8/14/2019 Socialist Alliance Climate Change Charter

1/4

Warnings that can'tbe ignored

Climate scientists have been

warning us about global warming

for decades. But in the last few

years, alarm bells have been ring-

ing more loudly.

Previously it was assumed that

gradual increases in carbon diox-

ide (CO2) and other heat-trapping

gases in the atmosphere would

produce gradual increases in glob-

al temperatures. But now scien-

tists predict that an increase of as

little as 2C above pre-industrial

levels could trigger environmental

effects that would make further

warming as much as 8C

inevitable (see Box 1, over).

Worse still, a 2C increase is

highly likely if greenhouse gas

concentrations reach 450 parts per

million (ppm). They presentlystand at 430ppm and are increas-

ing by 2 - 2.5 ppm per year (seeTable 1).

Such accelerated warmingwould create the hottest Earthsince the human race evolved (seeGraph 1). In the earlier stages, an

additional 2 billion people wouldbe at risk of insufficient water,95% of coral reefs would be lost,

the Amazon rainforest and otherimportant ecosystems would bedestroyed forever, and a super-drought would spread to the

worlds largest food producers,causing widespread famine and anunprecedented refugee crisis.

The collapse of the polar icecaps would result in a sea level

rise of up to 25 metres, and mas-sive devastation to coastal andisland communities and major

cities. The rate of species losscould match those of previousmass extinctions. Needless to say,not only civilisation, but the very

survival of humanity would bethreatened.

Australia greenhouse gasemissions junkie

Each year human activity ispumping out twice as many green-house gas (GHG) emissions 8billion tonnes as against 4 billion as the worlds forests, land andoceans can absorb.

Moreover, there is a time lagbetween greenhouse gas releaseinto the atmosphere and the finalimpact on global average tempera-ture. Since the late 1880s, this hasrisen 0.8C and the GHGs now in

the air will cause a further 0.5-0.6 rise over coming decades.This puts us dangerously close tothe temperatures at which run-away warming will occur. Theharmful effects are already beingseen in droughts, floods, cyclones,heat waves and rising sea levels.

While Australias share ofworld GHG emissions is small,around 1.4%, our highly industri-alised economy has the highestGHG emission rate per person inthe world: 5.63 tonnes of carboneach year (see Graph 2, over).

The global average is 1.27tonnes and the world environmentcan absorb only 0.62 tonnes perperson. Just to get Australiasemissions down to a level the

Earth can absorb would mean cut-

ting emissions by 90%.

Yet, despite knowing the seri-

ous risks since the 1980s, the

Australian government and

resource industry lobbyists (the

greenhouse mafia) have sabo-taged international negotiations in

order to protect the profits of a

small number of big polluters like

BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto.

We have no choicebut to make everypossible effort

The urgency of the situation

cannot be overstated: global

warming and climate change are

already upon us. Bringing green-

house gas emissions under control

will require deep changes and

immense effort at the global level:

a revolution in the economy and

industry as big as mobilising for

world war.

Climate change scientists say

we have a window of around 10

years to make the necessary infra-

structure and investment changes

that can produce these emissions

cuts.

In the words of the May 2007report of the Intergovernmental

Panel on Climate Change (IPCC),

It is technically and economical-

ly feasible to stabilise greenhouse

gas concentrations in the atmos-

phere.

But getting there in time is the

greatest challenge. It means

adopting policies adequate to the

climate crisis, and creating the

social and political movement

capable of making sure they are

actually introduced. This charter

outlines the Socialist Alliances

view of those policies and the

strategy we need to implement

them.

Graph 1: Past CO2 levels and theaverage temperature of the Earth.

This table, from the Stern Report, shows the likelihood that a given

level of greenhouse gases (expressed in carbon dioxide equiva-

lent CO2e) will result in global warming over a certain tempera-

ture. For example, greenhouse gases that level off at 550ppm CO2e

give a 63-99% chance of exceeding a 2 warming compared to

pre-industrial temperatures. The figures are drawn from a wide

range of studies. The red shading indicates a 60 per cent chance of

exceeding the temperature level; the amber shading a 40 per cent

chance; yellow shading a 10 per cent chance; and the green shad-

ing a less than a 10 per cent chance.

See

Table 1: Probabilities of Global Warming.

