Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Porkahontas: why Kevin Rudd’s Solar Schools is really solar pork

By Jonathan J. Ariel - posted Wednesday, 7 November 2007


Project Cost $m CO2 saved Cost to save one tonne of CO2
Solar Schools (say an 8 yr program) 350 215,000 tonnes $1,625
Solar Schools (say an 8 yr program) 500 215,000 tonnes $2,320
Mass Transit (per anum) 526 1,444,500 tonnes $364

While the price of $364 per tonne of CO2 avoided is indeed high, it’s clear that the Solar Schools initiative is a ridiculously expensive way to combat climate change, but an affordable way to buy votes, I suspect.

Advertisement

Honesty in addressing greenhouse emissions is what’s needed. Incentives, not sanctions, are indispensible in order to cajole the public (and industry) to act responsibly. That does not mean slapping a tax on those consumers or producers whose behaviour is frowned upon by the gloom sayers of global warming.

Looking at public transportation for instance, the community already expects this service to be affordable and to be primarily subsidised by state governments.  Ideally, Federal intervention would involve direct payments to the states to cover the value of passenger revenues forgone as a result of abolishing fares.

But there are other ideas that come to mind: removing federal taxes on hybrid vehicles, given their trifling contribution to global warming; lowering (or eliminating altogether) car registration costs for such vehicles; exempting hybrids altogether from (state) tolls as the City of London does for drivers of the low emitting Toyota Prius.

Labor has already u-turned in their long march towards Kyoto II. The unionists now understand the folly of advanced economies signing on to such a flawed treaty, while the underdeveloped world is given a free pass to thumb their collective snouts at us.

I wonder, how long it will take Porkahontas to pivot 180 degrees on his Solar Schools initiative? And when, if ever, will we see him honestly and fairly tackle the real environmental bandit: the motor car.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

12 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Jonathan J. Ariel is an economist and financial analyst. He holds a MBA from the Australian Graduate School of Management. He can be contacted at jonathan@chinamail.com.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Jonathan J. Ariel

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Jonathan J. Ariel
Article Tools
Comment 12 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy