Consultant Dan
09 June 2010
My Godot question to James Cameron and David Blood, about green capitalism
Everyone who attended the Deakin Lecture on ‘Greening Capitalism’ last night would have come away feeling inspired by the climate action happening elsewhere and depressed by Australia’s backwardness.
The international guests were James Cameron (Executive Director of Climate Change Capital) and David Blood (Senior Partner of Generation Investment Management). They explained the ways in which investors are making money by cutting emissions in a range of markets and technologies.
Listening to David Blood and James Cameron, it was clear that low carbon industries in other countries are profitable as well as beneficial environmentally. So why are Australian Governments are doing practically nothing to create the shift to a new economy? Perhaps the answer is that the political economy here is dominated by the old resource sector, which has intellectually corrupted our economic debates.
I thought it was an excellent session and was pleased when a question I had submitted online was read out:
There was never any chance that we could negotiate a global agreement to slash emissions, within a free-trade model that says every nation has to move in unison. 20 years of UNFCCC failure is the evidence.
While we wait for international agreement for a global carbon regime, what are the best ways that nations can implement strong local carbon taxes with trade protection to prevent capital flight? How can nations decarbonise while waiting for Godot?
The question provoked a great 8 minute response from James Cameron and John Daley (Chief Executive Officer, Grattan Institute. You can watch it here.
When the moderator, Nick Rowley, read my question out, James muttered ‘brilliant’. I’m not sure the question was brilliant but it is apposite because it attacks one of the key arguments that big coal uses to undermine climate action.
The coal industry and its supporters in the major political parties say that Australia cannot ‘go it alone’ on climate change. They claim that the only economically rational approach is for every nation in the world to negotiate a global carbon price (in international law). This would allow a frictionless free trade in carbon-adjusted goods and services, just like in economic theory.
My question says that waiting for this perfect global carbon market is like waiting for Godot but the metaphor is not to be taken too seriously. In Beckett’s play, the notion of the wait is a way of speaking about something eternal in the human condition.
James said that climate change is an existential threat but unlike the God(ot) threat, it is physically, caused by our actions and getting worse daily. Australia can no longer afford the tragicomic ‘luxury’ of sitting around in existential pain, bemoaning the failure of the Kyoto Protocol.
If you do not have time to watch the video, these are the key points which were brought up by my Godot question:
it is legitimate for nations taking climate action to protect their industries against cheaper imports from nations which are not taking equivalent climate action
Australia can have a carbon tax along with adjustment taxes on imports to protect our industries
Australia will benefit economically from a carbon price as a result of innovation and new exports
our economy will become more efficient and resilient if we swap from fossil fuels to renewable energy, because it is free and constant
RSS