Clean coal a furphy: Dr Karl

Bendigo Advertiser
Friday 2/11/2007 Page: 13

Science broadcaster and NSW Senate candidate Karl Kruszelnicki has likened talk of clean coal to Nazi propaganda, describing it as a "complete furphy." The celebrity science commentator and Climate Change Coalition candidate yesterday said the major political parties were lying when spruiking the benefits of clean coal technology.

Claims carbon dioxide could be removed from burning coal and stored underground or underwater were a lie, he said. "It is simply a furphy, it's a porky pie to cover up the fact there is no such thing as clean coal. It was the kind of lie a Nazi propagandist would conceive," he said.

Dr Kruszelnicki's running mate, Patrice Newell, challenged suggestions the coal industry would suffer major job losses if Australia made a dramatic switch to renewable energy sources. "I know that for a fact that they would be quite happy to have a job in the renewable industry," said Ms Newell, a resident of the Hunter coal mining region.

Field narrows in Qld energy sell-off

Australian Financial Review
Friday 2/11/2007 Page: 65

As the latest stage of the Queensland's government's multi-billion-dollar sell-off of its energy assets unfolds, sources said Babcock and Brown had not made a formal bid for the $200 million-plus business by Monday's deadline. That leaves only Arrow Energy and Suncorp Metway in contention for acquiring a gas trading business and a Moranbah-Townsville pipeline. The Moranbah oil field that supplies the pipeline is owned jointly by Arrow Energy and AGL Energy, and the two are not believed to be keen on owning the pipeline.

Meanwhile, Babcock and Brown is understood to be eyeing wind farm assets that the state government is also due to put on the block in a few weeks' time. However, there are several other parties interested in the wind assets, including TRUEnergy (on its own and jointly with Hydro Tasmania), Origin Energy, Viridis Clean Energy Group, parts of Allco Group, International Power and Conergy. Also likely to bid, but somewhat less interested than the others, are AGL and Transfield Services Infrastructure Fund. The two might bid in partnership and individually.

Clean coal a furphy: Dr Karl

Canberra Times
Friday 2/11/2007 Page: 4

Science broadcaster and NSW Senate candidate Karl Kruszelnicki has likened talk of clean coal to Nazi propaganda, describing it as a "complete furphy." The celebrity science commentator and Climate Change Coalition candidate said yesterday the major political parties were lying when spruiking the benefits of clean-coal technology. Claims that carbon dioxide could be removed from burning coal and stored underground or underwater were a lie.

Such technology would require one cubic kilometre of compressed carbon dioxide to be stored every day, which was "physically impossible." "That is the volume of compressed carbon dioxide that we have to get rid of - not every 10 years, not every year, but every single day," he said. "It is simply a furphy, it's a porky pie to cover up the fact that there is no such thing as clean coal." It was the kind of lie a Nazi propagandist would conceive, Dr Kruszelnicki said. "Goebbels, the Nazi propagandist, said if you're going to tell a lie, tell a big one, and this is a beauty." He also said political policies such as a $20 million plan for the exploration of underground storage caverns would be a waste of money.

Any storage facility would eventually wear down and would release the stored carbon dioxide back into the environment. "We've got two choices in 15 to 20 years from now - either to make money, we sell dirt overseas - coal - or we sell the (renewable energy) technology without burning dirt." Underground thermal energy accessed in South Australia could provide 100 per cent of Australia's base-load electricity for the next 75 years and then be supplemented by other renewables, he said.

"If we tried really hard we could have all of the electricity in Australia made without carbon by 2020 using a mixture of renewable energies including hot rocks and the wind and the waves and the sun." Dr Kruszelnicki's running mate, Patrice Newell, challenged suggestions the coal industry would suffer significant job losses if Australia made a dramatic switch to renewable energy sources. "It's not that it's a commitment to a coal job, they want a commitment to a job," she said.

Australia is not a climate change leader. Here are the facts

Age
Friday 2/11/2007 Page: 15

THE debate over climate change in Australia could be seen as evidence of the existence of parallel universes. It is as if Australia and 191 other countries, including China and India, never signed and ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, as if the new Howard Government never signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1997. In this universe, Australia is a leader on climate change.

Basic facts seem to have gone down the memory hole. Indeed, John Howard is asked: "Why won't you sign?" The reason he gives for not ratifying the protocol, unlike 175 other parties to the convention, is that it does not commit developing nations to targets, an exemption established under the convention. The real reason is that the US withdrew and Australia followed.

