Tony Abbott has been caught out telling more porkie pies, this time over the United States’ approach to limiting carbon emissions. Environment editor Sandi Keane reports.

Image Wes Mountain (thisisaustraliatoday.wordpress.com)
Tony Abbot made such an ass of himself trying to put one over us with a pensioner’s electricity bill, he’s been on the naughty mat ever since. Thankfully, we appear to have been spared the daily litany of carbon tax misdemeanours, lest we remember his.
But if Mitt Romney wins the U.S. Presidential election in a fortnight’s time, Abbott may well be tempted to make an ass of himself again on this subject.
There’s no doubt a Romney win will signal a return to Bush’s ‘business first, people last’ agenda. He opposes fuel-economy standards, wants to expand tax breaks for big oil companies and wind down investment in wind power; in other words, the same agenda we’d see in Australia if Abbott gets into the Lodge.
But, before the next election, Tony Abbott will need to convince the Australian public to get shot of the carbon tax ― like the Republican-dominated Congress dispensed with Obama’s cap and trade bill. Abbott will likely come up with the same absurd argument he voiced on his return from the United States in July this year, when he claimed:
“The last thing they want to do is damage their competitiveness, score an economic own goal without doing any good for the environment by hitting their people with a carbon tax.”
Well, let’s see how the U.S. is dealing with greenhouse gas emissions since Abbott made that claim.
Notwithstanding a Romney victory and Obama’s cap and trade Bill buried by a Republican-dominated Congress, the U.S. is rapidly decarbonizing its economy. In fact, the U.S. will easily meet its Copenhagen Accord target of minus 17 per cent by 2020, based on 2005 levels.
Without a price on carbon, on the other hand, Australia has no hope of meeting even its limited target of 5 per cent by 2020 below 2000 levels.
Surprisingly, two Republicans are responsible for rush by other states and institutions to jump into the vacuum vacated by Washington on climate change leadership: disgraced President, Richard Nixon, and former Californian Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger.
Following the Governator’s bold Global Warming Solution Act 2006, emissions in California are on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 to 1990 levels, and an impressive 80 per cent from 1990 levels by 2050, matching U.K. and German targets.
As the eighth largest economy in the world, California is big enough to qualify for a seat on the G20 in its own right and has the power to galvanize action beyond its borders.
Referred to as ‘the California effect’, carbon trading is now operating in sixteen U.S. states through the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Mid-Western and Western GHG trading schemes. California is also developing a joint cap and trade scheme with British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and Manitoba through the Western Climate Initiative.
But the largest share of the credit for decarbonizing of the U.S. economy should go to Richard Nixon.
During his administration, President Richard Nixon (1969-1974), delivered a raft of environmental legislation. It included the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Clean Air Act.
The EPA, not Washington, will micromanage the move to a low carbon economy. The landmark 2007 Supreme Court ruling that CO2 was a ‘pollutant’ and a threat to public health under the Clean Air Act – thereby qualifying it for regulation by the EPA – was upheld in June this year by the Court of Appeals.
Unlike Australia’s state-run, toothless, EPAs, the U.S. EPA will do most of the heavy lifting. The Clean Air Act limits carbon emissions to 1,000 pounds of CO2 per MW hour of power produced. Emissions standards also apply to other industries, as well as cars and light trucks.
This means that only natural gas power plants can meet the standard. New coal-fired power stations emit nearly twice this amount. The only way a new coal-fired power station can now be built in the U.S. is with the expensive and still technically unproven carbon capture and storage.
As the economy transitions to low carbon, forward thinking energy companies – such as Exelon and NextEra, which had moved to natural gas – look set for big gains, whilst those who generated most of their energy from coal will be the losers.
Exelon and NextEra are both members of U.S. Climate Action Partnership, a coalition of energy corporations and environment groups endorsing cap and trade legislation.
Another factor driving change is the current devastating drought. This year’s drought is breaking all records. Bloomberg Businessweek warns of the rising cost of food:
‘The drought gripping more than half the country is a major reason why consumers can expect to pay 3 percent to 4 percent more for groceries next year.’
The Australian drought certainly galvanised public appetite for action on global warming back in 2007. A Lowy poll that year showed over 65 per cent of Australians saw global warming as a serious and pressing problem, requiring action, even at a significant cost.
