The Prime Minister is defending her flip flop on the Emissions Trading Scheme on the basis that oil prices are rising
and thus having the same effect on motorists’ behaviour as the ETS would have done anyway. This, as Jeanette has pointed out on The Panel
this afternoon, ignores the fact that taxpayers are subsidising carbon polluters. But it is also interesting given the Prime Minister’s own government forecasters at Treasury
and the Reserve Bank
all claiming that the price of oil unjustifiably high and should fall from its current US$120 a barrel to somewhere between US$60 and US$70 in the next couple of years.
Presumably that means in 2011, after the Greens’ peak oil conspiracy has been exposed and everybody has returned to enjoying endless supplies of cheap petrol, and when petrol is eventually introduced into the ETS, the price required to have the sort of behavioural change the Prime Minister is seeking would need to be more in the range of $1 per litre of petrol rather than the currently mooted 8 cents per litre. I’d be interested to see her selling that to the roading lobby after they got her to back down on the current proposal.
Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare | Environment & Resource Management by frog on Tue, May 6th, 2008
Tags: Carbon, climate change, Emissions Trading Scheme, Jeanette Fitzsimons, MED, peak oil, petrol, Prime Minster, Reserve Bank, Treasury
More posts by frog | more about frog