The debates in Australia are those the world's nations thought they had settled 15 years ago. Australia led the way at the Rio Earth Conference in signing the convention. Because the rise of industrialised nations created the problem, all signatories, including Australia, accepted that, "developed country parties should take the lead in combating climate change."

All parties agreed to take mitigating action and co-operate in the development and transfer "of technologies, practices and processes that control, reduce or prevent anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases." All agreed that, "the extent to which developing country parties will effectively implement their commitments under the convention will depend on the effective implementation by developed country parties of their commitments."

The convention came into force in 1994 and the agreement reached in Kyoto in 1997 was a protocol to the convention. Australia secured special treatment: it could increase greenhouse emissions to 108 per cent of 1990 levels. Howard hailed this as a "splendid result." The average commitment was to a 5 per cent cut by the time the protocol expired, which is 2012. After that, the convention expected developing nations to commit to emission controls alongside developed nations, albeit with different targets, a point Howard conceded just this week.

The US and Australia held out the prospect of some alternative path until very recently. They hit a dead end.

The convention still provides the framework for next month's negotiations in Bali. When Howard calls for a "new international agreement ... with all the major emitters" that has always been the next step under the convention. But it was the US among major emitters that first dropped the ball as Bill Clinton buckled under the weight of domestic political resistance. By April 2001, President George Bush had announced the US would withdraw from the Kyoto Protocol.

At first, the then environment minister, Robert Hill, insisted Australia would ratify, saying: "We've signed the Kyoto agreement and we've accepted what we believe to be a fair target." Within a month, Howard supported Bush and ever since has argued that Kyoto was a bad deal that would put Australia's economy at risk. Why then did his Government sign it? To put it bluntly, until its position became untenable, the Bush Administration was never interested in responding to climate change. The limitations of the Kyoto Protocol were not of concern. It simply didn't believe there was a problem. Even this week, Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile voiced doubts, but at least he has the integrity to say so. Everyone is entitled to have doubts and it is infinitely preferable that these be voiced, and respected, rather than have politicians misrepresent their positions and records.

Labor environment spokesman Peter Garrett's convictions are not in doubt, but he has been pilloried for his political clumsiness. His difficulty with one question - would Australia sign the next climate change agreement if developing nations are not included? - led Kevin Rudd to step in with a firm "no", which Howard said meant Rudd now agreed with him on climate change, an "unbelievable capitulation." Not nearly as unbelievable as Howard's shift within a year from open scepticism about climate change to the embrace of mandatory emission and renewable energy targets, and carbon trading - after a decade of resistance.

These are all provisions of the Kyoto Protocol, leaving just one objection to it: its lack of firm targets for developing nations, including big emitters such as China and India (both ratified it in 2002). These nations have been portrayed as recalcitrants that need to be brought into the fold. In fact, they have been on board since 1992 - it is the US and Australia that jumped ship.

The question that tripped up Garrett misses the point. The key issue is whether all nations can adopt a mix of binding measures that ensures climate change remains manageable. A post-Kyoto deal must include developing nations; the framework convention is predicated on this. If not, the whole process faces collapse. There are parallels with global trade talks; no nation can afford to be sidelined.

The question the world is asking Australia, is whether it will finally choose to be again at the heart of the process. The US is likely to come in from the cold once the Bush presidency ends in January 2009, the year in which negotiations are to be finalised. If Australia does not ratify the Kyoto Protocol, this country is excluded from its provisions for carbon trading and the clean development mechanism, by which emissions are offset by investing in reduction programs in developing countries.

Crucially, unless it ratifies, Australia lacks full voting rights and has a restricted role in shaping the next global agreement. Until then, claims to be showing leadership on climate change cannot be taken seriously.

Crusader's cup always half full

Northside Chronicle
Wednesday 31/10/2007 Page: 35

HAPPY by name and nature is an apt description for Dr Mal Happy, the jovial co-founder of the Brisbane North Climate and Water Action Group. Yet the Kedron neurophysiologist turned climate crusader is serious about climate change, dedicating much of his energy to projects such as designing a powerplant/desalination plant powered by wave motion and a film series aimed at getting people motivated about climate change.