Like the Australian public, the majority of Americans want action on global warming but, as we saw in Australia during the Howard government years, it was vested interests, rather than public opinion, that drove his agenda.
Punters are placing bets on the inventiveness of another formidable player in the race to stop irreversible global warming ― the powerful U.S. military.
In its 2010 Quadrennial Review, the U.S. Department of Defense identified the links between climate change, energy security and economic stability. It regards climate change as a ‘threat multiplier’ and energy efficiency as a ‘force multiplier’.
The U.S. military is scaling up investment in energy efficiency, assessment tools and renewable energy projects for all its installations.
Just last week the U.S. Navy Secretary announced “Biofuel technology has arrived” touting a so-called “Green Fleet” of ships as well as a bio-fuelled “Green Hornet F-18″.
Having declared war on carbon, the U.S. military may remain the word’s best hope of preventing irreversible global warming. One of the most profound technologies of our time was invented by the U.S. Department of Defense during World War II – the computer.
This invention led to another extraordinary human achievement – the internet.
If Tony Abbott wants to avoid making an ass of himself again, he needs to remember that the information highway is now at everyone’s fingertips. Telling porkies about how Americans wouldn’t kick an own goal by implementing an exit strategy for coal is easily debunked by just a quick surf on the internet.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia License









23 Comments
Fascinating that California, simply a state among 49 others (mind you, basically a country in itself in some regards), can lead the way for the entire country to then foolow that lead. They have done it on many issues in the past, and will continue to into the future. A truly progressive mindset prevails in that state, and the benefits of progressivism to all are plain to see.
Australia’s answer: Tasmania? Perhaps…
Agree Miles Q. As I said, California is big enough to qualify for seat in its own right on the G20. Remember back in Dec 2008 when Papua New Guinea demanded of the US, “If you can’t lead then get out of the way.” The rest of America, especially California, is doing just that – so Move Over Washington!
As to Australia, I think most commentators in the climate science space would agree that South Australia is leading the way – thanks to the former Rann government. Happy to be challenged on this!
Good story Sandi.
The monk has lied that much now even God won’t forgive him.
Lib voters all must be tarred with that brush to that for the mug.
Julia is pulling away steadily and brilliantly actually.
Tony your just washed up i guess and so are your mates.
Ah true Sandi, didn’t think of SA, good point. I was thinking of the gay marriage debate and the recently defeated parliamentary motion on the little rock to the south-east.
Actually, now that I think of it, SA and Adelaide in particular have always been quite progressive – Don Dunstan is a legend.
And if Don were still around Miles, he’d probably be leading the gay marriage debate as well. You’re right, SA progressive politics goes back way before Rann’s time.
And way back before mine too
It was actually during, and largely because of, his leadership of SA in the 70′s that my father (who was living in Adelaide for several years from the US) decided that he would one day bring his family back to live here in Australia, which we did in ’88 when I was just a wee fella…and the rest is, well, rather recent history.
Thanks again Sandi, another great article on a great site!
“irreversible global warming” is a misnomer. If it were allowed to run it’s course and the worst case scenario was realized, it wouldn’t be long before the atmosphere is stripped away, leaving the globe a very cold place indeed. On top of that, I fail to see how we could ever activley reverse any of it. Almost all our methods of creating cold generate heat as a by-product. By the time we remake global industry in Gaia’s image, we will have either suceeded or failed… Unless the threat is not as imminent as it’s made out to be.
That said, Tony Abbott is an ass clown who doesn’t have a prayer. It’s just a shame that the only other choice in most people’s mind is Gillard. Say what you will about carbon pricing, the real legacy she will leave can be summed up in two words: Mining Tax. I live in Kalgoorlie, right on the nerve, and let me tell you, friends and neighbours…. She has kneecapped her nation.
Tony Abbott continues on his untruthful ways. “Australia has the biggest carbon tax in the world.” he says.
Ah no it doesn’t. On 1 JUly 2012 British Columbia in Canda INCREASED its carbon tax from $25 per tonne to $30 per tonne.
So when you hear him mouthing those (biggest carbon tax in the world) words again, you know that he is lying to you.
But the Murdoch media never pick him iup on it and he NEVER subjects himself to joiurnalists who will ask him hard questions.
