Climate Change Authority

Some big news (at least for me). I’ve just been appointed as a member of the Climate Change Authority. I was pleasantly surprised by this – although I’m a strong supporter of the carbon price policy, I’ve been highly critical of the current government in other respects.

As regards the blog, the main implication is that I’m going to avoid posting anything that might constrain me as a member of the Authority (for example, views on policy issues) and also avoid polemical statements about climate issues. I’ll still post relevant information on the topic, and welcome debate in the comments section, but I won’t take an active part myself.

44 thoughts on “Climate Change Authority

  1. … and 20 short minutes later there’s another wannabe wrestler here on your “Comment on The doomsayers” thread. They do hate to be ignored.

  2. @John Quiggin

    Yes … there are some occasions when being constrained not to comment, though momentarily annoying, is in the longer run, a blessed relief. The vast majority of the people you’d swing at show themselves through their remarks to be reckless fools without any urging or analysis from you. Troubling to respond directly to them lends them credibility they ill-deserve and from which they derive satisfaction. Nobody whose opinion you value will bother with such folk.

    Take pleasure PrQ in your self-imposed private counsel. It’s a boon. As you say, you can always speak of the many things to which your post is not germane.

  3. Jim Birch :
    Seriously, who are you suggesting? Do you want a couple of innumerate denialists and one or two gung-ho she’ll-be-righters on the board for balance or something?

    Well if they had appointed Nick Minchin I wouldn’t have called it bland and I’d be begging for meetings to be open to the public. But even a Ziggy Switkowski or a Barry Brook could have kept it lively.

  4. I’ve seen the Catallaxy thread on this item and have decided I am justified in continuing with my spoof name.

  5. Inside the tent pissing out? Although being on boards can be just as frustrating as not being on boards in the end change mostly gets enacted from the inside so its good to see you there, congratulations.

  6. A lot of stuff to digest; from the NREL

    Renewable electricity generation from technologies that are commercially available today, in combination with a more flexible electric system, is more than adequate to supply 80% of total U.S. electricity generation in 2050 while meeting electricity demand on an hourly basis in every region of the country.

  7. An excellent and well-deserved appointment. Dare I say it casts the quality of the government’s judgement in good light, for a change.

  8. Well done.

    However, unless we leave ALL remaining coal in the ground we will not stop or even slow climate change. How many nations around the world are serious about leaving all remaining coal in the ground? My guess would be zero.

    Given that serious and even catastrophic climate change is now built in and inevitable, perhaps all the planning should be how to run a global civilization at a world mean temperature 6 degrees plus above the current level. That would be a sobering exercise.

  9. Very pleased to see this John. And a fine thing that those appointing the group are not after a group of yes men.

  10. To Terje @33 (and in the process seconding Nick’s comment @39), from your perspective what’s wrong with someone like John Marlay?

    He’s an alumina company executive and a former member of Howard’s task force on emissions trading, and someone that only the hopelessly partisan could regard as a shill for Labor or for left-green orthodoxy.

  11. Ikonoclast, coal is a continuous variable, not a discrete variable, and so its not actually possible for a single coal mine to hold the world to ransom by threatening to not to leave all the coal in the ground.

  12. I wonder if the remit of the CCA allows them to suggest policy to the govt as opposed to rubber stamping existing policy while looking concerned. I note one of the ideas lambasted by Combet at his last Press Club speech was that of carbon tariffs. Back door protectionism or somesuch he reckons. However the idea is supported by some EU heavyweights, US energy secretary Chu and Nobel prize winning economist Stiglitz.

    Were it not for 94.5% free permits Australian heavy industry could feel dismayed at China and India getting all the Australian coal they want with no prospect of ever paying $23 per tCO2. If the CCA had real teeth it’s the sort of issue they could raise instead of endless motherhood statements.

  13. @Ronald Brak

    Ikonoclast, coal is a continuous variable, not a discrete variable, and so its not actually possible for a single coal mine to hold the world to ransom by threatening to not to leave all the coal in the ground.

    That’s true. While I don’t support such a course, one could object that the withdrawal of Australia from the world market for coal (and presumably natural gas and petroleum) would cause a significant spike in world prices which would in turn make renewables more competitive.

    Establishing new supply chains would be disruptive and probably costly to those relying on Australian coal. There would also be issues of sourcing coal of the right quality and at the right volumes at the right time. These non-price factors would also tip the Chinese more in favour on non Fossil HC sources.

  14. Despite the likely knee jerk reaction from business interests there could be bigger emissions reduction from a coal and LNG export go-slow than from the domestic carbon tax. Australia has nine coal ports, is in the Pacific region and is politically stable. China leaned on Vietnam for coal exports and bled them dry now Indonesia is talking about conserving coal. I understand India’s steel industry depends on Australian coking coal though the US northwest coast is greatly increasing hard coal exports. We obviously have no monopoly on double standards about AGW concern.

    I think Australia should form an alliance with the EU and countries with nontrivial carbon penalties. Goods from countries (read India and China) that obviously have no near term intention of cutting emissions will be subject to punitive import duties, arbitrarily 10% or 20% to save compliance cost, until they join the club. Chindia’s reaction to the EU airline tax reveals their true colours. The CCA connection is that they could discuss it even though Gillard/Abbott have closed minds to the subject.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s