Final Project on CCE - Assignment Example

RОJЕСT FINАL Name: Introduction Recently the Australian government has introduced the Carbon Tax enactment of 2012.the purpose of this enactment to extenuate greenhouse emissions and tackle the environmental problems as a result of this greenhouse gas emissions (Smith, P. et al. 2013). Lately, the current federal government has introduced the policy of Direct Action Plan to supersede the Carbon Tax of 2012. This essay will choose the sector of horticulture and explore the climatic impacts of the sector. The Direct Action Plan and the Carbon Tax policy of 2012 policies will be compared and contrasted on the sector of non-renewable sector. The predicted climate change impacts on the non-renewable energy sector The major non-renewable sources of energy in Australia include gas, oil, coal and uranium. These non-renewable sources of energy have largely contributed to the growth of the Australian Economy (Dwyer, L. et al. 2013). Consider an example of the coal resource in the country. The coal industry is employing approximately 200,000 people both the nationals and the immigrants. In the fiscal year ending 2014, the coal industry generated approximately $60 billion to the Australian economy. Furthermore, globally coal contributes to estimated value of 41% of world electricity so as to run industries. However, these non-renewable sources of energy have impacted negatively the environment thus affecting the horticulture sector. First, the carbon released on activities involving combustion of oil and coal is causing global warming. The greenhouse effect has sharply increased which means the emission of carbon dioxide is rapidly on the rise to the atmosphere that may cause drought thus affecting the horticulture sector. Both the range and the amount of rain have significantly dropped globally since the high temperatures in the atmosphere are reducing humidity. The burning of these fossil fuels is significantly altering the climate. The greenhouse effect is slowly ruining the ecology of our environment. There is a high risk of raising the temperatures of the planet earth to an incompatible value of the existing civilization (Dwyer, L. et al. 2013). This is very risky to the future of the human generation. Secondly non-renewable sources of energy extraction are creating many depressions on the surfaces of the earth thus is difficult to get good sites for horticulture activities. Many of the non-renewable sources such as coal and uranium are extracted leaving depressions. This does not only cause land pollution that may affect horticulture products but also provides good breeding grounds for mosquito lava. This in turn leads to the spread of malaria which is a primary cause of death, especially in third world countries. Mining of non-renewable sources of energy also makes the soil loose and thus is prone to erosion due to water and the wind and may cause gulley erosion that may cause acidification of the soil thus killing plants. Thirdly, these sources of non-renewable energy also cause the release of both smoke and dust in the air which may reduce the amount of sunlight reaching the earth and, therefore, reducing the rates of photosynthesis for plants. This may hence decrease the production of horticulture plants. A good example is wheat production in Australia. These adverse impacts as a result of carbon emission to the atmosphere have significantly affected the production and distribution capacity in the horticulture sector as well as the employees in the sector. Rationale and theoretical underpinnings of a carbon tax A carbon tax that in most cases are referred as tax imposed on the greenhouse gases is a policy that was introduced so as to reduce carbon dioxide emission. This is a market-based system. Typically, a carbon tax is essential since it facilitates reduction of greenhouse gas emission from different sources of non-renewable which affect the horticulture sector negatively. The carbon tax of 2012 applies the power of various market prices which vary with the market forces. The economic rationale in the case of carbon tax is multi-fold. The carbon tax of 2012 could make up the underlying possible failure in the market. This is because of the concentration of the greenhouse gases which lately has significantly increased. Human activities that result to gas emission have led to global warming and adverse climatic impacts. These activities include burning fossil fuels and mining of coal and uranium. The negative consequences of global warming are vast. Some of them include; high cost of reducing greenhouse emission, adverse weather events and loss of biodiversity of the environment that usually affect plants in the horticulture sector (Davies, J., 2014). The implementation of the Carbon Tax of 2012 will add the extra cost of the prices of goods. However, the sector of horticulture is not affected by