He squibbed it with the Indonesian President over “turn back the boats”.
It is about time that Abbott manned up and stood up for what he believes in and is prepared to cogerently argue his case.
Just make sure you get him to write is down and sign it as well.
What he believes in? Fie. He believes in himself! But lordy oh lordy, don’t hold him to that.
He is a little man in a big room. He has made his position clear, and I think it’s probably safe to ignore him now.
And now that Barbra Ramjam has commenced legal proceedings against Kroger and the Australian Newspaper he may well be found out for lying about his student days.
Oh wow, bundysmum! Didn’t realize that.
Crikey’s First Dog is taking bets as we speak on his replacement date. Seems inevitable. Wonder why there’s no equivalent site like we had for Howard – Not Happy John! Now with the people power of twitter, we could really get it happening. Name? Suggestions anyone?
As to reversing global warming, we’re talking here about reversing the trend, not what to do when we pass tipping point. Even so, there are many ideas being discussed right now: re-aforestation, massive algae ocean farms, etc. There’s even talk of painting roofs white and the whole geo-engineering fantasy of giant mirrors and technology to suck the carbon out of the atmosphere. I’ll put my money on the U.S. military.
Hey Sandi,
First time commenting but long time reader..
How about – “Time’s up Tony” or Time’s up Tone
or ” Kick the H’Abbott”..”
or a site that says “I pledge to preference the liberal party if you change the leader!!!!”
Thanks for the informative article
Or.. Shamelessly stealing from Lachlan Harris ” One Big Leader Switch” and all sides of the political spectrum can express that ultimately we will deal with any Prime Minister but Tony.
hey that’s another one “Anyone but Tony”…
I promise I have finished now… Cheers
“Kick the H’Abbott”
That is gold Andrew, love it. I’m gonna get a shirt made with that, if you don’t mind of course (maybe I could put a little disclaimer as to the original author!)
Talk about brightening up and already beautiful Friday – thanks!
Happy to help Miles Q!! would love to see some T-shirts around.. and no need for disclaimer… lol The goal is only to never ever have Tony Abbott Prime Minister of our great country.
Isn’t Richard Nixon dead?
But BSkinner, I thought the carbon tax didn’t raise any revenue? How is it going to kneecap the nation when it doesn’t charge any money? I think you’re trying to pull a rabbott here (“Whyalla will be wiped off the map”).
Andrewthetwelve – boy, you should comment more often! Those are gems. Ooooh… hard one but I reckon “Kick the H’Abbott”. Conjures up a rather nice image to go on the T-shire too. I’ll start tweeting and see what our fellow tweeps say! My handle is @jarrapin by the way.
Mercurial – yes, Nixon is dead. Re carbon tax: our biggest emitters pay $23 per tonne – here’s a good website to explain where the money goes. Sure you aren’t confused with the MRRT?: http://is.gd/voxF4q
Andrewthetwelve – have tweeted it out. What’s your twitter handle?
Note to the Landscape Guardians and Waubra Foundation: Not just gas but wind power has dethroned King Coal in the U.S. Of the two companies mentioned above, Exelon is the largest provider of wind power east of the Mississippi River and NextEra is one of the world’s largest generators of wind power with around 90 wind farms in the U.S. and Canada.
There’s already a fantastic site out there …..troll free…..terrific articles……intelligent comment and 14,000 grateful members. It’s “Tony Abbott Will Never Be Prime Minister”. Check it out.
Mercurial, the Mining Tax was the kneecapper. I have had a university economist (Friends with my mum) explain to me, at length, about how the Mining Tax was designed so as to not actually impact the mining industry, and you know, it seemed to make a lot of sense… What I could understand of it, anyway
Nonetheless, investors are walking away from Australia. Ye Gods, Gina the Golden Giant is walking away from Australia, and she was born here. It’s not a case of the reality, which I am assured is quite reasonable… It’s a case of investor confidence, which has been shaken dramatically. I’m not fighting reform or transformation, I’m saying that rich people get nervous where their cash is involved, and if there is even a (percieved) 5% chance that investing in another country will reap better rewards, I ask you, why would they invest here?
The newsflash we aren’t likely to see:
NEWSFLASH: TONY ABBOTT TELLS THE TRUTH!