Dr Happy said his interest in such topics as renewable energy had its roots growing up in the US. "When I was a kid I built a hydrogen generator," he said. "I was about nine or 10 at the time." "It was just so clean because the only waste product was water and I though this really has potential." "I was always working on something (as a child) and there would be explosions quite often all around the house, which did worry my parents a little bit."

Dr Happy said his focus at the moment was trying to create a film or television series that would encourage people to make worthwhile differences in the effort to combat climate change. "I worry that people will see how bad things are and just give up," he said. "You have to make these things interesting so that people will want to see them."

Blackout-free summer

Adelaide Advertiser
Friday 2/11/2007 Page: 31

POWER blackouts in South Australia because of lack of supply are unlikely this summer, a new report says. The National Electricity Market Management Company report, however, warns that unless the state has found extra generating capacity by 2010-11, there will be problems. A similar time-frame is forecast for Victoria which shares a major power interconnector with SA.

NEMMCO managing director Les Hosking said: "Our forecasts show that the NEM (national electricity market) has sufficient capacity to deliver reliable supply during the coming summer." The warning about future supplies is contained in the company's annual statement of opportunities released yesterday, in which it sets out the predicted reliability of electricity supplies over the coming summer.

The report is based on supply and demand and the perceived reliability of each state's electricity system. The power system is deemed reliable if, over the long term, at least 99.9 per cent of consumer energy demand can be met. "The 2007 statement of opportunities shows this level of reliability can be met in all regions for the summer of 2007-08 even if extreme temperatures and demand conditions occur," the report says.

On SA, the report says the state will need additional generating capacity to provide 49 megawatts by 2010-11. It says this is only enough to meet the state's local minimum reserve level requirement. "An additional 56 megawatts of capacity is required for the combined Victorian and SA network to meet the combined minimum reserve level requirement," the report says. It says the commissioning of new generators at Hallett, Lake Bonney Stage II and Snowtown wind farms will increase the available capacity in SA before the summer of 2008-09. The report says Queensland will face supply problems in 2009-10 while NSW is not in any danger until 2013-14.

Walk to sound alert on climate warming

Ballarat Courier
Thursday 1/11/2007 Page: 18

PEOPLE concerned about climate change are being encouraged to take part in the Walk Against Warming on Sunday week. The walk around part of Lake Wendouree will be hosted by the Ballarat Renewable Energy and Zero Emissions group. "Walk Against Warming is the opportunity for people of Ballarat to send a strong message to our governments," BREAZE president Nick Lanyon said. "The big solutions to climate change are politically based solutions. "If we don't do something to stop climate change now, it will be too late for our kids. "We are already seeing the effects of climate change on our community now.

Climate change is the most pressing issue of our time. We are hoping that local residents will walk at our local event, and join the hundreds of thousands of other people expected to turn out across the country. "We also invite participants to stay and listen to our engaging guest speakers and sign the Walk Against Warming banner."

Walk organiser and Nature Conservation Council director Cate Faehrmann said without community pressure political parties would not act "to make real cuts to our greenhouse gas emissions." "Already, many people across Australia have shown how committed they are by changing to low energy light globes, signing up for Green Power and reducing their energy use in the home. "Walk Against Warming provides a platform for all Australians to be united in calling for greater government action on climate change. The community of Ballarat wants to add to the voice for greater action." The Walk Against Warming is on Sunday, November 11. Participants should meet at the Ballarat Grammar and High School boatsheds, Lake Wendouree Lake, at noon.

For more information, visit www.walkagainstwarming.org.

Future black for coal: Renewable energy call

Illawarra Mercury
Thursday 1/11/2007 Page: 4

INTERNATIONAL business and energy expert Ian Dunlop has added his voice to the chorus calling for the coal industry to be phased out, describing it as "more dangerous than nuclear energy". Mr Dunlop last night presented his seminar "Climate Change, Peak Oil and Sustainability - key drivers for the 21st century" at Wollongong's Futureworld. Mr Dunlop's work in the oil, gas and coal industries and in long-term energy planning has fostered a specific focus on the interaction between sustainability and corporate governance.

"We are certainly facing a fundamental change in the way society is going to operate," Mr Dunlop said. "The world's population can't move from 6 billion to 9 billion if current levels of consumption remain intact." He said the coal industry's future would depend on how quickly it could clean up its act through carbon-trapping technology. "The world is not going to want coal unless we can sequester that carbon," he said. "The future of the coal industry is going to depend very much on how successful that technology is. "In my view, coal is now more dangerous than nuclear.