8/14/2019 Socialist Alliance Climate Change Charter

2/4

Set the greenhousegas reduction targetsthat the planet needs

Any GHG emissions reductiontarget fails the test if achieving itstill gives us runaway global warm-ing. This is the central problem ofthe UKs 2006 Stern Review, whichadopts a limit for greenhouse gasconcentration of 550ppm, eventhough, in Sir Nicholas Sterns ownwords, this would produce at leasta 77% chance and perhaps up toa 99% chance, depending on the cli-mate model used of a globalaverage temperature rise exceeding2C.

The only responsible limit is onethat gives the best chance of holdingthe temperature rise beneath 2C.That means a maximum greenhousegas concentration of 450ppm.

To achieve it the SocialistAlliance calls for a 60% reductionof Australias emissions (comparedto 1990 levels) by 2020, including95% of power station emissions, anda 90% overall reduction by 2030.

We need mandatory emissionsreduction targets of 4-5% per yearnow. We propose immediateeconomy-wide and sector-by-sectorplanning for all greenhouse gases, to

meet these targets on time or before.We must be able to review andchange these targets as scientificforecasts are updated.

Businesses, local councils andgovernment departments should allbe included in such an audit, and

networks like that of the local coun-cils committed to reducing theiroverall GHG emissions to zerostrongly encouraged.

Ratify Kyoto andnegotiate a muchstronger treaty

The rich industrial countries aremostly responsible for greenhousegas emissions, but poor under-developed countries like Bangladeshand Kiribati are hit first and worstby climate change.

The rich nations must assist poornations to develop economicallyalong a road that avoids high-pollution industries. This aid is not

charity, but repaying our ecologicaldebt. Many poor nations will havetrouble just dealing with the symp-toms of climate change withoutmassive technical assistance.

Australia must also accept a largeshare of environmental refugees dis-placed by rising sea levels, especiallyfrom the Asia-Pacific region.

The government must immediatelyratify the Kyoto treaty and push fora new international treaty that aimsfor 90% emissions reductions on1990 levels by 2030. The industri-alised nations are the only ones ableto lead the way Australia mustbecome a leader, not a saboteur, ofserious international climate action.

Attack energyinefficiency, aim forzero waste

All the experts agree that the eas-iest cuts in GHGs come fromincreasing efficiency and reducingwaste. More efficient appliances,insulating homes, better recycling,building public transport instead of

private cars, marketing locally pro-duced goods there are many sim-ple but effective changes that arepossible right now.

But these changes will never beintroduced on the scale necessary ifleft to the individual consumersresponse to appeals to save energy,and to the sticks and carrots of ener-gy price hikes and tax rebates.

To begin the transition to sustain-ability, it is essential to set energyefficiency as a national goal, andthen develop targets, standards, reg-ulations and national and local cam-paigns to achieve it.

Take as an example Venezuelaand Cubas elimination of incandes-cent light bulb use. In both countries

this goal was achieved by havingteams of young volunteers movefrom house to house, installinggovernment-supplied, low-energyreplacement bulbs for free.

Its the sort of approach thatsneeded for the immense job of mak-ing Australias 5.5 million housesand blocks of flats energy efficient.

A government committed to ener-gy efficiency would launch a sus-tainable energy household conver-sion plan, with annual targets forsolar power and heating installationcompulsory for energy utilities. (Asexplained below, these would haveto be returned to public ownershipto do this.) Such a plan would buildon and promote the various commu-

nity initiatives already dedicated togoals like creating zero emissionhousing, schools and other facilities.

It would require the sameapproach from business, and with a

systematic energy audit and setcompliance deadlines, would closedown or take over firms that wontupgrade to low emissions technolo-

gy and processes.It would also monitor and estab-lish strict standards for the energyuse of business products. Businessesoperate in a competitive capitalisteconomy, have a vested interest inselling as much as possible and areunlikely in most cases to implementclimate-friendly techniques unlessstrong regulations are introduced.

Integral to the plan would be thephasing out of the $8.9-9 billion infossil fuel subsidies, especially toenergy-hungry industries l ike alu-minium refining. Industries that areheavy users of energy would berequired to generate their powersustainably or alternative materialswould be found and these industries

closed or cut back.All products require energy to bemanufactured. Waste of energy andresources are built into the entireeconomy. More profits are madefrom designing products not to lastand pollution produced along theway is released to become someoneelses problem. Even traditionalrecycling largely ignores manufac-turing waste and assumes relativelyfew products can be re-used or recy-cled at the end of their lives. Mostconsumer products with all theenergy and raw materials that havegone into their production oneway or another become landfill.

