three decades. This is a question having a bearing on a huge range of activities; from individual lifestyle to operational behavior of large scale industries, all our activities make an impact on the environment of the world, mostly adversely. Now Australia has come out with its detailed long term plan to meet the challenges of global warming.
According to the announcement of government, a most comprehensive program of carbon trading will be fully functional in Australia in 2010. Outside Europe, this is the most noteworthy program. The objective is to cut greenhouse emissions by 5% of 2000 levels (minimum) by 2020. If other countries could work for a higher target, Australia could also step up its target easily.
Mr. Penny Wong, Australian Climate Change Minister is of the view that the global warming is a threat to economy and effective action is called for to deal with the situation. There is a growing awareness that in the absence of measures to safeguard environment the nation would be losing many vital industries and the job opportunities that go with it.
The cornerstone of the Australian Plan is a carbon emissions trading program to be introduced within two years. This brings within its fold one thousand of Australia’s top level companies, covering nearly 75% of greenhouse emissions. It is generally agreed by leading scientists that the greenhouse gases of carbon dioxide and methane cause the most damage. These two gases are produced mostly by burning coal and oil. The companies engaged in these activities will have to buy permit for each ton of carbon they emit.
The environmentalists are disappointed with what has been announced. In their expectation, a 25% cut of greenhouse emissions is the minimum the government should work for. They think that the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd should address the issue more seriously. Ray Nias of the environmental group WWF has warned that the nation would have to pay a heavy price later for the low targets fixed now. He has said, "It commits Australia to long-term climate change. It will make Australia's ability to negotiate global agreements very, very difficult. It is much lower than even we had imaged the worst case being."The disappointments manifested as public demonstrations as well. About 100 persons assembled outside Parliament House in the national capital Canberra to express their disappointment of Rudd's cuts while in Sydney more than 100 demonstrators rallied outside government offices.
New South Wales Greens lawmaker John Kaye said, "Today's protest is to tell Kevin Rudd that the Australian people didn't vote for five%."
Australia relies on coal for producing electricity. This increases its per-capita greenhouse emission. At the same time, the impact of global warming would also be greater on Australia; some scientists have pointed out that the occurrence of frequent droughts in recent years could be indicative of serious adverse effects likely to afflict the country because of global warming. Droughts focus on the plight of the farmers and there are some who argue that they should be exempt from the carbon trading program for a minimum of five years.
The Global Economic Crisis and its effect on Australian financial system have provided another argument against the environmental program. Many business stake holders have warned against adding burden on the organizations already struggling to pull on. Peter Anderson, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry has said, “It does beg the basic question and that is whether or not these costs can be borne by business in the first place at a time when Australia is going through an international economic firestorm and we need to come through that economic firestorm with a strong economy… And placing domestic stress on the economy is just going to make that more difficult."
The Prime Minister, however, has stood his ground, without seeming to be aggressive. He has justified the cuts as "a responsible course of action" necessary for the economy and for dealing with the environmental challenge of climate change. He has said, "The Australian government, given the global financial crisis, makes no apologies whatsoever for introducing responsible medium term targets to bring down our greenhouse gas emissions, capable of being built on in the future more ambitiously," he told reporters in remote Western Australia.
Source
No comments:
Post a Comment