At least with nuclear energy you know where that waste is and you have the ability to contain that waste." Mr Dunlop acknowledged that the shift from traditional energy sources to renewables would not be painless, with cities built around those industries - like Wollongong - set to be acutely affected. "Coal is not going to disappear tomorrow morning - it's a fact of life at the present time, but we are going to have to wean ourselves off it," he said.

"We can't keep building more coal stations and keep pushing that carbon into the atmosphere. We have got to halt the expansion of the coal industry." Mr Dunlop urged greater investment in renewables, an area he argued Australia was lagging behind other countries. "If you look around the world at what's happening in other countries, they're moving far, far quicker than we are," he said. "We have three times as much sunshine as Germany, who are the leaders in solar power, but their government has accepted that it's serious and has made the investment."

Australia scores badly on global emissions growth report

Age
Thursday 1/11/2007 Page: 1

AUSTRALIA is the ninth biggest contributor to increased global carbon emissions, a new World Bank report has found. The bank report shows that between 1994 and 2004, Australia's annual emissions of carbon dioxide (the world's main greenhouse gas) increased by 107 million tonnes, or 38 per cent. Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull declared yesterday that Australia was "leading the world on climate change". Australia's emissions grew by more than the combined increase in emissions by Britain, France and Germany,which have 10 times our population. In Denmark, which has become the world leader in wind energy, carbon dioxide emissions fell by 9 million tonnes, or 13 per cent.

The report, Growth and CO2, Emissions: How do different countries fare', released in October, examined the trends among the world's 70 biggest producers of greenhouse gases. Australia was almost unique in being a developed country whose emissions are not only very high but growing rapidly. It said that on a population basis, Australia had the sixth highest emissions of carbon dioxide - 19.36 tonnes per head in 2004, roughly three times that of Sweden and Switzerland, more than five times that of China, 19 times that of India and 72 times that of Bangladesh.

The figures undermine the Government's efforts to present Australia as a world leader in tackling climate change. Prime Minister John Howard and Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd this week pledged not to sign any new agreement on climate change that does not include developing countries, but the figures show why developing countries will not agree to cut their emissions.

For Australia, there was some good news in the report. First, the bank found the rate of Australia's emissions growth fell sharply in the second half of the decade, suggesting that government, business and households' efforts to slow the pace had some effect. Second, the figures show no strict correlation between emissions and incomes. Switzerland, Sweden and France, which are as rich as Australia or richer, all produce only a third as much carbon dioxide per head as Australia. All rely heavily on nuclear and hydro power for their electricity.

Australia's emissions are high largely because it relies on heavily polluting coal for electricity; specialises in energy-intensive industries such as aluminium; has a large car fleet with poor fuel efficiency; and lags behind Europe in energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances. Mr Turnbull said the post-Kyoto agreement was now the main issue in the climate change debate, and he accused Labor of again adopting a Coalition policy. "Climate change is the biggest economic challenge the world faces," Mr Turnbull said.

"You have to ask yourself whether a team which was wrong all year, and then in the space of a few hours does a complete backflip, has either the commitment, the capacity or the competence to get the job done." Australia is leading the world on climate change. We are going to meet our Kyoto target. We are leading the world to reduced deforestation, the second largest source of emissions. Who is leading the world in clean coal research? Australia. Who is slapping the coal industry in the face? Labor."

But Mr Rudd denied that Labor's post-Kyoto policy was a copy of the Government's. "Mr Howard, as a climate change sceptic, has never embraced a carbon target for Australia in the existing commitment period," he said. His historical scepticism, rejection entirely of the Kyoto framework, stands on the record." Mr Rudd's plan for Labor to lift its target for "new'' renewable energy to 20 per cent of electricity demand by 2020 left the Coalition having a bet both ways yesterday.

While Mr Turnbull and Nationals senator Barnaby Joyce criticised Labor's target for shutting the door on future coal-fired power stations, Mr Howard said he was considering adopting it as Government policy. The coal miners' union, the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, said employers were relaxed about it. "That's what they tell us privately, they're relaxed about emissions trading. Really, it's political scare campaigning by the Government," the union's Tony Maher told the ABC. "You've got to bear in mind the energy growth between now and 2020 will be between 30 and 40 per cent, so there's plenty of room for various energy sources." Opposition resources spokesman Chris Evans said the renewable energy target would deliver only half the new capacity needed to meet future energy demands.