In a zero waste economy, prod-ucts are designed from the start withan ability to be repaired, re-used anddisassembled for recycling. Oneway to do this is extended producerresponsibility, where manufacturersmust take back their used products(cars, TVs, computers, etc.) and re-use the components. Another way isleasing schemes, where appliancesare repaired and updated, thusextending their working life.

Phase out coal,no nuclear

Governments and the coal indus-

try are spending millions of dollars

researching clean coal technolo-

gy. This entirely experimental tech-

nology would involve capturing car-

bon dioxide from coal burning and

burying it underground, where it

would remain a threat to future gen-

erations.Coal burning now accounts for

around 36% of Australias GHG

emissions; mining and handling coaladds even more. Aplan for phasingout coal mining and export must bedeveloped, and must involve creat-ing new jobs for miners, as well as

transitional assistance to help affectedcountries meet their energy needsthrough renewables.

No new coal mines or coal-firedpower plants should be approvedfrom now on, and all existingapprovals (such as for the Anvil Hillmine) should be revoked.

The nuclear lobby and its friends

in the Coalition and ALPbegan thepush for expanding the mining ofuranium when its price started torise well before concerns aboutglobal warming reached their pres-

ent height. They then cynically usedconcerns about climate change topromote their agenda.

But expanding the nuclear cycleis not a solution to climate change.The storage of nuclear wasteremains dangerous, and there willalways be the risk of disasterousaccidents like at Chernobyl and

Three Mile Island. Huge amounts ofenergy and water are used in urani-um mining and power generation,and the development of nucleartechnology risks further nuclear

Runaway global warming is caused by self-perpetuating cycles (pos-itive feedbacks) that accelerate global warming. Increasing temper-atures trigger these feedbacks, which in themselves cause moreglobal warming so that the process of global warming becomes self-

fuelling and self-perpetuating. Here are some examples:As icecaps melt there is less reflective white surface on Earth, sothe land and water beneath absorb the sun's heat instead of reflect-ing it. This reduces the amount of ice that grows back over winter,leading to even less reflection of sunlight and more warming. Arcticsea ice is expected to disappear by the middle of this century.

Water vapour is a powerful natural greenhouse gas. As the Earth'stemperature rises, more water evaporates, which contributes to fur-ther warming.

Methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more powerful than carbondioxide, is frozen in vast quantities in the permafrost (frozen ground)of Siberia, Canada and Alaska. Thawing of the permafrost hasalready been observed. As temperatures rise, more methane will bereleased, triggering further warming and hence more methanerelease, and so on.

Decomposition of organic carbon in soils increases with rising tem-peratures, releasing more CO2 into the air. This can make forests

emit carbon instead of absorbing it.

Ocean warming and slowing of the Gulf Stream reduces CO2

absorption, leading to higher concentrations in the air and furtherwarming.

Warming leads to forest die-back and fires, releasing more CO2 and

causing more warming.

In the words of James Hansen, head of NASA's Goddard Institute,We either keep the warming small or it is likely to be quitelarge.

We were very pleased to see the SA announcement that you hadadopted ambitious and visionary emissions reduction targets for greenhousegases... and hope that it does influence other parties to commit to similarlyambitious targets

Cam Walker, Friends of the Earth Australia. Commend you on your recent decisions re greenhouse emissions

Dr Ted Trainer

Box 1: Triggers for runaway global warming.

Graph 2: Australias greenhouse gas emissions by sector in 2005. Source:Australian Greenhouse office.

8/14/2019 Socialist Alliance Climate Change Charter

3/4

weapons proliferation. Apart fromall this, the time needed forapproval and construction ofnuclear reactors is much too longto reduce our reliance on fossilfuels within the next two decades.

Aboriginal communities haveresisted the expansion of uraniummining and the dumping of nuclearwaste on their traditional lands.The federal Coalition governmentsdecision to take control ofAboriginal settlements in theNorthern Territory and scrap thepermit system that givesAboriginal people a say overwhether mining can take place ontheir lands is another victory for

the nuclear lobby at the cost ofAboriginal land rights.

