Abstract

Effective climate policy requires global emissions of greenhouse gases to be cut substantially, which can be achieved by energy supply technologies with lower emissions, greater energy use efficiency and substitution in demand. For policy to be efficient requires at least fairly uniform, fairly pervasive emission pricing from taxes, permit trading or combinations of the two; and significant government support for low‐emission technologies. We compare the technology‐focused climate policies adopted by Australia and the ‘Asia–Pacific Partnership on Clean Development and Climate’ (AP6), against this policy yardstick. We find that such policies omit the need for emission pricing to achieve abatement effectively and efficiently; they over‐prescribe which abatement actions should be used most; they make unrealistic assumptions about how much progress can be achieved by voluntarism and cooperation, in the absence of either adequate funding or mandatory policies; and they unjustifiably contrast technology‐focused policy and the Kyoto Protocol approach as the only two policies worth considering, and thus ignore important policy combinations.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.