Meanwhile, the Victorian Government said that proposed legislation creating renewable energy targets, introduced in State Parliament yesterday, would be the first in Australia to cut greenhouse emissions. Under the targets, which would see 10 per cent of electricity come from renewables by 2016, retailers will be obliged to provide incentives to householders to install measures such as energy- efficient lighting and ceiling insulation. Victorian Energy Minister Peter Batchelor said the scheme aimed to cut the average household power bill by about $45 a year.

Renewable energy companies ready for big break

Courier Mail
Wednesday 31/10/2007 Page: 42

A HOT rock geothermal business could become viable as early as late 2009 under the Opposition's requirement that electricity retailers buy 20 per cent of power from renewable resources by 2020. Hot rocks company Petratherm's managing director Terry Kallis said the company had four hot rock sites in South Australia, with the one at Paralana being the closest to commercialisation. Wind farms also would benefit from the policy. Pacific Hydro would be able to increase its energy output sixfold.

But the peak body representing mainstream electricity and gas suppliers said it hoped Labor would wind back its renewable energy target once carbon emissions trading got under way. Energy Supply Association of Australia said: "We encourage the ALP to review the level of its renewable target once the outcomes of the Ross Garnaut report are known, consistent with yesterday's announcements that a renewable energy target is a transitional measure to be superseded by emissions trading." Climate Institute Australia chief John Connor, however, gave the target "a big thumbs up" for smart economics.

"Our modelling shows that these sorts of targets can help to keep electricity prices down." Pacific Hydro, which has 100 megawatts of installed generation, said the incentive would provide certainty for a further 600MW of wind energy projects worth $1.5 billion. Deputy chairman of the Clean Energy Council Peter Szental said the policy was "a wonderful commitment to delivering a sustainable energy infrastructure". "We are also calling for a $2 billion sustainable energy innovation fund to assist research in solar, geothermal and bioenergy power," Mr Szental said. The Renewable Energy Generators Australia said the target would help technologies such as geothermal and solar to prove electricity could be produced more cheaply than coalfired electricity by 2020.

Polar station a world first

Bendigo Advertiser
Wednesday 31/10/2007 Page: 25

BELGIUM is building the first ever zero-emission polar station in the Antarctic, powered by solar panels and wind turbines and designed to have minimal impact on the climate change its scientists are studying. All waste from the Princess Elisabeth station, housing up to 20 researchers, will be recycled. fossil fuels will only be used for back-up systems. "Polar stations really have an impact on the environment because most of them run on fossil fuelss. There is a huge cost to buy the fuel, a huge cost to transport the fuel and a huge impact on the environment," said Maaike Vancauwenberghe, head of the research program.

On display in Brussels, the station will be transported later this year to a ridge in the Dronning Maud Land, East Antarctica, where temperatures drop to minus 50 degrees Celsius and winds reach up to 250 kmh. Belgian scientists first sailed out to the Antarctic on the ship Belgica more than a century ago, the world's first expedition there during the southern hemisphere winter. But while renowned for research, including a recent excursion to measure snow thickness in the Arctic, they have not had their own station since 1967, when their existing site became engulfed in snow and unsafe.

The station, named after the king's granddaughter, and with an interior of 700 square metres, should be operational for at least 25 years. With a stainless steel shell, a 40-centimetre layer of polystyrene charged with graphite and sandwiched between wood panels, the walls will be well insulated against the cold. Heat from computers will help keep the inside habitable.

Project manager Johan Berte said he had high hopes that the station would be used as a prototype by other nations. "I hope, and I really believe it will have a big influence on future stations in the Antarctic," he said. Britain and Germany also have plans to rebuild their stations during International Polar Year, which extends extends over two years from March, 2007, to March, 2009. The cost so far for building the station is 10 million euros ($A15.83 million). The Belgian government, which commissioned the project, will contribute 2 million euros ($A3.17 million) per year to the research project, starting in 2009.

Answer's in the wind

Courier Mail
Tuesday 30/10/2007 Page: 59

Babcock and Brown Wind Partners reached the second stage of a state government process to sell operating and planned wind farms. Final bids for the assets, which have a capacity of 177MW, are due by November 19 and the company is obtaining regulatory approvals before submitting an unconditional offer.