Socialist Alliance opposesAustralias participation in thenuclear fuel cycle. We oppose thefederal governments racist landgrab.

Renewables can and

must be our main

energy sourceA large number of specialist

studies have established thatAustralia could meet its basic energyneeds from a combination of non-fossil fuel sources like solar, wind,biomass derived from agriculturalwastes, tidal and geothermal (hot

rocks beneath the Earths surface).Countries like Spain and

Denmark already produce morethan 20% of their energy fromsolar and wind power. By contrast,Australias state and territory gov-ernments have adopted totallyinadequate Mandatory RenewableEnergy Targets (MRET), while thefederal government, under pressurefrom the greenhouse mafia, haswound back its existing MRET,which had delivered a totally inad-equate increase in renewables.

At the same time as massivegovernment subsidies continue tobe given to dirty fuels like browncoal, renewable energy technolo-gies are being starved of adequatefunds.

This strangulation of seriousresearch and development fundingfor renewables is very convenient

for the fossil fuel and nuclearmafias. It prevents from coming

true the scenario they most dread the speedy development ofrenewable technologies withfalling unit costs that increasinglycompete with their polluting money-

spinners.The quickest way to guarantee

that renewables are taken up at thespeed needed to keep greenhouse

gas concentration in check is not toleave this job to the market and

private industry even greenindustry but to create an ade-quately funded, public renewable

energy facility; a Snowy Riverscheme of alternative energyresearch, development and imple-mentation.

Towards a new agri-cultural model goorganic, protect theforests

Our current agricultural prac-tices based on highly mecha-nised planting and harvesting ofsingle crops and on artificial fer-tilisers consume huge quantitiesof fossil fuels. This not only cre-ates pollution, but when fossil fuelsupplies start to diminish, foodsecurity along with the climate willbe threatened.

Australia must start a transitionto carbon-neutral and organicfarming. The use of dry areas togrow crops that consume too muchwater, such as rice and cotton,must end.

All organic waste, includinggreen waste and sewerage, shouldbe composted and the methane gasby-product harnessed for use as anenergy source. This ensures richsoil and avoids methane gas escap-ing into the atmosphere from land-fills, which currently occurs.

Food production should bedecentralised and localised toreduce the energy needed to trans-port and refrigerate foods. TheSocialist Alliance supports thegrowth of urban agriculture, espe-cially as many cities are built onour most fertile lands.

Existing farming communitiesshould be encouraged with income,resources and training to make thetransition to organic agriculture.

Biodiversity and the survival ofnative ecosystems must be promotedin order to preserve our food sup-plies and the diversity of nativespecies that make up the web oflife on this continent.

Land clearing and outdatedforestry practices such as old-growth logging are the biggest

cause of greenhouse gas emissionsin Tasmania, and account for 6%of national GHG emissions.Moreover, native forests that havenot been logged store up to threetimes more carbon than forests thathave been logged.

To increase this carbon sinkcapacity, extensive programs ofnative-forest planting must be initi-ated.

Make public transportfree and frequent

Transport is responsible for 14%of Australias greenhouse gas emis-sions, a figure that just keepsgrowing. Road transport accounts

for by far the largest share, around90% of the total. The longer wecontinue with this transport model where cars carry 80% of peopleto work and trucks carry 60% of

goods the worse things will get.The CSIRO says that to reverse

this trend we have to put publictransport at the centre of our citydevelopment plans. Not surprising,given that trains are 40 times moreenergy efficient than cars! Buthow?

Obviously, we wont switchaway from car and truck use unlesstheres huge investment in publictransport to make it a real optionfor the millions who dont use itnow.

A system that people want touse will have to provide frequentservices and place everyone within10 minutes walk of a service, espe-cially in outer metropolitanregions.

It will have to be a publiclyowned, integrated system of heavyrail, light rail, ferry and busservices.

But even that wouldnt beenough. To jump start the switch topublic transport it has to be free.

Thats what transport authoritieshave always done when they reallyneed people to use the public sys-tem, as in the 2000 SydneyOlympics. Its what has happenedin the Belgian city of Hasselt;

within a year of introducing freebus fares, patronage increased by870%.

The natural reaction to this pro-posal is to think that it would costa vast amount of money. However,this reaction fails to measure thetotal (economic, social and envi-ronmental) cost and benefit of pub-lic transport against the total costand benefit of the alternative continuing to shift people andgoods by private car and truck.

