A new Feb 2008 pdf downloadable from

http://www.carbonequity.info/index.html

Here are some highlights.

>From the Introduction:

> We have, according to the USA's leading climate scientist, James
> Hansen, already passed some climate "tipping points" and now face
> dangerous climate change in coming decades. While the evidence has
> grown to a now overwhelming case, governments have wasted a decade in
> endless negotiations and quibbling over who should go first, while
> ignoring the large carbon debt accrued by the rich and owed to the
> majority world. It is clear that forms of "greener business as usual"
> are not sufficient to bring the required depth or speed of change. In
> Australia, the mainstream debate remains focused on emissions trading
> as a means of reducing emissions, yet there is no agreement on a clear
> target for capping emissions! Many in industry advocate options that
> may ameliorate but cannot solve the climate problem -- such as "clean"
> coal which cuts but does not fully eliminate carbon dioxide emissions
> and is unproven technology at the scale required -- or options that
> add to other major problems such as "greenhouse friendly" nuclear
> power that maintains and spreads technical capabilities that can be
> used for the proliferation of nuclear weapons capability. When do we
> as a community admit that the current responses are simply not enough
> and are wasting valuable time and getting us into worse trouble? At
> what point do we ask whether we need to put aside the limitations of
> our current models and modes of thinking and stop assuming that
> technological innovation and market-based mechanisms can deliver the
> reductions that the science is telling us we need to make in the
> absence of clear public policy to achieve a safe climate and the use
> of a full suite of measures, including lifestyle change? At what point
> do we acknowledge that we, as a local and global community, need to
> take the global warming problem seriously and consider all effective
> options, including those that have been treated as off-limits because
> they go beyond business-as-usual. This report asks exactly these
> questions. It argues forcefully that we must look for something new,
> something equal to the profound and immense task that confronts us as
> we stand at the start of the global-warming century.

A centerpiece of their proposed solution is a cap and auction system.
I am still weary of the side effects of introducing an entirely new
kind of property rights, even if the intent is to distribute it
fairly. My hunch is that a combination of regulation (ban on new coal)
and carbon taxes would be much better, but I am still looking for
solid economic arguments pro and con.  (That's why I am sending this
message to PEN-L.)

> An authority independent of government, like the Reserve Bank, sets a
> national carbon emissions budget each year, which is decreased each
> year in a series of downward steps in accordance with the rapid
> transition plan. Because households (in Australia) are directly
> responsible for about one-quarter of emissions (generated by household
> energy use and personal private travel), one-quarter of the carbon
> budget would be made available free of charge as an equal "carbon
> credit" (or ration) for each citizen via an electronic swipe "carbon
> card" which would be used to draw on an individual carbon credit
> balance each time household gas and electricity, petrol and air
> tickets are paid for. Unused credits could be sold. For the energy
> embedded in commodities purchased such as food and personal services,
> the carbon ration would already have been paid by the manufacturer,
> and its cost built into the end price for the consumer. If a person
> lacks the carbon credits to cover a purchase or is an overseas visitor
> without a carbon credit, he or she could buy on the "spot" market at
> the point of sale. The balance of three-quarters of the national
> emissions budget would be auctioned to business and government in an
> "emissions trading" market where the price would rise and fall such
> that the business and government demand for carbon emissions would not
> exceed the carbon budget target.



Back cover:

> Here is the message from spaceship Earth. Our planet's health and
> capacity to function for the journey through time is now deeply
> imperilled. We stand on the edge of climate catastrophe.  Like Apollo
> 13, we have only one option and that is, for the duration, to abandon
> our life-as-normal project and hit the emergency button, to plan with
> all our ingenuity how to survive and with unshakeable determination
> build a path for a return to a safe-climate Earth and to act with
> great speed and efficacy. Our life support systems -- food, water,
> stable temperatures -- are at risk, and our consumption of fossil
> fuels is completely unsustainable. The voyage will be perilous and
> require intense & innovative team-work to find and mobilise
> technological and social answers to problems. Putting aside the
> "cost-too-much" mantras, our collective actions need to be driven by
> the imperative that "Failure is not an option!"  If we do not succeed,
> we lose not just a small spacecraft but most of life on this planet.

Reply via email to