the policies implemented; it is highly recommended for companies involved in activities that lead to carbon dioxide emission to use certain technologies to minimize the emissions. The challenge is that these technologies are still very expensive and are not easily available. It would be better to switch to fuel resources that reduce usage of fossil fuels as a way of minimizing carbon dioxide emission to the atmosphere so as to protect the horticulture sector. It is necessary to use market-based policy to have similar prices on gas emissions. This is vital to enable incentives for a wider range for minimisation of greenhouse gas emissions in industries and even our households. However, the reduction of possible emissions will provide a good opportunity for businesses to invest in energy-saving energies, therefore, reducing carbon emission and thus protecting the horticulture sector (Dreyer, S. J. et al. 2015). Comparisons with the Direct Action Plan The federal government of Australia has recently introduced the policy of Direct Action Plan with the objective of replacing the policy of Carbon Tax of 2012. This policy gives guidelines the wide principles that the government will follow by coming up with programs aimed at reducing the Australian Carbon Emission. The target of this plan is to reduce carbon emission of Australia by 5% by the year 2020. It is very apparent that the two policies have the same objective that is to minimise carbon emission in Australia as possible. However, some differences between them have been evident. The table below shows the comparison of the two policies Risks and opportunities for Non-renewable Energy sector The Australian government has been concerned about the carbon dioxide emission in the country. It is interesting to understand the issues rose in the two policies for reduction of greenhouse gases in Australia. However, this policy affects the horticulture sector indirectly since it helps reduce carbon emissions. There are various risks for the horticulture sector in the carbon constrained world. Firstly, enacting both the Carbon Tax and Direct Action Plan policies will lower the competitive aspect of the sector and thus increasing the cost of fertilizers and pesticides manufactured in the various industries. They will compromise with the industries at a competitive disadvantage and may hurt the horticulture sector according to Sumner, et al. (2011). Secondly, manufacturing industries for fertilizers, insecticides and pesticides dominate the Australian industrial sector. These industries consume more non-renewable sources of energy due to the high energy required and thus may increase the cost of fertilizers and pesticides required in the horticulture sector(Michel, S., & Nielsen, J. 2015). These manufacturing industries are very essential to the economic growth of Australia. However, they emit a high percentage of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. Mitigating greenhouse gases emission will be a huge blow to the horticulture sector since the cost of fertilizers, and other supplements required form the carbon emitting industries will be significantly high. The Australian business community is at a significant risk under the policies to be put in place under the carbon-constrained future (Sumner, J et al. 2011). However, there are challenges facing the horticulture sector, there is still opportunities in the carbon-constrained world. There is an opportunity for a comprehensive policy framework over the long-term period for investing in the sector. This will unleash the non-renewable energy potential for Australia in the manufacturing sector thus leading to the economic growth of the country since more horticulture supplements will be produced for the horticulture sector. The policy framework could include; facilitating technology based energy-management practices that reduce carbon dioxide emission, innovation, and research and development on the sector to develop solutions so as to minimise carbon dioxide emissions that will help in the growth of the horticulture sector. In the future, there is a need for a strong competitive motive for the Australian government and the manufacturing sector to invest in carbon dioxide reducing technologies and practices to reduce the carbon emission that often hurt the horticulture sector. Existing barriers need to be expanded to address the issue of greenhouse gases and at the same time encouraging the competitiveness of the horticulture sector (Linquist, B. et al. 2012). Appropriate Adaptation Strategies Adaptation is very essential for complementing climate change mitigation efforts. Using appropriate adaptation strategies and at the same time using real mitigation efforts can largely contribute to the sustainable reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the future. Appropriate adaptation strategies can complement mitigation in a cost-effective