On that scale, public transportwins hands down every 10%switch out of car and truck andinto public transport would reducethe costs of air pollution, green-house gas emission, car accidents,

traffic congestion, motor vehiclewaste disposal, noise pollution androad maintenance by an order of$1.4 billion at least.

Free and frequent public trans-

port combined with policies that

stimulate cycling and walking is

the only serious approach to curb-

ing greenhouse gas emissions in

the transport sector.

Carbon tradingschemes won't solvethe crisis

Mainstream political debate onglobal warming is dominated bydiscussion of emissions tradingsystems. These involve cappingnational GHG emissions at a targetlevel and issuing permits or cred-its to polluting industries that tell

them how much carbon dioxidethey are allowed to emit over acertain time.

These schemes are riddled withloopholes. In theory, the totalamount of carbon that can bereleased is reduced each year, theprice of carbon rises and those whodont make the change to carbon-saving technologies pay the price.

In practice, the schemes are verydifficult if not impossible to police

and the price of carbon is set fartoo low to force business to aban-don its polluting practices quicklyenough to have anything like theimpact on overall emissions that isneeded.

For example, the CSIRO hascalculated that carbon would haveto trade at between $350-$575 atonne to produce the (inadequate)level of carbon emission reductions

targeted in the Stern Review. Atthe other end of the spectrum, JohnHoward has threatened Australiawith a Garrett recession if car-bon ever reaches the ALPs (very

distant) target of $50 a tonne.Carbon credits are also given

out for carbon offsets, like plant-ing a forest somewhere, regardlessof whether the plantation wouldhave gone ahead anyway or ifanother forest was cut down inorder to plant it! These credits per-mit companies to carry on pollut-ing, all the while continuing toprofit. Planting forests is in anycase not a permanent, or even

measurable store of carbon (where-as digging up fossilised carbonfuels is basically permanent).

If the credits are given out bygovernments instead of being soldor auctioned, and if the caps aretoo lenient, industries suffer nopenalties and can go on pollutingas usual which is what has hap-pened with the European Unionsscheme over the last two years.

No solution withoutpublic ownership anddemocratic control

The principle of polluter paysmeans that the assets of pollutingcompanies should be directed to

cleaning up the mess they havemade. Individual consumers do usepolluting products but they arerarely responsible for the decisionsthat result in the pollution occur-ring: it is the big industries thatmust bear the costs.

The first measure to ensure ajust solution is to take over indus-tries that will not stop polluting,placing them under public owner-ship and scrutiny. In this way,those operations that are essentialcan be identified and kept (andcleaned up) while non-essentialaspects can be scaled back or shutdown. The profits that these publicenterprises will still make can be re-

Vote Climate gives Socialist Alliance the topscore for climate change policy. See

Rail vs road some points to consider

A modern, small automobile with two passengers gener-ates almost 25 times the air pollution per passenger mileas a four-car commuter train at 35% capacity. Two sets of commuter rail tracks will handle the passen-ger traffic of at least six lanes of highway. A new light-rail line costs about a third of a new highway

or loop road, and recent developments in track-laying tech-nology can take 60% to 70% off that cost. Trains are faster, quieter and smoother than buses. Inaddition, they avoid traffic jams and most accident scenes. Rail deaths and injuries are almost nothing compared tothose in automobiles. Rail cars and locomotives have lasted up to 100 yearswith decent maintenance. Railroad tracks are cheaper and easier to maintain thanroads and highways.

From

How much would it cost to beat global warming? Who pays?

In his 2006 review, Sir Nicholas Stern calculated that the cost of

fighting global warming would probably be only 1% of global prod-

uct per year - $US350 billion in 2005 terms.

But Stern's target for greenhouse gas emissions is 550ppm, which

means a 77% to 99% chance of average global temperatures rising

by more than the critical 2C limit.

So how much would a plan to keep greenhouse gas concentrations

below 450ppm really cost? Would it be affordable?

Below are some examples that show that, although we need an

emergency mobilisation of economic and human resources to fight

global warming, these resources do exist.

Sources: Stern Report, Zero Emissions Now, IPCC, Earth Policy Institute, Danish WindEnergy Association, Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics, Robert Socolow,Stephen Pacala and Jeffery Greenbach, Greenpeace and European Renewable EnergyCouncil.

