7-24-08, 9:09 am

Original source: The Guardian, Australia


'An important biological species is at risk of disappearing due to the rapid and progressive removal of its natural habitat: humankind. We are becoming aware of this problem when it is almost too late to prevent it.' This warning was made by Fidel Castro at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992*. In a short seven-minute speech, the Cuban President identified the urgency of the situation, who was responsible for it and what had to be done. More than 15 years on, the situation has become even more urgent and grave. Climate change is a reality, and it is already taking its toll on that important species and its habitat. Floods, droughts, rising seas and the destruction of crops are some of the outcomes being experienced and taking a huge toll on those affected.

So what is the Rudd government planning for Australia, one of the worst greenhouse gas emitters per head of population? Climate Change Minister Penny Wong last week released the government’s green paper titled Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. Regrettably, the green paper does nothing of the sort; it is a blueprint for a system to pay the worst polluters to continue polluting as if there were no tomorrow.

The centrepiece of the system is a carbon emissions trading scheme where polluters would be required to buy permits allowing them to produce a certain amount of carbon gases. These permits would become commodities themselves, to be auctioned by government. Those who bought permits would be able to trade them on markets in much the same way as shares or taxi licences can be bought or sold.

They are a licence to pollute. Their cost would push up the price of the coal, electricity or whatever else was being produced. The green paper goes into detail on the ins and outs of how such a scheme would be phased in, who might receive compensation (pensioners, families, etc), how much permits might cost per tonne of carbon gases, whether caps would initially be placed on the price of pollution permits, what corporations might be exempt from the scheme, etc.

The media has run hot, debating the detail, interviewing different employer groups, trade union leaders. All of this, without questioning the validity of carbon emission trading schemes, let alone debating the alternatives and comparing what those alternatives might achieve. The narrow parameters of the debate have in fact diverted attention from pursuing real solutions and away from the immediacy of the climate change crisis.

Flawed concept

Successive Australian governments have either denied the reality of climate change, or have made some token acknowledgement while doing very little to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

The situation is urgent. It is a life-and-death matter, requiring radical changes NOW. The main polluters are the transnational corporations and the consumer, car-driven lifestyles of the richer nations.

The concept of a carbon tax or carbon emissions trading system is to make some financial imposition on those who pollute as a means of pressuring them to reduce or eliminate their emissions altogether. Even at its best this concept falls far short of what is required. It is a cop out, which avoids tackling the major polluters and developing alternative, renewable energy sources, and concrete action to reduce emissions.

In fact, the scheme is even worse than that because it compensates the major polluters for the extra cost involved in buying permits. This defeats the purpose of the scheme, as the higher prices were meant to act as a motivation for companies and people to change their ways.

But that is not all: the biggest polluters who export their goods will be given free permits to pollute and a 90 percent subsidy on those they pay for. Agriculture and land clearing and logging are exempt – completely free to add to the problem.

The paper pits economic growth against emission reductions as though it were some juggling act to try and get the right balance. It is not a game, it is not about balancing. Emissions must be reduced. Hysterical media headlines such as 'Carbon trading could cost 15,000 jobs' or claiming certain industries are at risk, are based on a narrow economic perspective, typical of the corporate sector.

One of the reasons given by government for subsidizing polluters is that the higher cost of permits would deter future investors in coal-powered energy generation!

The various employer organizations make loud noises about greenhouse gases and the environment. They see these issues in terms of how they can be used to generate new methods of profit-making. They still fail to understand that their own future profit-making will come to a halt along with the rest of society if serious action is not taken to reduce carbon emissions.

There seems to be no limit to the extent to which capitalism will go to profit from crisis and suffering. The big seed and chemical companies have prepared for climate change with new products that will grow in the new environmental conditions following further climate change.

Greenhouse gas reduction

Australia has a responsibility to reduce its carbon footprint. There are many ways in which this can be done – but it will need a government prepared to stand up to the coal-fired powerhouses, to the major coal mining corporations, to the aluminum industry, the petrol companies, car makers, and other corporate culprits.

The Australian public are very conscious of and willing to make changes to reduce their pollution. It is the corporate sector and its loyal servants in government that are the obstacles to progress.

Forget the emissions trading scheme. Instead, a simple 10 percent reduction of Australia’s $22 billion annual military spending could be used to fund solar panels on the roof of every house, block of flats, school, enterprise and office block.

Instead of paying polluters to pollute more, subsidies should be directed towards the cost of whitegoods with low energy usage ratings, to assist with research into renewable energy, and the development of alternative, renewable energy sources.

The lack of investment in public transport, which is bursting at the seams in some areas, is nothing short of criminal.

As Castro said in concluding his contribution to the 1992, 'Now that the supposed threat of communism has disappeared and there is no more pretext to wage cold wars or continue the arms race and military spending, what then prevents the immediate use of those resources to foster development in the Third World and to avert the ecological destruction threatening the planet?

'Let this be the end of selfishness and domination; the end of callousness, irresponsibility and deceit. Enough of insensitivity, irresponsibility and deceit. Tomorrow, it will be too late to do what should have been done a long time ago.'

* See full text of Castro’s contribution and reports at the World Food Crisis Summit from the Pacific and African delegations.

From The Guardian, Australia