Australia's target greenhouse emissions reduction of 5% by 2020 was low because of a "projected" population growth of 45% from 1990 numbers. Nobody wants to face the taboo subject of population growth. It is people who use energy and power, make pollution and consume natural resources. Any addressing of climate change is senseless unless we address our rising numbers - in Australia and globally. It is pointless to mop up the flood while the downpour continues! Any effort to reduce ghg emissions is negated by more people. Please address this issue and help break the taboo.

Hi there,

It is a mistake to think that Kevin Rudd's policy is to cut greenhouse
emissions by 5% by 2020. In fact, they will not be cut at all and will
actually increase over this period. This is the basis of carbon trading. The
polluters simply buy what permits they need from third world countries, with
absolutely no guarantee that what they are buying actually exists or that
they are the sole purchasers. Neither is there any guarantee that the third
world countries will maintain the carbon sink in their trees and not cut
them down for either fuel or timber. There is no provision if this carbon
sink is destroyed by fire either.

It is a sham and a farce, and Rudd and Penny Wong are well aware of this.

Neither will their carbon capture work. It is almost a scientific
impossibility to do this on a commercial scale, butand even if there is a
solution, it will come far too late to save the atmosphere. They are talking
about finding it by 2020, but that does not mean it will be implemented by
then even if a solution is found. Further, they intend to increase their
coal exports to china be a massive 50% over this period, It is sheer
hypocrisy!

Barnaby Drake

All he has done is to cut the number of permits by 5% and allowed the big
polluters to buy the extra that they need.

I have to think about telling another country what to do. Maybe. Anyway, the reason Australia rejects nuclear energy is that the powerful coal industry sees it as potential competition, which it certainly would be. But they do export uranium.

John Tanner

We are all one nation.

According to an analysis that came out in the last few days from RAN, the
draft Waxman global warming bill in the US has offsets provisios making it
MUCH weaker than the Ausralian bill, which is udoubtedly why Obama science
advisor John Holdren is thinking the unthinkable - tht we must be prepared
to engage in "geoengineering" to cool the planet because it looks as if
the regulatory response is goig to be too weak.

There is just one painfully simnple fact and message that we must get across to all world leaders.

They are now destroying planet Earth as a life sustaining planet.

The science is definite - global warming cannot stop unless the world cuts CO2 emissions to zero.
That means no fossil fuels (virtual zero) and the development of artificial carbon sinks. All the science papers agree on this.

What ever the level of global warming it will last thousands of years.

The research from the Arctic tells us runaway global heating is immminent.

Peter Carter.

When Australians themselves don't see any reason to react, it's hard to tell their government to do otherwise. I sent the Alert to my Australian penfriend of more than 50 years, and received this reply:

We are not supporters of Kevin Rudd (Labor Party) he defiantly is mismanaging the country financially, however I'm not in the least interested in politics or climate change, the day of the bushfires was 47 Celsius with roaring winds, so anything could have happened that day, our Daughter now lives in the high country and they had a much larger amount of snow last winter than usual!! So who knows???
Sorry, cannot get involved in all that!!!

Rudd's government understands the seriousness of climate change, but considers anything they do will make no difference now; too late, and the CHINESE! So tokenism will be all they'll do.

I think the bush fires are taking place due to the increase in temperature every year from global warming.Since the overall temperature of the earths atmosphere is increasing by a degree or less every year, the dry vegetation is being prone to fires being started.

Carbon emissions do not need to be brought down to zero. This is because there are numerous Carbon sinks. The International Panel on Climate Change (see IPCC Summary For Policy Makers, p20) suggets stabilisation at between 400 to 500ppm (parts per million). This is reflected in the Garnaut Review

On a bit of a side note, I find the performance of Peter Garrett (former lead singer for Midnight Oil and now Minister for Environment, Heritage and the Arts) to be truly disappointing. Here's someone who was extremely passionate about the environment before politics. Somehow politics always corrupts.

Stop using petrol.
It causes injustice,hunger,sickness in the third world countries where it is extracted.
It causes pollution by spills in the sea, by refining it and after being changed in plastics and POP's too.
I think this does make as much sense as telling Australia to change it policy towards CO2 .See how it handles Japan in the continuing slaughter of the whales in their sanctuaries.