8/14/2019 Socialist Alliance Climate Change Charter

4/4

invested in further programs.Private power companies have a vested

interest in making us all use more energy,whereas what is really needed is less use ofenergy and clean power targets that can bemet with renewable sources.

But Australian governments have succes-sively privatised public utility after publicutility, handing vital infrastructure over tothe private-profit sector. Public ownershipand control over the vital area of energygeneration and distribution is essential tobring this sector under an overall plan forgreenhouse gas reduction and environmentalsustainability.

Guarantee jobs, involveworkers in the fight for aliveable environment

As old industries die, their workers are

normally thrown on the scrap heap of unem-ployment. For example, as oil prices riseand cars become too expensive, the fossil-fuel based auto industry may well shrink toa boutique luxury service and masses ofworkers lose their jobs.

The same can be said for unsustainableagriculture, coal mining and similar indus-tries. A plan for a transition to a sustainableand just economy is therefore essential, suchthat these workers would be called on tobecome the driving force and moral guaran-tor of the new sustainable society, not leftbehind with the de-commissioned machinery.

Workers are critical to identifying andeliminating waste and pollution in the work-place, closing down old industries and open-ing new ones. The transition also needs gov-ernment-funded climate action brigades,

teams of people who can go door-to-door toprovide practical assistance and resources toassist households and communities improvetheir energy efficiency.

The massive program of converting ener-gy infrastructure that the Socialist Allianceproposes will call for a large number ofworkers, requiring extensive redeploymentand training. We will also need an expansionof public education, made free, to help usreach the necessary research and develop-ment goals.

Working people and their unions can alsoshow the way to sustainability to the rest ofsociety by producing model projects, likehigh standard, carbon neutral, sustainablehousing proof that the combination ofappropriate technology with workers skillswill be key in the transition.

Change the system, not theclimate!

None of what we have outlined is goingto happen unless it is fought for by aninformed and mobilised community. In thewords of climate scientist James Hansen:The alternative scenario is feasible, but it isnot being pursued. Our best hope? The pub-lic must become informed and get angry.

Australias greenhouse mafia wontaccept these measures. For years they fund-ed climate sceptics to produce reports thatthrew doubt on the reality and severity ofthe problem. Now, faced with overwhelmingcommunity concern, organisations like theBusiness Council of Australia are concernedto preserve their memberspolluting capitalfor as long as possible behind a new thincoat of greenwash.

The Coalition government has been their

faithful servant, by working internationally

to undermine the Kyoto protocol and by

refusing to take action that would reduce the

profits of the coal, aluminium, electricity,

forestry and other major greenhouse pollut-

ing industries.

The ALPis also influenced by the big

polluters, fixated on the quackery of clean

coal and allowing more uranium mining. It

advocates targets for emissions reductions

by 2050 that, while better than the no-target

Coalition, would mean Australia emitting 6-

10 times (per person) the Earths estimated

capacity to absorb carbon.

Both major parties cynically claim to be

protecting jobs, despite the decline in work-

ing conditions in some industries (e.g.

speed-ups and health and safety declines in

coal mining), and job losses in others (e.g.

forestry).

The Socialist Alliance says that the planetand future generations are more important

than corporate profits.By knowingly spreading disinformation,

standing over elected governments and

resisting change despite the risks to all peo-ple and our planet, these corporations have

lost the right to control the resources theyare wasting.

The community cannot afford vestedinterests like theirs to continue to determinepolicy.

To replace their control of policy willrequire a movement that is independent of

either of the major parties, but is strongenough to put pressure on whichever party

is in government.

Just as previous mass movements forcedthe Australian government to withdraw fromthe war in Vietnam and stop plans to damTasmanias Franklin River, so the movementto avert climate catastrophe must mean morethan just voting for change. It will need tocampaign in the streets, workplaces, schoolsand universities to win wide public support

for the changes that need to be made.Imposing those changes also means chal-lenging the capitalist market, which hasfailed to protect future generations and canno longer be allowed to stop us from avert-ing climatic disaster. The measures outlinedabove are not only absolutely necessary toprevent global warming getting out of con-trol, they also lay the basis for a society thatis sustainable on an ongoing basis, becausethey subordinate production to human andenvironmental imperatives. We call thatdemocratically planned and ecologicallysustainable system socialism, but whatev-er name it goes by its what the planet andits peoples need.

