↓
 

PLEA Network

Climate change information and resources for change

  • PLEA Network
  • Addiction to Growth
    • Steady State Economy
    • Universal Basic Income
    • The Law vs Politics
  • The Science
    • Impacts Observed & Projected
    • All Things Carbon and Emissions
    • BOM Updates
    • Antarctica
  • Mainstreaming our changing climate
  • Fairyland of 2 degrees
  • Denial and the Political Agenda
  • Population & Consumption
    • People Stress
    • Food & Water Issues
    • Equity & Social Justice
    • Ecosystem Stress
    • Security & Conflict
  • Global Action/Inaction
    • IPCC What is it?
    • Paris COP21 Wrap-up
  • Australian Response / Stats
    • Federal Government – checking the facts
  • Communication
    • Resource News Sites
  • The Mitigation Battle
    • Fossil Fuel Reduction
  • Adaptation & Building Resilience
    • Downsizing Plan B
    • City Basics for Change
  • Ballarat Community
    • Regional Sustainability Alliance Ballarat
    • Reports & Submissions
  • Brown Hill Community FireAware Network
    • FireAware Network – Neighbourhood clusters
    • FireAware Network – Understanding risk
    • FireAware Network – Be prepared
    • FireAware Network – Role of council and emergency services
    • FireAware Network – Resources
  • The Uncomfortable Corner
  • Archive Library
    • Site Topics Index
    • Links Page for Teachers
  • Climate Change explained in one simple comic
Home→Tags Fed Govt - Page 58 << 1 2 … 56 57 58 59 60 61 >>

Tag Archives: Fed Govt

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →
PLEA Network

7 October 2015, Renew Economy, Hunt says “inevitable” large numbers will quit grid with battery storage. Australian environment minister Greg Hunt says it is inevitable that significant numbers of consumers will leave the grid in coming years, and repeated his vow to help accelerate the deployment of battery storage. Hunt was asked on ABC TV’s Lateline program on Tuesday – following a segment on a couple in the Blue Mountains going off-grid – if he thought that significant numbers of consumers would follow. “I do. I think it is inevitable,” Hunt said, before noting that Australia already had the highest penetration of rooftop solar in the world – an average 15 per cent across the nation. “Increasingly we will see the adoption of battery storage, which is the key thing to enable people to go off the grid. This is clearly the future,” Hunt said. “The debate is how long it takes and the task for government is to help bring that forward.” Indeed, two big international battery storage developers have chosen Australia to be their global launch pad for their battery storage initiatives. This includes Tesla and California counterpart Enphase Energy, which describes the Australian market as the most promising in the world. Not everyone, however, agrees that consumers should be encouraged to go off-grid, and Hunt’s comments could be seen as controversial if that is what he is urging. Read More here

PLEA Network

18 September 2015, The Guardian, Is new Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull already a climate change turncoat? Malcolm Turnbull once endorsed common sense positions on climate change. Then he became prime minister. During the first few days of being prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull seems to be doing his best to argue about climate change with a former version of himself. I know I might have already given the game away here, but who do you think said this only five years ago? “We are as humans conducting a massive science experiment with this planet. It’s the only planet we’ve got…. We know that the consequences of unchecked global warming would be catastrophic. We know that extreme weather events are occurring with greater and greater frequency and while it is never possible to point to one drought or one storm or one flood and say that particular incident is caused by global warming, we know that these trends are entirely consistent with the climate change forecasts with the climate models that the scientists are relying on…. We as a human species have a deep and abiding obligation to this planet and to the generations that will come after us.” Stirring stuff eh? That was Turnbull in August 2010, speaking at the launch of a report demonstrating the technical feasibility of moving Australia to a 100% renewable energy nation. During his first question time as PM earlier this week, Turnbull was asked if he would join Labor in its aspiration (and that’s about the extent of Labor’s policy on this right now) that Australia should be generating 50% of its electricity from renewables by 2030. Turnbull’s response? “[Opposition leader Bill Shorten] is highlighting one of the most reckless proposals the Labor party has made. Fancy proposing, without any idea of the cost of the abatement, the cost of proposing that 50% of energy had to come from renewables! What if that reduction in emissions you needed could come more cost-effectively from carbon storage, by planting trees, by soil carbon, by using gas, by using clean coal, by energy efficiency?” What did the Turnbull of 2010 make of a plan to move away from fossil fuels that was twice as ambitious as Labor’s, that actually explained how it could be done and that proposed doing it faster? Read More here

PLEA Network

11 September 2015, The Conversation, Ignored by the government, shrunk by resignations – where now for Australia’s Climate Change Authority? Bernie Fraser’s resignation as chairman of Australia’s Climate Change Authority has left many wondering what is left of it and what its future might be. Established three years ago as part of the climate change package negotiated by the previous parliament’s Multi-Party Climate Change Committee, the Authority was formed to serve as the principal source of climate policy advice to the federal government, particularly on the issue of emissions targets. Championed by the then Greens deputy leader Christine Milne, it was modelled closely on Britain’s Committee on Climate Change. The Authority is legislated to have nine part-time members, including the Chief Scientist ex officio. When the Abbott government was elected two years ago it expressed its intention to abolish the Authority along with the rest of the Labor government’s climate policy architecture. Unlike the former Climate Commission, which had a public education role (and since losing government backing has morphed into the independent Climate Council), the Authority was established by legislation as a statutory authority. The government could not obtain sufficient support in the Senate to abolish the Authority. In particular, Palmer United Party leader Clive Palmer struck a deal with the government in which he would support thecarbon tax repeal but not the abolition of the Climate Change Authority. With the Authority saved, Palmer said he wanted the government to instruct it to assess whether Australia should have an emissions trading system at some time in the future, and what conditions should trigger its introduction, taking special note of the policies of Australia’s major trading partners. The government agreed to Palmer’s request to extend funding for the Authority. Continued funding was essential in order to sustain the Authority’s secretariat, based in Melbourne, which at its peak reached around 35 but now stands at around 25. On its formation the Authority attracted some of the best and brightest to work for it. Read More here

PLEA Network

20 August 2015, SMH, Adani mine a $20b project creating 10,000 jobs? The Abbott government’s myths busted. When it comes to Australia’s largest coal mine, the Abbott government has a difficult relationship with the truth. If you haven’t heard, Australia is under siege from a new kind of eco-warrior, one with a manual and money for legal challenges designed to endlessly frustrate economic development. At the centre of this battle is the proposed Carmichael coal mine in Queensland. The mega mine, led by Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, has had its federal environmental approval set aside. Why? Because a Queensland environment group – the Mackay Conservation Group – exercised its legal rights and used a federal court challenge to expose a flaw in the government’s assessment of that project. The government now wants to remove those legal rights and hinder the ability of green groups to access the courts. The Parliament is clearly entitled to debate whether Australia’s environment laws are working as they were intended. But it should not be too much to expect that the government defend its position with arguments that have some semblance to the truth. To make its case to protect growth and jobs and stop “vigilante litigation”, ministers have repeatedly relied on inflated numbers, distortions and blatant inaccuracies about the Adani project to make their case. Here are some: Read More here

 

Post navigation

← Older posts
Newer posts →

Tags

Agriculture animal response Antarctica Arctic Attribution Bioenergy Bushfire carbon capture coal Community consumption Denial Drought Economy Emissions Extreme Events Fed Govt forest response gas geoengineering groundwater health insurance Legal Action Local Action Migration native forests New Technology nuclear oceans oil Renewables RET scheme State Govt subsidies trade agreements UNFCCC United Nations Waste Management water
©2025 - PLEA Network - Weaver Xtreme Theme
↑