Victoria takes the lead
Leadership on climate change has been absent from the federal election campaign, but at last we are getting some from the states. Or at least from Victoria, where the Labor government is outlining a bold climate change strategy in areas where its federal counterparts fear to tread.
In what many people would like to see as a blueprint for national action, the Victorian government has set an ambitious target of a 20 per cent fall in greenhouse emissions by 2020, throwing down the gauntlet to the mainstream federal parties, that have only brought modest reduction targets to the policy table.
In the Victorian energy white paper to be released today, Victorian Premier John Brumby says the targeted fall from 2000 levels will translate into a 40 per cent fall (per capita) from business as usual, cutting the state’s emissions from 121 million tonnes a year now (and 130 million by 2020 under BAU), to 96 million by 2020.
Brumby says the state supports a national trading scheme “but is no longer willing to wait for this to occur. We must do our fair share in global efforts to reduce emissions.”
“There is no doubt that climate change poses huge risks for our economy, our environment and our way of life,” says Brumby. “But equally there are great opportunities in acting early, and our actions to address climate change will create a 'climate of opportunity' for Victoria’s innovators and entrepreneurs.”
The measures will include amending powers under the Environment Protection Act to effectively ban new power stations based on current brown coal technologies; and the creation of a greenhouse “trigger” for large emitters that will enable the regulation of greenhouse gases as part of licensing and approvals.
The government plans to reduce emissions from its brown coal generators – the heaviest emitting power utilities in Australia – by four million tonnes over the next four years by conducting a “competitive open book process” to ensure that the abatement is secured at least cost.
It says this would be the equivalent of closing two units at the Hazelwood Power station, but that these measures will not provide the opportunity for windfall gains for utilities.
The government will also introduce a targeted emission level of 0.8 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per megawatt hour, lower than most black coal power stations.
Among other measures, it says it will establish a “green door” for renewable energy, which it says will help fast track energy projects with an emission thresh-hold of 0.5tCo2/MWh, particularly those above 30MW.
Another key part of the abatement process will be the creation of Victorian Carbon Exchange, to help re-establish voluntary markets for the public and businesses in the absence of a national emissions trading scheme.
This exchange will allow for offsets to be created through activities such as soil carbon sequestrations, improved farming practices and new plantations. It will establish clear rules for which crown land can be used for carbon sequestration.
Other measures include a clean business fund to support projects that would have been viable under a carbon price, but would be un-commercial otherwise, and a “ClimateTech” strategy that will seek to replicate the state’s success in bio-technology and position Victoria as a top-5 global leader in clean technologies.
The Victorian government will also set a target of a 5-star equivalent energy rating across existing homes by 2020, introduce a comprehensive retrofit program and offer more rebates for solar hot water installation.
Apart from the 5 per cent target of energy to be sourced from large scale solar, announced last week as along with the country’s first large-scale feed-in tariffs, the government will look at establishing up to 50MW of co-generation power plants in hospitals, increase the government’s greenpower commitment to 50 per cent by 2020 from 25 per cent now, and add $100 million to the green buildings program.
It will offer support to the introduction of electric vehicles into the state and will reduce its own fleet emissions by 20 per cent by 2015 and start with the purchase of 2000 Camry hybrid vehicles.
Comments on this article
CO2 data....
Carbon
The CO2 levels quoted on http://www.warwickhughes.com/icecore/ are highly doubtful. There were attempts before Moauna Loa to measure atmospheric CO2, but the technology wasn't up to it. It is highly likely that most if not all direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 before the 20th century were wrong.
Decarbonising
CO2 is not a problem, never was, not now, not ever. James Hansen in 1976 was worried about the coming ice age, now he is frightening people with some very dodgy science. I suggest Bob Muntz should also read Bob Carter or Ian Plimer for another perspective based on climate history. He could also visit WUWT and read an excellent article on the role clouds play in keeping temperatures within limits.
