Survey: CO2 reduction - too high a price to pay
The pair [of researchers] surveyed 600 Sydney residents to find out their willingness to pay the extra household costs.
The study results show, yes, Australians are concerned about climate change and they are willing to pay for action.
But those levels of concern and willingness to pay are significantly less than the expected costs in Treasury modelling of the CPRS.
“The survey respondents were willing to pay an extra $135 per household each month towards the CPRS,” Professor Bennett said. “But when aggregated across the nation, this represents $8.46 billion a year – significantly less than the Treasury estimated cost of $14.7 billion a year.
Professor Bennett said that debates about the relative merits of an emission trading scheme, such as the CPRS, and a tax on carbon emissions are misplaced.
Both would leave the country poorer, he said.
"Rather, the debate should focus on the prospects for adapting to the negative impacts of climate change should they arise.
"That debate should similarly focus on the relative costs and benefits of adaptive strategies,” he said.
Right on the money (and in the Fairfax media as well!). A cost/benefit analysis of an ETS is always going to be tricky, since the benefit is exactly zero.
Climate sense, for once.
Read it here.