The State Government is selling assets including the 70MW Mount Millar Wind Farm and 50 per cent of the 79MW Emu Downs Wind Farm. TRUEnergy and a venture between it and Roaring 40s Renewable Energy have also applied for clearance to buy the assets, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission says. Other potential bidders are tipped to be AGL Energy, Origin Energy and Transfield Services.

Wind farm support

Warrnambool Standard
Friday 26/10/2007 Page: 4

MOST Australians trust wind farms and the CSIRO, but are not keen on nuclear energy stations or genetically modified crops, according to a new survey.

The National Technology and Society Monitor, conducted by the Australian Centre for Emerging Technologies and Society at Swinburne University of Technology, questioned one thousand people about their attitudes towards new and emerging technology.

The survey found 81 per cent of respondents were comfortable with wind farms. There was much less support for nuclear energy stations, with more than half those surveyed stating some level of discomfort. Another discovery from the survey was that half of those questioned were uncomfortable with genetically modified (GM) plants, while two-thirds felt the same way about genetically modified animals for food.

Scientists say energy supply humanity's biggest threat

Weekend Australian
Saturday 27/10/2007 Page: 21

ENERGY supply poses one of the greatest threats facing humanity, the world's leading academies of science have warned, highlighting the peril of oil wars and climate change driven by addiction to fossil fuelss. Nations must provide power for the 1.6 billion people who live without electricity and wean themselves off energy sources that stoke global warming and geopolitical conflict, the scientists demanded. "Making the transition to a sustainable energy future is one of the central challenges humankind faces in this century," they said.

Their report, Lighting the Way: Toward A Sustainable Energy Future, is published by the InterAcademy Council, whose 15 members include the national science academies of the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Brazil, China and India. It was written by a 15-member panel whose co-chair was 1997 Nobel Physics laureate Steven Chu of the US.

"Overwhelming scientific evidence shows that current energy trends are unsustainable," the report said bluntly. Its authors sounded a special alarm over the surge in the building of conventional coal-fired power plants in China and other developing countries, as such infrastructure will doubtless be entrenched for decades to come. "The substantial expansion of coal capacity that is now under way around the world may pose the single greatest challenge to future efforts aimed at stabilising carbon dioxide (CO) levels in the atmosphere," the report warned.

Managing the greenhouse-gas "footprint" of these plants while encouraging a conversion to Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) will be a mighty technological and economic challenge, it said. CCS means piping off CO' at a plant and then pumping it into geological chambers deep underground, such as disused oilfields, rather than releasing it into the atmosphere. Many scientists view this pilot technology warily, waiting to be convinced that CCS is safe, for a chamber breach could have potentially catastrophic consequences for the climate.

The report also appealed for a planet-wide drive in favour of energy efficiency to reduce carbon emissions. And it spoke loudly in favour of renewable energy, describing its potential as "untapped" and offering "immense opportunities" for poor countries that are rich in sunlight and wind but poor in cash to buy oil and gas. Nuclear energy as a low-carbon resource "can continue to make a significant contribution to the world's energy portfolio in the future, but only if major concerns related to capital cost, safety and weapons proliferation are addressed".

Turning to biofuels, the scientist said that these sources hold "great promise", but only through a switch to second-generation sources. At present, feedstocks such as sugarcane and corn are the main source for biofuels, which is effecting on global food prices. A more promising but uncommercialised goal is using lignocellulose stocks from timber chips and agricultural residues. Other dawning technologies, such as plug-in hybrid cars and hydrogen fuel-cells for energy storage, can make an important niche contribution.

But they cautioned that the move to sustainable energy could only happen if nations work together to free up the necessary financial resources and expertise -and setting a price for carbon to punish pollution and waste and reward clean energy was a key part of the mix. A 2006 report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) suggested world oil consumption would rise by nearly 40 per cent by 2030 as compared with 2005 levels, and CO, emissions would increase by 50 per cent over 1-004 levels, under a "business-as-usual" scenario.

Inconvenient risk

Herald Sun
Saturday 27/10/2007 Page: 98

FEELING trapped at the end of a jam-packed gabfest exploring the financial services sector's links to climate change, Westpac's man in London Martin Hancock did the unexpected-he raised the bar. Less than 15 minutes after winding up the two-day United Nations' Environmental Program Finance Initiative Global Roundtable at Melbourne Park this week, Mr Hancock, who also chairs the initiative, was blocked from leaving the venue's car park. So conscious, it seems, of conserving energy were the venue managers that they had switched off the lights and locked up the conference centre minutes after the forum finished, shutting down the car park exits on their way out.

