"Lies" told about global climate change action: Flannery

21/08/2012 - Chief climate commissioner Tim Flannery says Australians have been misled by "lies" about global efforts to tackle climate change — but they're increasingly less fearful of Labor's pollution price. Julian Drape

Find related suppliers

Prime Minister Julia Gillard has been attacked for breaking her promise not to introduce a carbon tax, but Professor Flannery says on the flip-side people have been repeatedly told the world isn't acting, when it is.

The Climate Commission on Tuesday released a report which suggests by next year 33 countries and 18 sub-national jurisdictions will have a carbon price in place.

"These schemes could be expected to cover around 850 million people, around 30 per cent of the global economy and around 20 per cent of global emissions," the report, The Critical Decade: International Action on Climate Change, states.

Prof Flannery says the report proves the world is moving.

"We've been misled here in Australia by a couple of lies," the environmentalist told reporters.

"One is that the world isn't acting and (the other is) what Australia does is not important."

Prof Flannery said even he was "astonished" to discover the extent and diversity of action.

The commission chief was surprised Japan has emissions trading in Tokyo and Saitama, covering 20 million people, and that South Africa will introduce a nationwide carbon tax in 2013.

He was also impressed by the extent of Canada and China's responses.

In Canada the provinces of Quebec and British Columbia have carbon taxes while Alberta introduced emissions trading in 2006. Quebec will follow suit in 2013.

The Chinese government will introduce trading schemes in seven cities and provinces from 2013.

The commission report also notes that China is a global leader in renewable energy.

"It's doing hugely well," Prof Flannery said.

"It's got half the world's installed wind capacity."

The report points out Australia is the 15th largest emitter in the world and the biggest polluter per person in the developed world.

It argues that as one of 20 "carbon heavyweights" that contribute 75 per cent of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, Canberra is influential.

Prof Flannery believes since Labor's controversial carbon tax started on July 1 people have developed a greater understanding of its real-world impact and their earlier fears have faded.

"But since then the experience that we're hearing back from a lot of people is that a lot of the fear has gone out of it," he said.

Labor's climate commission was established in early 2011 to promote the case for tackling dangerous climate change.

Browse the IndustrySearch directory: Waste & Environmental Management

Have your say...

Ron | 21/08/2012 10:16 1

Agreed; Australia is a leader in using a carbon pricing scheme to encourage reductions in our pollution output. Despite the lack of comprehension, personal attacks and refusals to believe, the future will show that we are doing the right thing.

alan | 21/08/2012 10:18 2

The Australian public has certainly been lied to, lied to by you Flannery Just go away Flannery you are nothing bu a fraud and a charlatan

Bruce | 21/08/2012 11:22 3

All government see the benefit of carbon tax a a means of revenue raising. Collecting tax will not make any difference to the climate and it is unfortunate that governments as well as some biased intelectuals are misleading the public for their own interest and publicity.

DEE JAY | 21/08/2012 11:34 4

I guess when your views are held by the person paying your salary you will keep on with your long held atheistic views. Why will no one debate with Ian Plimer. When Al Gore was in Australia, Al would not meet Ian let alone debate with him. Any warming up in the world is coming from the ocean floors - does not the temperature go up as you gown down nearer the centre of the Earth ! ? To think that humans could induce global warming thru carbon is just so far fetched but suits the many scientists who hold this view and of course continue to get paid.Imagine how many would be out of a job if another "denial' group was listened to.Even palaeontologist Tim could lose his commissioner status and his salary.

Ken Goldsmith | 22/08/2012 12:41 5

One "for", four "against" the carbon tax scam. Not one word in the article about how destroying Australia's industry is supposed to affect the climate.

Kermit | 22/08/2012 17:07 6

Exactly, a BIG scam and another Tax designed by the international money lenders to raise Taxes to pay their excessive interest rates for our debit ridden society. If we could bypass the propaganda from Al Gore, Tim Flannery and the "PAID" team of "bandwagon riders" we could make some sense of the whole scam. For every change in temperature rise or sea level it has been in action for 200 years to take effect...who are we trying to fool here?..a vote for an "equity" based monetary system replacing the "debit" based system we currently "enjoy" would make more sense than a NEW TAX to drive the middle class out of existence or into bankruptcy!...not to mention what happens to the POOR!

dave d | 24/08/2012 12:59 7

Kermit,Communism relies on subjecting the poor.Keep them reliant on Ju-Liars hand outs - but to make Communism truly effective you have to also Kill off the Aristocracy and reduce the middle class to the ranks of the poor.Isn't that what Ju-Liar and her cronies are all about -control - ask Kev & co ask the owners of Manufacturers - and soon you'll be able to ask the Mining companies - this woman is poison!!

tom | 28/08/2012 13:48 8

Wow, its looking like around 6:1 now. This shows just how low the average IQ in Australia has gotten. For example: "And the centre of the earth is heating up the planet..." hmmm, now but not previously...funny the oceans are not boiling after millions of years....that is true genius. By the way, I do tax accounts for medium-large companies. Effect of the carbon tax - sweet FA for the vast overwhelming majority any time soon. You've had abbott lie through his teeth to you for months, but none of you six seems unhappy about that. Its ignorance like this that has the tea party making waves in the US.

dave d | 30/08/2012 14:17 9

Tom , 6:1 -wow you can count - I was beginning to worry considering your ridiculous comments !!

Ken Goldsmith | 31/08/2012 08:07 10

Tom, science does not yet "know" wether the heat in the core of the earth is a: a combination of residual heat from the formation plus heat generated by the pressure of gravity, or b: nuclear reaction caused by the densest elements in the soup migrating to the centre. Science says it takes a photon generated in the fusion reactor of the sun, a million years to reach the surface of the sun, (and 8 minutes to reach earth from there). So we don't know enough to say "now but not previously". The ice core records show that CO2 increases 40 to 800 years after the commencement of warming, and we are now warming following the LIA, so "why" did CO2 rise "previously", (in the ice records), "and not" "now"? The North pole is in the process of migrating from Canadian waters to Russian waters, about a thousand kilometers. Seismic activity has increased, so denying that SOME warming is occurring from beneath the sea/ocean makes as much sense as saying CO2 does not cause SOME warming. The question is "how much", the answer in both cases is probably that the amount is so small we do not have instruments or technique to measure it. I believe the pole shift may be adding significantly to climate change (shift) in the northern hemisphere, by shifting the protective magnetosphere. It is not hard to imagine that ocean currents could spread "climate change" from the Arctic. The jury is still out, Tom, there is no scientific "consensus". Even if there was, Galileo was opposed by the consensus of his day, so you are in no position to call into question the IQ of people who oppose the useless, destructive CO2 tax.

We welcome thoughtful comments from readers Comment Guidelines The approval of your comment is at the discretion of this article's publisher. Write your comment with the following in mind to ensure the highest likelihood of it being approved: - No promotional undertones - No use of profanity - Good spelling, grammar and layout - Check punctuation, language and missing words - No use of aggression - No unsubstantiated claims We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion. Your name is used alongside Comments.
Name:
Email: