Notice how there was a Government grant involved in this…..TonyfromOz.
The global warming faith is just the latest vehicle for people who like to order other people around “for their own good”. Nothing reveals its appeal to the inner totalitarian better than the latest taxpayer-funded research of the Southern Cross University:
Southern Cross University is set to lead a project testing the world’s first Personal Carbon Trading program conducted in a ‘closed system’ island environment on Norfolk Island commencing early next year.
This follows the announcement this week of a Linkage Projects grant by the Australian Research Council valued at $390,000.
Leading chief investigator Professor Garry Egger, a Professor of Lifestyle Medicine and Applied Health Promotion at Southern Cross University, said the main goals of the project were to test the effectiveness of a Personal Carbon Trading scheme over a three year period; reduce per capita carbon emissions and reduce obesity and obesity related behaviours…
“This is a project for looking at reducing climate change and obesity in the one hit…
“The way the system will work is basically it will involve giving everyone on the island a carbon card, like a credit or debit card, and they will get carbon units on that card. Then every time they go and pay for their petrol or their power – and from the second year their food – it will not only be paid for in money but it will also come off the carbon units that they are given for free at the start of the program.
“If they’re frugal and don’t buy a lot of petrol or power or fatty foods, then they can actually have units to spare at the end of a set time period so that they can cash those in at the bank and make money from them.
“If they aren’t frugal and they are very wasteful and they produce a lot of carbon and consume unhealthy foods then every year they will have to buy extra units. Also over time – as we target lower carbon emissions and increasing health goals – the number of carbon units they are given will go down and therefore the price for the individual will go up to sustain that lifestyle they are not prepared to forego…”
Of course, to fulfil its mission, the experiment will have to include the bit where emissions are forced down if the guinea pigs don’t respond to the bribes.
On MTR 1377 this morning, Professor Egger told me his idea was borrowed from this British proposal:
The Environment Agency will argue today that carbon rationing is the fairest and most effective way for the UK to meet its legally binding targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The Agency’s chairman, Lord Smith, will propose at the organisation’s annual conference in London that every citizen be provided with a “carbon account” and unique number that they submit when buying carbon-intensive items such as petrol, electricity or airline tickets.
Individuals would then periodically receive statements that show the carbon impact of each purchase and how much of their annual ration has been used up. If they exceeded this ration, they would need to buy extra credits from those people that have not used their full allowance, in a similar fashion to existing emission cap-and-trade schemes.
Lord Smith, former culture secretary under the Blair Government, is expected to say that carbon rationing will help citizens “judge how they want to develop their own quality of life in a sustainable way”.
Nor was this proposal just the thought-bubble of some out-of-control quango:
The House of Commons Environmental Audit Committee called on the Government last year (2008) to resume research on a rationing scheme and to be “courageous” in seeking to overcome likely public hostility to the idea…
The committee concluded: “Widespread public acceptance, while desirable, should not be a pre-condition for a personal carbon trading scheme; the need to reduce emissions is simply too urgent.”
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, called for a “thought experiment” on carbon rationing when he was Environment Secretary in 2006.
But although the idea has kicked around for a while, it seems that some basic questions have not been answered.
Egger told me his carbon-rationing plan could be one day spread to the whole mainland, so that citizens who’d blown their ration by buying too much fatty food, for instance, would find that buying more “credits” prohibitively expensive. I asked what would happen to a fat and poor family who’d maxed out on their ration card. Would they then starve? Egger said this was a problem they’d have to work on.
Each year the quota of carbon units will be reduced, and the price of a high carbon emission lifestyle will rise.
Although it will be a voluntary scheme, the incentive to participate was obvious, Professor Egger said: ‘’People can make money out of it.’’…
The Norfolk Island trial will determine whether the approach is acceptable to people or not. If so, it could eventually be scaled up to a country level, and then world level, he said.
So those who look like making money will join, and those who’d blow their rations can opt out – for now. Some test.
Egger himself should be overdrawn on his carbon rations – if the scheme was made to apply to him, too:
He has been invited to speak to business people at the United Nations climate change conference in Mexico in December.
Please don’t try and tell me that this is about the environment. As I have said all along, it’s only about the money. Note how the Professor himself says, “People can make money out of it.”
Read more excellent articles from Andrew Bolt’s Blog