1. Aim for 60% overall emissions reduc-

tion, including 95% power station emis-

sions reduction, by 2020, and 90% overall

emissions reduction by 2030. Immediate

comprehensive planning, including annual

targets of 4-5% or more, to meet these tar-

gets on time or sooner.

2. Ratify the Kyoto treaty and initiate a

further international treaty and mutual

assistance program to bring other countries

together to meet a global target of 90%

emissions reductions on 1990 levels by

2030. Focus on cutting rich industrial

nations' emissions as a priority, and supplynon-polluting means of industrial and

social development to poorer countries.

3. Start the transition to a zero-waste

economy. In the first place, establish an

energy auditing department to investigate

industrial energy waste and recommend

legislation or other measures to end it,

including improving or banning wasteful

consumer products such as those with

built-in obsolescence. Engage workers in

industry to redesign their products and jobs

sustainably, in consultation with the appro-

priate technical experts.

4. Set a minimum 10-star energy effi-

ciency rating for all new buildings. Require

the fitting of all feasible energy efficiency

measures to existing houses upon lease

changes, building renovations, etc., andsubsidise owner-occupiers for the costs.

Allow renters to use the same system.

Immediately begin a program to install

photo-voltaic solar panels and solar hot

water heaters on home roofs, subsidised or

owned by the electricity authority. Give

commercial buildings a deadline to meet

six-star energy standards within two years,

and 10-star standards within 10 years.

5. Bring all power industries under pub-

lic ownership and democratic control.

Begin phasing out coal mining and power

immediately. Ensure a fair transition plan

(including guaranteed jobs and retraining

on full pay) for coalmining and power-sta-

tion worker communities, with new sus-

tainable industries being built in their areas

and paid redundancies offered. Run the

maximum possible base-load power from

existing natural gas and/or hydro power

stations instead of coal, as an interim

measure until renewable energy can takeover. Coal to be used only for predicted

energy peaks in the short term until renew-

able energy sources replace first it, and

then the natural gas power stations as well.

6. Bring the immense manufacturing

potential of the auto industry under public

control. Re-tool this industry for manufac-

turing wind turbines, public transport vehi-

cles and infrastructure, solar hot water,

solar photo-voltaic cells, etc., and for con-

verting existing cars to electric power.

Subsidise the conversion of private cars to

electric, plus buy back and recycle unneeded

vehicles.

7. Immediately begin constructing wind

farms in suitable areas. Fund research into

further wind, solar photovoltaic cells, geo-

thermal, concentrating solar thermal, wastebiomass fuel, wave and tidal generation

sources, with pilot solar-thermal and geo-

thermal plants set up immediately. Create a

power grid with distributed, diversified

electricity generation for stability and effi-

ciency.

8. End industrial farming based on

fossil-fuel fertilisers, pesticides and fuels.

Restrict farming areas to ensure that river-ine, forest and other indigenous ecosystemsreturn to healthy states. Assist farming tobe transferred to organic practices anddecentralised to include urban farming.This process must be undertaken at a rate

that ensures food security, and guaranteescontinuing work and livelihood for farmingcommunities.

9. Stop logging old-growth forests andbegin an urgent program of re-forestationand protecting biodiversity to ensure arobust biosystem that can survive the stressof climate change and provide an increasedcarbon sink.

10. Make all urban and regional publictransport free and upgrade the network toenable all urban residents to use it for alltheir regular commuting. Nationalise andupgrade interstate train and ferry services,while making them cheaper than air travel.Reduce reliance on air travel while ensuringequal but limited access, and aim toreplace air travel with trains (and ferries onBass Strait). As much freight as possible to

be moved to rail. All rail and light rail tobe electrified, other public transport andfreight to run on electric motors or biofuelsfrom waste where possible. Encouragebicycle use through more cycleways, bikeracks on public transport and more publicshower facilities. Implement free or verycheap bicycle rental networks, as inBarcelona and other European cities.

Authorised

byD.

Nichols,

23AbercrombieSt,Chippendale2007.

PrintedbySpotpress,

24-26LilianFowlerPl,Marrickville2204.

The alternative scenario is feasible, but it is not being pur-sued. Our best hope? The public must be informed and getangry.

Dr James E. Hanson,NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies.

Find out more: For more information, see the references inthe online version of this document, at

.