The Senate Economics References Committee On Carbon Risk Disclosure

This essay has outlined all the current positive aspects of Australian society, but we need to address the future and the sustainability of our environment for our grandchildren. The federal government is addressing this issue by introducing a carbon-trading scheme. This carbon trading scheme, where the tax on carbon producing goods and services go into a positive influence on the environment, for example planting trees. The Australian government is following leads by other countries in this circumstance.

The world economy is a very complex system; in the system harmful externalities disrupt capital flows and determine economic productivity. Most notable of these externalities is inadvertent global warming. Spending towards research and regulation of climate change at both the national and international level are very important in determining current and future business trends. Economists and scientists worldwide continuously debate the pros and cons of emissions reduction and what consequences can quickly follow. Though many have different views on the issue, all can agree that the immediate and long term effects of climate change have become an economic matter of paramount importance. The sweeping impact from climate change will have important fiscal, financial, and macroeconomic ramifications that influence global commerce standards.

The argument about man’s role in climate change and the role of government, the role of industry and the role of citizens is a significant challenge that crosses all levels of government, crosses all geopolitical boundaries and crosses all sectors of business. National governments across the globe are dealing with the issue in different ways, but one overarching aspect of control and mitigation can be seen in the oversight and regulation of the electric energy industry. One significant challenge facing each nation is the cost to lower carbon emissions and the question of who will pay the additional cost for compliance. Though the cost issue is significant, a much more difficult question is whether any decision on lowering emissions can make

The mining business is where the greater part of Australia’s economy originates from. Conservative politicians are unwilling to accept climate change, for the reason that they favour society’s values and aspects to be unchanged. A case which supports this notion is Australia’s and the United States rejecting to join other countries in partaking in the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol aims to unite countries to set limits on their greenhouse gas emissions, to suppress the destructive effects of climate change. The United States expresses that it will not participate in the international treaty due to; absence of sufficient supporting scientific evidence, large developing countries such as China or India aren’t partaking in the movement and reducing the greenhouse emissions would mean loss in their economy. Therefore, Australia and the United States will be more reluctant to adapting accepting climate change as it will negatively affect the industries that both countries originated from and have thrived on (Vanderheiden,

Australia’s carbon tax led to a drop in electricity sector emissions by as much as 17 million tons (9%). Many contend that the effects would have been more

The regulatory constraints on businesses from government have been subdued recent years. Fulfilling the function of the state, Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s government proposed a new climate policy that the government will put off the existing levy on emitters and set up fund with as much as $2.6 billion to subsidize the mining enterprises in cutting green-house gas emissions (Anderson, Scott 2014). The subsidy released the financial burden of carbon tax which cost BHP $77.5 million in 2013 (Financial Review 2014) as an enabler in mining industry (Conrad 1993).

Cap and trade is a system aimed at diminishing the rate at which carbon is emitted into the atmosphere by creating an economic system based on meeting a certain minimal threshold or paying low-emitting companies for the right to emit in their place. For example, if company A only emits half of the emissions cap, that company can sell (or trade) the remaining credits to company B, should company B choose to emit one-and-a-half times the cap. A main objection to the cap and trade system is that it is not a strong enough means by which to curb emissions of fossil fuels and is inferior to specifically stronger carbon taxes. While initially appealing, the notion of simply strengthening carbon taxes fails to properly stifle carbon emissions and to adequately incentivize “green” development in comparison to the cap and trade system, preventing carbon taxes from occupying a central role to mitigate carbon emissions.

First we should understand how the carbon cap and trade system came about. The system of carbon cap trade used to be known as ‘emissions trading’, the alliance of free-market republicans and renegade environmentalists got the system adopted as national law in 1990 as a part of the Clean Air Act, to control the power-plant pollutants that cause acid rain, which is triggered by vast clouds of sulfur dioxide

Limiting emissions requires broad-based action across many sectors of the global economy. Australia’s air temperature has risen 0.9°C since 1910, illustrating the Global Warming due to the emissions of greenhouse gases. Australia has numerous initiatives that provide its population with tips on how to help the environment. Unlike many industrialized nations Australia is still heavily reliant on Non Renewable Resources such as coal. Australia and Japan have both signed the Kyoto Agreement which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Japan signed it in 2002, whereas Australia signed it in 2007. The time of which both countries signed, illustrates that Japan was more acceptable and ready for such a scheme and to do something about greenhouse gases. Japan was ranked 12th out of 176 countries in a 2013 Global Sustainable Competitiveness Index. Japan ranked 4th in Sustainable innovations which entails providing quality education, cultivating research and development, creating globally competitive products and services, and providing jobs and income for the population of a country recognised as environmentally sustainable. Although Japan has achieved this position, the country has a substantial amount of air pollution from power plant emissions which results in acid rain. The acidification of rain damages lakes and reservoirs whilst degrading water quality and threatening aquatic life.

