Comments on: Carbon Trading Triple Backflip with a twist http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/ are you playing the game or watching from the stands? Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:53:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Marc http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-59 Marc Tue, 21 Nov 2006 07:01:09 +0000 http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-59 Yeah I agree on water above I was mainly pointing to the sydney siders saying climate change is why sydney has a water shortage. when really that is mainly a demand side imbalance. Yeah I agree on water above I was mainly pointing to the sydney siders saying climate change is why sydney has a water shortage. when really that is mainly a demand side imbalance.

]]> By: Grant http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-58 Grant Mon, 20 Nov 2006 20:47:56 +0000 http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-58 The other thing I meant to mention earlier was that there is a scientific basis linking climate change to drought and water shortages. The link is not as direct as many people think, but it does exist. The other thing I meant to mention earlier was that there is a scientific basis linking climate change to drought and water shortages. The link is not as direct as many people think, but it does exist.

]]> By: Grant http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-57 Grant Mon, 20 Nov 2006 13:36:37 +0000 http://www.marclehmann.net/2006/11/carbon-trading-triple-backflip-with-a-twist/#comment-57 Hi Marc. I agree with your sentiment. However, I think this particular backflip has more to do with a looming election that straight out profiteering. I suspect Howard's pollsters have tipped global warming as an election issue, so they've announced an inquiry into it - and I suspect the results of that enquiry will be announced in the leadup to the next election. The recent frenzy of media following Al Gore's visit and An Inconvenient Truth have really rammed home the urgency required on this issue, and Howard needs to catch up. He is using the "China and India must be part of the trading scheme" line as justification for the long delay on acting. So the inquiry has been launched, essentially ignoring the trading mechanisms embedded into the Kyoto Protocol, and those recently floated by the Australian State governments. Howard wants something he can call his own at a politically convenient time. I think that Howard's nuclear push is much more closely related to his industry backers than the trading scheme. But I think the nuclear inquiry has also moved him towards trading, as it is the only way local nuclear production can be justified (and even then the justification is tenuous). Hi Marc.

I agree with your sentiment. However, I think this particular backflip has more to do with a looming election that straight out profiteering.

I suspect Howard’s pollsters have tipped global warming as an election issue, so they’ve announced an inquiry into it - and I suspect the results of that enquiry will be announced in the leadup to the next election.

The recent frenzy of media following Al Gore’s visit and An Inconvenient Truth have really rammed home the urgency required on this issue, and Howard needs to catch up. He is using the “China and India must be part of the trading scheme” line as justification for the long delay on acting.

So the inquiry has been launched, essentially ignoring the trading mechanisms embedded into the Kyoto Protocol, and those recently floated by the Australian State governments. Howard wants something he can call his own at a politically convenient time.

I think that Howard’s nuclear push is much more closely related to his industry backers than the trading scheme. But I think the nuclear inquiry has also moved him towards trading, as it is the only way local nuclear production can be justified (and even then the justification is tenuous).

]]>