Tag Archives: Fed Govt

PLEA Network

28 October 2016, Renew Economy, Coal wars: A fact check for the Turnbull government. Since Malcom Turnbull replaced Tony “coal is good for humanity” Abbott, the Adani Carmichael Mine, the Galilee Basin and environmental “Lawfare” had been out of the news. But an increase in the coal price and Turnbull’s apparent change of view means the Coal Wars are BACK. It’s time to re-arm yourselves the facts. 

CLAIM: The Adani mine will create 10,000 jobs.

FACTS: Adani’s own economist contradicted this under oath in the Queensland Land Court, saying: “Over the life of the Project it is projected that on average around 1,464 employee years of full time equivalent direct and indirect jobs will be created”. 

  Adani’s economist, Jerome Fahrer from ACIL Allen, found that Adani’s mine and rail operations would employ around 1,800 people directly and create around 1,000 downstream jobs in “other services”.  But, in building and operating such a big mine, ACIL found that the project would reduce employment in agriculture, manufacturing and other mining projects by around 1,400 jobs.  All this is shown in ACIL’s graph below, with increased jobs at the Carmichael mine in yellow, increases in services in dark purple and reductions in manufacturing, agriculture and other mining below the axis: Read More here

PLEA Network

3 November 2016, Australia has not disclosed details of its carbon emissions accounting despite repeated requests, the chief scientist of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) said on Thursday. Speaking at the launch of UNEP’s Emissions Gap report in London, Jacqueline McGlade said she had been unable to draw any conclusion about whether Australia is on track to meet its pledges under the Cancun and Paris climate deals. In a repeat of last year, the Australian government continued to claim that it had cancelled licenses for coal power stations but failed to declare the details publicly. That means proposed projects like the Kingston power station in South Australia officially remain part of Australia’s future energy plans. “There’s a process which takes a long time before it comes out into the open that these 15 plants are not going forward. Until we know they aren’t going forward they are in the calculation,” said McGlade. Out of the G20, the only other nations that could not be assessed because of inadequate information were Indonesia and South Africa. McGlade’s travails with the Australians are not new. In fact, she said, there had been some improvement on last year’s impasse. She said that she could now say the government would definitely meet its targets under the Kyoto Protocol. The government also claims it will meet the pledge it agreed in Cancun in 2010 to be emitting 5% less than it was in 2000 by 2020. It has previously been highlighted that this will only be achieved through some creative accounting. But McGlade said that the lack of information from the government meant that no conclusion could be drawn. “Right now Australia is neutral as far as if it is making progress or not,” she said. “When we talk about if it’s going to meet the 2020 trajectory… it’s very difficult to evaluate progress.” “It is a very open dialogue and we continue to press the government that insofar as it is possible to publish the retraction of certain licenses, that will help your case. But until we see that, we can’t document it.” Read More here

PLEA Network

31 October 2016, The Conversation, Turnbull wants to change Australia’s environment act – here’s what we stand to lose. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is seeking changes to Australia’s national environment act to stop conservation groups from challenging ministerial decisions on major resource developments and other matters of environmental importance. Turnbull is reviving a bid made by former Prime Minister Tony Abbott to abolish Section 487 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC Act) – a bid rejected in the Senate in 2015. If it goes ahead, the change will significantly diminish the functionality of the act. The EPBC Act, introduced by the Howard government in 1999, has an established record of success. Judicial oversight of ministerial discretion, enabled by expanded standing under Section 487, has been crucial to its success. Section 487 allows individuals and groups to challenge ministerial decisions on resources, developments and other issues under the EPBC Act. An organisation can establish standing by showing they have engaged in activities for the “protection or conservation of, or research into, the environment” within the previous two years. They must also show that their purpose is environmental protection. Repealing this provision would remove the standing of these groups to seek judicial review of decisions. Standing would then revert to the common law position. That means parties would need to prove they are a “person aggrieved” by showing that their interests have been impacted directly. Read More here

PLEA Network

21 October 2016, Renew Economy, A renewable fiction: Myths mainstream media refuses to let go. For reasons that are not entirely clear, renewable energy sources such as wind and solar appear to have gotten the better of mainstream media. For years now, many in mainstream media have been propagating myths about renewable energy in general, and wind and solar in particular. It’s unclear why this is so – whether it is simply about ideology, politics, the protection of vested interests or simply the fear of new technologies and new ideas. Since the big price spike in South Australia and then the blackout, however, the myth making has reached plague proportions and has spread to some surprising corners. From the arch conservative Andrew Bolt of News Limited to Chris Uhlmann at the ABC, and via so much of the Murdoch media, the Fairfax Press, commercial TV and radio and rather too many in ABC radio and TV, the myths have been perpetuated, egged along by conservative politicians. The instances are so many that it is impossible to count, let alone list, and for this article we will ignore the cheap sloganeering such as “renewables are a fraud”, “wind energy doesn’t work,” and “wind energy is a boondoggle.” The problem we identify in the following examples is that there still seems an inherent bias against wind energy, and it appears to be based either on a lack of understanding of how energy systems work, or how they are changing. They seem convinced that renewables are the primary cause of high electricity prices, that fossil fuel plants don’t need back up, that transmission lines were only built to link remote and unreliable wind farms. They fail to understand – and appear to have no interest in asking – that new technologies can make the grid cheaper and more stable, and that we should be accelerating the transition rather than slowing it down and turning to old and expensive alternatives. Read More here