If this foolishness to cut emissions is pursued then I support Peter Lang and lets go nuclear. The French produce nuclear power for 20 pounds /kWh. By comparison coal power is about 35 pounds /kWh and WIND IS 92-114 pounds/kWh. If you are a consumer which would you prefer?
Victoria Takes the Lead
Interesting that geothermal seems to be lumped in as renewable, but no mention of nuclear, which is as renewable as geothermal.
Without satisfactory base load generation capacity, there is no way renewables can contribute more than 25-35% and keep the grid stable.
In Victoria's case, I would think wave power should also be considered - although undoubtedly greens would object because they would possibly obstruct the passage of fish or some similar problem.
Carbon
James Hansen states above 350 ppm of carbon we are really in an unknown scenario and we are currently at about 390 ppm.
Obviously climate in most geological ages was a disaster, but the animals and plants of the time were blissfully unaware of this and so life continued happily on.
http://www.warwickhughes.com/icecore/ points out that the CO2 climb we have had since the 1800's has used indirect methods to estimate CO2 in the earlier period, even though accurate direct measurements were available.
The accurate measured value for the 19th century was 335ppm, whereas we are given "holy writ" of 290ppm, arrived at by indirect means and selective use of measured data from the period, ignoring the majority of measurements which are too high to fit the theory.
Based on such "science" Hansen, Mann, Jones and others tell us that CO2 has risen disastrously from that time. To bolster this they then quote a baseline from Moana Loa - an active volcano close to several other active volcanoes on a volcanically active chain of islands!
Why not use less dubious stations as base line?
Atmospheric temperature record also doesn't support the theory.
Shakin' Stevens for renewable energy
I don't know what they're doing, but they laugh alot behind the 'green door'!
Ah, who could forget those immortal words from that classic Elvis wannabe, Shakin' Stevens? Obviously not John Brumby....
But seriously folks, if there's a 'green door' for renewable projects to fast track projects under the 0.5 tonne Co2/MWh, then this includes all the new gas-fired projects on the table in Victoria, most of which come in at 0.4 C02/MWh. First point - obviously, these are not renewable projects so let's not call them something they're not.
But secondly, there are 5 such projects under development in Victoria at the moment, totalling 3.8 GW - over twice Hazelwood's entire capacity. If these are fast-tracked, there'll be no shortage of supply to cover the replacement of the entire Hazelwood plant. Indeed, an oversupply of power could see depressed prices for generators.
Replacement of the entire Hazelwood plant is in the best interests of both our economy and our environment.
Why spend $1 trillion on unreliable power supply?
Why should Australia spend $1 trillion on an unreliable power supply when we could have a reliable power supply of clean electricity for about $120 billion?
The renewable energy systems will not be able to provide the power supply needed by modern society. But nuclear can.
This site shows the vision of what we could and should have. http://www.rte-france.com/fr/developpement-durable/maitriser-sa-consommation-electrique/consommation-production-et-contenu-co2-de-l-electricite-francaise
This is for the country with the lowest emissions from electricity of all the advanced economies. It also has near the lowest cost electricity in the EU.
Move the mouse over the power versus time area chart and notice how the proportions of electricity generated from each type of fuel changes. And notice the very low CO2 emissions. And only 1% renewables!!
This is where Australia should and could be if not for 30+ years of polices based on dogma and ideology.
And still we continue with these irrational beliefs.
Thank you
Great to see some real leadership and positive steps to focus action on reducing carbon emissions in a way that includes business as part of the solution.
Carbon
Some leadership at last! No matter how tenuous it maybe, anything to reduce emissions is better than, business a usual. I have read NASA scientist, James Hansen's book. 'Storms of my Grandchildren'. It should be obligatory reading for all politicians. As he states, above 350 ppm of carbon we are really in an unknown scenario and we are currently at about 390 ppm. He alo presents a compelling case to cease burning coal, NOW.
Surely, even that evasive person Blind Freddy, must be able to see what is already happening to our planet and why!!