The government wants to put a tax on emissions of carbon dioxide. They constantly refer to the tax as a carbon price, but they want to tax carbon dioxide emissions.
Your ABC either
- doesn't understand that Carbon Dioxide is a colourless gas; or
- they don't understand that the carbon tax is a tax on carbon dioxide (that invisible gas); or
- they are deliberately trying to cloud the issue using this image.
Memo to Marion Wilkinson and Deb Masters: Investigative journalists should make sure that they understand the topic before investigating. Did you understand that the tax on carbon is in fact a tax on invisible carbon dioxide?
Did the Chief Scientist say that there was a lot of debate about the science?
Australia's chief scientist Ian Chubb says the climate change debate is continuing to hit new lows.I thought that we had been told that the science is settled. But, of course, if the science IS settled, then we have no need to fund research into climate change, do we. Perhaps, the science being settled, we have no need even for a Chief Scientist.
Did your investigation look at China; the largest market for our exported coal?
The Australian reports on The Greening of China - A Mirage.
Last month China became the world's largest emitters of carbon dioxide. It is also the world's largest manufacturer of solar panels and wind turbines.
The carbon tax bills are now before Australia's federal parliament. Julia Gillard, Greens leader Bob Brown and climate-change adviser Ross Garnaut have argued China's can-do green example ought to be our inspiration. But while China is playing a smart commercial game, its pro-green credentials are a mirage.How often have you heard PM Gillard and her real deputy leader Bob Brown say that China is closing down coal fired power stations? But do they ever tell you that for every power station put out of commission, two more are opened up. Do they say that China's coal consumption is increasing by 17% each year?
There is superficial evidence that China takes climate change seriously. Its 12th Five-Year Plan (2011-2015) claims China will reduce its carbon intensity (the amount of carbon emitted per unit of output) by 17 per cent in 2015 compared with current levels. And 50 per cent of its energy will come from renewable sources by 2050.
Yet dig a little deeper and it becomes clear Beijing's carefully crafted message about shifting towards a green future is primarily designed for Western markets eager for alternative energy sources and as a defence against these same governments putting greater pressure on China to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions.
The International Energy Agency estimates almost 80 per cent of China's energy needs will be met by coal and oil in 2030. Official Chinese estimates by industry, science and technology ministries suggest coal alone will still provide about two-thirds of China's fuel needs in 2030. Which leads to the inescapable conclusion that a target that half the country's energy needs will be met by renewable sources in 2050 is not achievable.
Of course, not a word about this in the Four Corners report. Even if the falsified hypothesis that man made CO2 emissions are causing runaway global warming were true, what savings would a tax on Australia's small carbon emissions make?