White Paper response: 'timely start, but we could do better'.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Since the federal government released its White Paper outlining a carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS) for Australia in December, the response from environmental and public policy experts has been consistent--introducing a CPRS in 2010 is commendable, but the proposed 5-15 per cent reduction target is far too low and subsidies to carbon-intensive 'big polluters' far too high.

The government's case for a smaller 5 per cent cut in total emissions was based to a large extent on a comparison of Australia's projected per capita emissions cuts with Europe's, which has set a target of a 20 per cent cut in emissions (relative to 1990 levels) by 2020.

The projected faster growth of Australia's population compared to Europe's over 1990-2020 justifies a lower 5-15 per cent emissions cut because it 'translates to a 34-41 per cent reduction in the per capita emissions over this period', according to the White Paper.

'Five per cent below 2000 levels is our minimum, unconditional commitment to reduce emissions by 2020, irrespective of the actions of other nations,' said Prime Minister Kevin Rudd at the launch of the document.

'Fifteen per cent below 2000 levels is our commitment to reduce emissions further, if there is a global agreement where all major economies commit to substantially restrain emissions and advanced economies take on comparable reductions to that of Australia.

'Australia stands ready to adjust our post-2020 targets to play our full part in achieving a 450 ppm agreement [including] reconsidering our 2050 target, should it become necessary.'