approach that will help in minimizing the risks as a result of climatic changes (Liou, H. M., 2015). Moreover, the development of appropriate adaptation strategies will make use of opportunities thus complementing the mitigation actions undertaken and thus reducing the adverse impacts due to climatic change in the carbon constrained the world that often affect the horticulture sector. The main challenge with these adaptation strategies is that they would entail costs and cannot assure complete prevention of damages as a result of the negative impacts of climate changes. There are various adaptation strategies that are appropriate of minimization carbon dioxide emissions in the non-renewable sector. The first adaptation strategy is to strengthen the transmissions and distribution channels of the non-renewable sources of energy for the benefit of the horticulture sector. This will ensure that carbon dioxide emission to the atmosphere due to leaks is significantly reduced, and thus plants will thrive. The second adaptation strategy would be underground cabling for utilities of non-renewable sources. This strategy will ensure that greenhouse gases are passed to the underground cables thus reducing exposure of the gases to the atmosphere w. Thirdly, ensuring energy efficiency would be the other adaptation strategy. High energy efficiency of the non-renewable sources would greatly reduce the percentage of greenhouse gases emitted to the atmosphere. Finally, the use of renewable sources of energy would be the other appropriate adaptation strategy to undertake. Renewable sources of energy such as the wind, water and biomass do not emit carbon dioxide and are friendly to plants (Schreyer, M. et al 2015). Therefore, the federal government should emphasis the adoption of these renewable sources of energy to supersede the non-renewable sources. Conclusion Energy and climate policies such as the Carbon Tax and the Direct Action Plan are complex solutions that affect may indirectly affect the horticulture sector. The continued climate debates and arguments clearly show the complexity of the issue of greenhouse gas emission reduction (Cragg, M. I. et al. 2013). However, both uncertainty and conflict raised by the policies should not deter actions of reducing carbon dioxide emissions globally for horticulture to thrive. There are different appropriate adaptation strategies that can be undertaken by the Australian Federal Government to tackle the issue of greenhouse gas emission to the atmosphere. The strategies should ensure that they keep the horticulture sector thriving while constraining carbon emissions by using the most cost-effective ways in the future. REFERENCES Carattini, S., & Baranzini, A. (2014). Paying enough taxes already? Testing the acceptability of carbon taxes with survey data. Genève: Haute école de gestion de Genève. Cragg, M. I., Zhou, Y., Gurney, K., & Kahn, M. E. (2013). Carbon geography: the political economy of congressional support for legislation intended to mitigate greenhouse gas production. Economic Inquiry, 51(2), 1640-1650. Davies, J. (2014). The Direct Action Plan. Australian Resources and Energy Law Journal, 33(1), 1. Dreyer, S. J., Walker, I., McCoy, S. K., & Teisl, M. F. (2015). Australians' views on carbon pricing before and after the 2013 federal election. Nature Climate Change. Dwyer, L., Forsyth, P., Spurr, R., & Hoque, S. (2013). Economic impacts of a carbon tax on the Australian tourism industry. Journal of travel research, 52(2), 143-155. Fagiani, R., Richstein, J. C., Hakvoort, R., & De Vries, L. (2014). The dynamic impact of carbon reduction and renewable support policies on the electricity sector. Utilities Policy, 28, 28-41. Linquist, B., Groenigen, K. J., Adviento‐Borbe, M. A., Pittelkow, C., & Kessel, C. (2012). An agronomic assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from major cereal crops. Global Change Biology, 18(1), 194-209. Liou, H. M. (2015). Carbon Emission Reduction of Taiwan’s Electric Power Industry. JACE: Journal of Advances in Clean Energy, 2(1). Michel, S., & Nielsen, J. (2015). Carbon Reduction Credit Program: A State Compliance Tool for EPA's Clean Power Plan Proposal. The Electricity Journal, 28(2), 39-52. Schreier, M., Gao, P., Mayer, M. T., Luo, J., Moehl, T., Nazeeruddin, M. K., ... & Grätzel, M. (2015). Efficient and selective carbon dioxide reduction on low cost protected Cu 2 O photocathodes using a molecular catalyst. Energy & Environmental Science, 8(3), 855-861. Smith, P., Haberl, H., Popp, A., Erb, K. H., Lauk, C., Harper, R., ... & Rose, S. (2013). How much land‐based greenhouse gas mitigation can be achieved without compromising food security and environmental goals?. Global Change Biology, 19(8), 2285-2302. Sumner, J., Bird, L., & Dobos, H. (2011). Carbon taxes: a review of experience and policy design considerations. Climate Policy, 11(2), 922-943. Read More