Extracts from replies to campaign letters and responses to this site
9 November 2010: Received from Gary Newman, Plant Fibre Technology Ltd., UK
Congratulations on your climate change site. It’s nice and clear and easy to understand.
3 November 2010: Received from Aubrey Meyer, founder of the Global Commons Institute
Your letter of the 12th of October to The Hon Greg Combet MP Minister for Climate Change, Energy Efficiency and Water (http://www.climatechangeanswers.org/campaign/LessonsFromCopenhagen.pdf) made a good case for Contraction and Convergence [C&C]. I am posting it on GCN [The Global Commons Network]. Should Greg Combet ever give you a reply, we'd be very interested in what he says if you'd care to share it.
There is a lot of support for C&C: - http://www.gci.org.uk/endorsements.html but this level support is not yet nearly decisive, as the commentary around the upcoming COP meetings of UNFCCC suggests. However, as time seems to be running out between now and COP-17, there is more coordinated effort these days to achieve that level. We may yet succeed, not a little due to letters like the one you wrote. Well done and kind regards
23 September 2010: Received from Steve O'Connor
I recently found your website (via the skeptical science blog) it's really awesome what you're doing.. you should join SS as an author!
My Response:
I am a guest writer for the Skeptical Science web site.
13 August 2010: Received from Jennie Lenman on behalf of Senator Nick Xenophon (Independent)
Thank you for your letters to Nick Xenophon in February and June this year, regarding climate change, ocean acidification and climate policy alternatives. Nick has asked me to respond on his behalf.
Nick agrees that the Federal Government's stagnant approach to finding a credible and effective climate and energy policy is of great concern. He believes the target of 100 per cent renewable energy by 2020 should be embraced. Solar thermal power plants and wind farms are already being rolled out in the US, Spain and other parts of the world and there is no reason why Australia should not follow suit. The technology is available and it is time Australia stopped relying so heavily on an energy infrastructure that is so heavily dependent on fossil fuels.
19 July 2010: Received from Senator Sue Boyce (Liberal)
Thank you for your informative letter outlining the mid to long term consequences for the food chain of ocean acidification caused by absorption of increasing quantities of atmospheric CO2.
I most certainly concur that this and other environmental trends are likely caused by atmospheric levels of CO2. Further, even if one were not completely convinced by all aspects of the prevailing scientific argument, it would still be prudent to recognise this uncertainty by reducing CO2.
The real problem currently lies in obtaining international agreement to an effective method of carbon pricing. This was demonstrated only too convincingly at Copenhagen.
The Coalition's Direct Action Plan opts, for the short term, to tackle climate change by targeting specific major sources of pollution and supporting revegetation and like measures while working toward an internationally agreed carbon pricing mechanism in the longer term.
I find this imperfect reality as frustrating as you probably do and look forward to progress toward an international agreement. Meantime our policy is to encourage development of improved infrastructure to reduce costs to our country when such an agreement is realised.
29 June 2010: Received from Senator Christine Milne (Greens)
As you are aware, the Greens agree wholeheartedly with you on this issue and we are doing everything within our power to achieve a genuinely effective Australian climate change response.
In the "Emission Trading Scheme versus Carbon Tax" debate the Australian Greens have adopted a different position from the one you suggest in your letter:
... In spite of our reservations regarding a carbon tax, in order to break the deadlock, the Greens have proposed to the Government to adopt Garnaut's interim solution: a two year carbon price fixed at $20 a tonne.
This proposal for a transitional carbon pricing mechanism would:
Thanks again for your letter. I remember your previous two letters as being very clear and informative.
My response:
It is true that there are pros and cons in the ETS versus tax debate. I would be happy to see Australia adopt either solution provided it was well constructed and ambitious in its target.
Senator Milne's comments about the advantage of an ETS over a flat rate carbon tax are valid. That is why my proposed fossil fuel tax is an incrementing carbon tax. Its effect is like an ETS in that the tax increases over time to a level that polluting industries are unable to absorb. They are forced to pass the cost on to their customers who then have an incentive to change their spending patterns. Generators of clean energy become cost-competitive with coal-fired energy as the cost of the latter rises. The government determines the outcome it wants in terms of reduced emissions, and the carbon tax rises in annual increments until the outcome is on track to be achieved. If greater reductions are achieved than anticipated the tax can be decreased. In this way the market in effect determines the rate of carbon tax, but the government retains control. The risk of carbon price volatility is removed.
29 June 2010: Received from Greg Hunt MP (Liberal)
I have read with interest the letter that you have sent me, and appreciate the views and suggestions that you have put forward.
... I have provided for you a copy of the Coalition's environmental policy. I hope that it is of interest to you.
25 June 2010: Received from the Hon Malcolm Turnbull MP (Liberal)
Thank you very much for your letter about ocean acidification. I agree entirely with your concern about this issue. Please stay in touch.
30 March 2010: Received from Anthony Swirepik, Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, on behalf of Senator Penny Wong (Labor)
I commend you for taking the initiative to investigate the science behind climate change. Tackling the challenge of climate change is one of the Australian Government's highest priorities.
... The government has developed a comprehensive and integrated suite of climate change policies and programs to guarantee that emissions come down, provide incentives for action as we meet our ambitious pollution reduction targets, and transform the economy over time. This involves:
... I agree with your view that many climate skeptics ignore aspects of climate change science when presenting their arguments. This is in spite of the fact that there is clear evidence that our climate is changing, largely due to anthropogenic greenhouse gases.
30 March 2010: Received from Senator Christine Milne (Greens)
Thank you for your letter dated 18 February 2010 explaining the 40 year delay between climate change cause and effect.
I really appreciate the time and effort you have taken to put together this document and hope you will send it to all Members of Parliament.
We do need to counter the misinformation campaign unleashed by those who say that man-made climate change is nonsense. Your document does this very well.
22 March 2010: Received from Senator Stephen Parry (Liberal)
Thank you for your letter dated 18 February 2010 regarding climate change. I read with interest your detailed explanation of the 40 year delay between cause and effect.
I have forwarded your research to The Hon. Andrew Robb, Chairman of the Coalition Policy Development Committee and the Hon. Greg Hunt, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage for their consideration.
12 March 2010: Received from Senator Nick Sherry (Labor)
Thank you for your correspondence concerning climate change. I understand and appreciate your views on this issue and I thank you for bringing them to my attention.
... Australia has a responsibility to address the nation's relatively high per capita emissions. The Rudd Labor Government is committed to ensuring Australia meets its responsibilities in facing this global challenge.
... If you would like more information on the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, go to http://www.climatechange.gov.au/whitepaper
4 March 2010: Received from the Hon Joe Hockey MP (Liberal)
I agree with you that addressing climate change is one of the greatest challenges facing the world. The weight of scientific opinion clearly points to the fact that our planet is warming and that greenhouse gases are the principal cause.
I have, and always will, support strong action on climate change. I am firmly of the belief that climate change policy is a risk-management process requiring action to protect both Australia's and the world environment.
... I welcome Mr Abbott's announcement that the Coalition remains committed to keeping the Government's 5 - 25 per cent 2020 emissions reduction targets, and believe that direct action is the best way to efficiently reduce our carbon emissions.
I will continue to advocate in both parliament and in shadow-cabinet for strong action to protect our children's futures. Thank you for taking the time to write to me.