When it was clear assistance was not forthcoming, Mr Hancock hopped out of the car and using all his brute strength, he forced up the barrier so his driver could get out. It seemed a fitting metaphor for the forum. The finance institutions, especially those with their eye on long term returns on the funds they manage, are trapped in the vicious cycle of short termism. They know how compelling and, for now, attainable it is to focus on gains to be made from one quarter to the next, and certainly the market analysts demand it. But the quest for quick-fix earnings growth is scorching the earth.

WHAT to do, if you are a capitalist with a conscience, profit-driven yet passionate about the planet? This was the question 170 delegates from around the world grappled with in a global show piece event masterfully brought to Australia by Terry A'Hearn and his team at the Environment Protection Authority. Mr Hancock, the chief operating officer of Westpac's institutional arm in London, knows what has to be done and so he has raised the bar in another sense by throwing down the gauntlet to his peers and telling them to pause the growth and roll out sustainable finance. "Business as usual is not an option," he told the meeting.

He believes economies should slow down their growth, even to a stand still temporarily, and concentrate on developing technologies to reduce emissions. "Once you've figured out how we are going to neutralise the carbon dioxide, then we can go for hell for leather again," he told BusinessDaily. "To me it makes sense. "If financial services institutions don't crack this one, we are not going to be around in 15 years to enjoy the profits we are making now." The round table's message is that institutions need to take a hard look at their portfolios and assess how they will perform in a carbon-strained world that makes polluters pay. "Anyone who is a funds manager, especially of superannuation, needs to start asking now whether assets are going to be safe for 10 to 20 years. "They need to figure out what the risks are in a future grappling with global warming. "We are caretaking the pensions of the future and our time horizons have to be out there and not just in the next quarter," Mr Hancock said.

In a broadcast from Geneva concluding the roundtable's session, the UN Secretary General's right hand man, Achim Steiner, delivered some bad hot-off-the-press news. He told delegates he had just been informed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the 3000-strong international body that examines the science on global warming, that carbon emissions had reached even more toxic levels than they had anticipated. "We are now at levels 35 per cent higher than in 2000," said Mr Steiner who is UN Under-Secretary-General Mr Steiner was about to deliver UNEP's latest global environment report, with all its pessimistic view for the future of the planet and its inhabitants, thanks to the spiralling consumption that climate change is being blamed on.

It will form a plank of the IPCC's fourth report to be launched next month in Valencia, just ahead of the gathering in Bali in December that will revisit the Kyoto Protocol's emissions targets. "We simply will not meet the target of reducing emissions by 50 per cent of 1990 levels in 2050 if this meeting does nothing to move towards a low-carbon economy," Mr Steiner said. "The time has come to stop experimenting. "The principles of sustainable finance must become mainstream. "Without them there cannot be the transformation necessary to mitigate climate change." Mr Steiner challenged the delegates to change their models, to talk to governments, to take a lead in mitigating climate change, because no one else was doing it, he said.

DURING the two days, delegates pondered how they could reinvent their tools to make sustainable finance just as profitable as their traditional investments. The potential of a global market for trading carbon credits was dissected over and over again. The ANZ's sustainability manager, Lloyd Fleming, described an alternative scenario where carbon credits would be superfluous. "I'm throwing down the gauntlet to you all," he told delegates. "Envisage a future in which big technological breakthroughs have been made that have enabled the large scale roll out of zero-emissions renewable energy. "Imagine if we could shift our thinking away from carbon markets altogether." He said he had lived through so many technological breakthroughs in his life, that he believed it was plausible to run an economy without spewing carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

"Don't rule this view out of your thinking," he said. Credit Suisse vice-president Otti Bisang agreed that huge advances were well within the realm of possibility by 2020. "That year, 13 years from now, I can't believe I will be singing the old Beatles' song When I'm 64,"he said. "Yet 13 years ago, I would not have imagined wireless broadband, mobile phones like the ones we have today and so on. "And 13 years ago, there was no Kyoto Protocol, carbon emissions targets, or sustainability imbedded in company policies. "Change can really happen fast."