The year 2016 was the warmest year on average in NASA’s 136 year record. One main reason this occurred is the increase in greenhouse gases. To reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the air, the Canadian government has decided to implement a carbon tax as of 2018. (Canadian Press, 2017). A carbon tax is a “legal binding associated with harmful emissions charge.” (Maclean’s, 2016). Several provinces have already introduced a carbon tax, including British Columbia, Alberta, and Quebec. While British Columbia and Alberta have a carbon tax, Quebec uses a cap-and-trade system instead. The government believes it is important to avoid “economic damage caused by cross-country carbon price differentials.” (Maclean’s, 2016). That is why they are

In Australia, there is an emerging consensus that the government should take further actions to help mitigate and combat climate change. The current most accepted policy by government is the introduction of a carbon tax followed by an ETS in 2015. However we are focusing on the carbon tax in this essay and not the ETS. Here is a brief explanation of the dynamics of a carbon tax. A carbon tax is a tax on energy sources, which emit carbon dioxide (Co2). Therefore, carbon taxes address the problem of negative externality. Externalities are the subsequent effects when individual production or consumption of a particular good or service imposes costs or benefits on others. Therefore negative externalities are effects, which pose harm to others without their direct interaction (Basic Economics 2011). However, usual market practices and transactions do not reflect these cost and benefits in the prices involved in the transaction, or take into account in their transaction decision. Therefore this is a form of market failure. By imposing a cost on these negative externalities, the hidden cost can be addressed. Ultimately the purpose of a carbon tax is to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and therefore reduce

In February 2011, the Australian federal government declared a scheme to implement a Carbon Tax from July 1, 2012. Implementing this scheme has generated a controversial debate between Australians. The term “Carbon tax” refers to an environmental tax forcing polluters to pay per ton of carbon which they release into the atmosphere. This essay will provide the economical, social and political implication of carbon taxes, also with its introduction who will benefit and who would suffer.

However, the Gillard government has instituted one fairly radical and controversial policy: the new imposed carbon tax which took effect on July 1, 2012. The tax requires 500 of Australia's top polluting companies to "pay a fixed price, starting at Aus$23 per tonne, for their carbon dioxide emissions for the first three years. The mechanism would then shift

They looked at two scenarios, inaction, where business’ continue finding and using carbon as they see fit, and action, where business’ use a low-carbon energy mix. They found that not only would the investment cost of the action scenario be no more than inaction, but it would even cost a bit less- 190.2 trillion dollars for action and 192 trillion dollars for inaction. This is before even considering the amount of money saved by the effects of the action scenario itself. The report found that, “the difference in climate damage costs between low (1.5°C) warming and high (4.5°C) warming scenarios could be as high as $50 trillion” (Business Insider). The effect of such a large economic company reporting this data is the perfect example of how using economics for the sake of reversing global warming can be really beneficial. The argument often used by economists is that becoming more sustainable would hurt the economy, but the data in this report proves just the opposite, and how terrible it would be if we did nothing. For the sake of investment in industry’s like coal and gas, this information is often denied. But this is not anywhere near the first time industry’s have had to adapt due to uncontrollable events. This report emphasizes the importance of recognizing

The most recent State of the Market Report on bonds and climate change found that from 2015 to 2016, the so-called “climate-aligned bond universe” grew by $201 billion to reach a total $895 billion of both labelled and un-labelled green bonds. Separating out the labelled green bond market (as defined by the Climate Bonds Initiative), there was an increase of close to 100% with issuances totaling $81.4 billion. It has been noted that despite this overall growth in the green bond market, the growth rate is still far lower than expected and insufficient if we want to achieve our climate targets. I believe these numbers – along with additional evidence – suggest that the acceleration of the green bond market is simultaneously facilitated and