NationStates Jolt Archive

Took long enough.


Oh snap, in before the OP.

So sayeth Reuters.


Australia's prime minister, facing a tough re-election fight and under pressure over his climate credentials, has pledged new "clean energy" targets in a move environment groups said would not sway green-leaning voters.

By 2020, John Howard said, 15 percent of Australia's energy would come from "clean" sources including solar, wind, nuclear or clean coal, reversing his coalition government's previous reluctance to lift its renewable energy target from 2 percent.

[...]

But environment group Greenpeace said the target only streamlined existing state-based schemes, leaving sunny Australia lagging behind renewable energy leaders such as Germany and Spain, which are harnessing solar and wind power.

"The coalition's clean energy target is a missed opportunity to drive the growth of Australia's renewable energy industry and cut greenhouse pollution," Greenpeace energy campaigner Mark Wakeham said.

Howard, 68, is expected to call a national election within weeks and is polling well behind the opposition Labor Party, whose leader Kevin Rudd has pledged to sign the Kyoto Protocol capping greenhouse gas emissions in 35 developed nations.

A long-running drought in much of Australia and warnings by international scientists about the impact of global warming have spooked voters and elevated climate change to an election-turning issue.

A Galaxy poll on Monday had Labor 12 points in front of the government, 56 to 44, which would hand a landslide election victory to the youthful Rudd.

Rudd, who is this week tipped to unveil a renewable energy target of 20 percent, also won backing at the weekend from former U.S. vice-president and climate change campaigner Al Gore.

To win over voters Howard has promised a carbon emissions trading system, banned incandescent light bulbs and pledged A$200 million ($173 million) to combat forest clearing in Asia.


(link (http://uk.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUKSYD13552920070924?pageNumber=1))

Could electoral pressure actually prove useful in pushing prospective leaders to take concrete steps against climate change? :eek:

There's been more acrobatics over water restrictions in my state over the past few months than in a performance of Varekai.

There's been more acrobatics over water restrictions in my state over the past few months than in a performance of Varekai.
Interestingly enough, people I know from/moving to Australia seem to talk about water every 5 minutes.

You'd talk about water, too, if you'd spent your winter being flooded out of your house and expected to spend your summer worrying about whether there's enough water available to stop you being burnt in it ...

I don't know whether climate change really is an election-turning issue. It turns up in all the polls, sure, but that's the trouble: the polls ask about issues. A question along the lines of, "Are you feeling bored? Time for a change?" might find that was a significant factor, too.