Archives for August 2013
Why the ETS will not Succeed: Peter Lang
JUSTIFICATION for Australia’s carbon-pricing scheme assumes there will be a global carbon pricing system with our ETS a part of it. This assumption is probably wrong. It is unlikely a global carbon pricing system will be implemented, let alone sustained for the decades or even centuries that would be required. 
Without a global carbon-pricing system, national or regional carbon-pricing schemes would be prohibitively expensive if they are to achieve the projected benefits and, therefore, would not be sustainable. The high cost means that a scheme like the one Australia has legislated is not viable, and even regional carbon pricing schemes like the European ETS will not last. The ‘ball-park’ analysis presented here suggests Australia’s ETS would cost $12 for every $1 of projected benefit, to 2050.
Carbon Credit Market is Neither Free nor Worth Anything: Jo Nova
THERE is an entire cannon of western philosophical thought, dating back to John Locke and John Stuart Mills, that explains why the prosperity of a nation is not so much linked to its natural wealth, but rather the proper functioning of markets.
In On Liberty, perhaps John Stuart Mill’s most famous treatise published in 1859, he argues that:
“… the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant.”
[Read more…] about Carbon Credit Market is Neither Free nor Worth Anything: Jo Nova
Open Thread
“Freedom of thought is best promoted by the gradual illumination of men’s minds, which follows from the advance of science.” Charles Robert Darwin
***
The image/picture is of a fellow pretending to be Mr Darwin with the real Jen, taken in the British Museum of Natural History a few months ago.
Definitions of Science: Double Standards from Australian Government
The Australian legal system ruled on the definition of science some years ago, however, the Australian government is now pursuing the Japanese and their whaling program on the basis of an all together different definition, explains Charlotte Ramotswe.
Dear Jennifer,
Australia has taken Japan to the International Court of Justice disputing a basis of its whaling program – that it is scientific. You wrote about this recently in the blog post “Japan Attacks Aussie Moralising on Whaling”.
In the international court, it seems that the Australian Government has argued that what the Japanese are doing does not constitute “science”. What is this thing called science? The subject has preoccupied philosophers and historian and been the subject of many books including a classic by A.F. Chalmers.
Let’s face it: at least the scientific whaling program does generate a lot of data and publications.
[Read more…] about Definitions of Science: Double Standards from Australian Government
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD has worked in industry and government. She is currently researching a novel technique for long-range weather forecasting funded by the B. Macfie Family Foundation.