News 
 Local News 
 News 
 General 
 Garnaut report criticism just 'argy bargy': Rudd 

Garnaut report criticism just 'argy bargy': Rudd

09 Sep, 2008 06:10 PM
Criticism by a group of leading climate scientists that the Garnaut report is weak and disappointing is just part of normal debate in the scientific community, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says.

Three Australian authors with the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - Bill Hare, David Karoly and Amanda Lynch - say Professor Ross Garnaut's advice would all but guarantee environmental and social disaster, Fairfax reported today.

Prof Garnaut's latest report released last week recommends Australia cut its emissions by 10 per cent by 2020.

The authors have described Prof Garnaut's recommendations as inconsistent, disappointing and wrong, and argued for a 25 to 40 per cent cut, saying Australia was likely to be the developed nation worst hit by climate change.

But Mr Rudd today brushed off the criticism of Prof Garnaut's independent report.

"There's always going to be argy bargy within the scientific community and the policy community and the business community over climate change and what should be done about it," Mr Rudd told reporters in Brisbane.

"... some people will say we've done too much, others will say we've not done enough."

He said his experience was that scientists, like all people, had different views and did not always agree.

Mr Rudd said his government was determined to implement a carbon reduction scheme that would be both tough and controversial and a far better response than the alternative government's proposals.

Dr Hare, based at Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said adopting Prof Garnaut's recommendation would trigger big sea level rises, devastate ecosystems and dry up water supplies in Asia.

"Ross Garnaut's report is effectively putting off the cost of climate change to another generation, who will have to deal with a three degree rise in temperature as well as sucking carbon dioxide out of the air," he said.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

RELATED COVERAGE

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
In other news: interest group outraged that expert recommends taking less radical action than their demands.... boring
Posted by krud, 9/09/2008 2:19:56 PM
Krud, I take it you are happy to accept the loss of the Great Barrier Reef, 3 degree temperature rises and resulting social problems the world over? These are the predicted results from Garnaut's 10% reduction. Wake up Australia- we are living on a continent that is highly vulnerable to climate change
Posted by Emma J, 9/09/2008 3:52:10 PM
When I made my decision on who to vote for, one of my major decision criteria was that of Climate change and the reduction of carbon emissions. Therefore I am totally befuddled to read that a 10% carbon pollution target has been recommended by Mr Garnaut. Perhaps this should have been expected considering Mr Garnauts impressive background is Economics? This is a time for revolution. We absolutely must make radical changes. The economy should BENEFIT from reductions in carbon, by introducing more efficient practices. There are breakthroughs being made all the time in Eco technologies (new photovolatic plastics, special wind turbines for buildings and generally the decentralization of resource generation) that should be investigated for suitability and then MANDATED by the government for usage in Australia. Business will always look for the cheap, easy way out - don't fall for their scare mongering. Enforce the changes for everyone, and everyone will adjust. Humans are excellent at adjusting to their environment - don't underestimate this. This is a time for revolution. Don't be the one that is looked back on as having had that magical opportunity to do something really special but ended up doing something mundane.
Posted by Mark, 9/09/2008 4:44:58 PM
Emma J...your been conned...the coral in thailand is alive and the climate and water temp is higher than here...I just can't believe that we humans are responsible for for what they are saying...the industrial period has been with us 100 years,and we have destroyed the planet,I dont think so...
Posted by Charity of Kingston, 9/09/2008 4:46:12 PM
ok guys, you really need to look at it from a worldly perspective... because australia can have zero emissions if it wanted but dirty industry will just go meh! goodbye and pollute just as much in counties that have no pollution controls.... HELLO DOES ANY ONE GET IT... forget the reef its gone, just go see it while you can... regardless of what we not enough emissions will be reduced unless INDIA CHINA USA follow suite, the best thing we can do now is encourage the whole world to join us on our planet saving quest by making it look easy...initially 10% by 2020 IT MAKES SENSE!
Posted by ALEX, 9/09/2008 5:37:39 PM
ALEX ALEX ALEX...YES YES YES.
Posted by BALDY, 9/09/2008 6:10:40 PM
Well Alex we have no bargaining power and no credibility with the international community on this issue with a target of 10% by 2020. Mark, Thailand has an entirely different ecosystem and that is just the sort of simplistic reasoning that climate change sceptics love to pull out.
Posted by Emma J, 9/09/2008 6:54:30 PM
Sorry Mark! that criticism should have been directed at Charity of Kingston
Posted by Emma J, 9/09/2008 6:57:44 PM
Very disappointingly weak target for Australia indeed because: (i) Australia is suffering from high percapita grennhouse gas (GHG) emission level compared to China and India; and (ii)The US has high level of emission percapita too, but it is the most energy efficient country in the world according to ABARE research. Also, Garnaut's price setting and indexation for emitted GHG is too weak a signal to encourage the reduction of emissions from large polluters.
Posted by Nguyen Dao, 9/09/2008 8:55:55 PM
What is the fuss over Climate Change, it is happening every day and has been since man first appeared on the earth. It is part of the cycle of this planet. The easest way to cut back on carbon emissions is to have another war, less people breathing means less carbon dioxide produced. Better still wipe out humanity altogether we have the technology as we have the technology and have had for many years to reduce carbon emissions, but the dollar always comes first and people are expendable.
Posted by Deebee, 10/09/2008 9:08:28 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Professor Ross Garnaut
Professor Ross Garnaut
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
09 September, 2008
POLL
Q: What do you think about Ross Garnaut's 10 per cent emissions cut by 2020 recommendation?

It's too much, cut should be smaller
(27.3%)

It's too little, cut should be bigger
(49.6%)

I support a 10 per cent cut
(23.2%)

Total Votes: 1009
Poll Date: 09 September, 2008

Most popular articles

Australian Running Festival

Feb Best Buys


The Canberra Times







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...