Economic pygmies!
The last Labor govt commissioned modelling of a plan to cut "carbon" [though would be carbon dioxide methinks] emissions by 40-60% by 2030.
The cost - $600 Billion stripped from the economy.
They half trashed the economy last time around; at the recent national conference this modelling plan was approved - they want to finish off the job.
Be afraid, be very afraid!
Labor’s carbon emission plan a devastating blow to the economy, party’s own modelling shows
- EXCLUSIVE SIMON BENSON NATIONAL POLITICAL EDITOR
- THE DAILY TELEGRAPH
- AUGUST 10, 2015 12:00AM
Opposition Leader Bill Shorten / Picture: Hamish Blair
- Labor’s plan to cut carbon emissions would strip $600b from economy
- Party’s own modelling revealed it would also cost thousands of jobs
- The plan would also see closure of all 37 coal fired power stations
- Labor has claimed it is the only party taking climate change seriously
LABOR’S ambitious plan to cut carbon emissions by 40 to 60 per cent by 2030 would deliver a devastating blow to the economy, stripping a massive $600 billion from economic growth over the next 15 years, its own modelling commissioned in government has revealed.
The emissions cut would also cost tens of thousands of jobs and would likely lead to the closure of all 37 coal-fired power stations in Australia.
The shocking predictions are contained in a 2013 Treasury and Department of Industry and Climate Change modelling report.
Labor’s plan, which the party adopted last month at its national conference in Melbourne, would have to assume a carbon price of $209 a tonne by 2030, according to analysis of the models.
It would also push wholesale power prices up 78 per cent over the next 15 years, radically increasing power bills for homeowners and businesses.
Warren Brown’s cartoon.
A summary of the economic modelling, which also contained better economic predictions on more moderate targets, was released after the last election.
However, detailed data and graphs showing the economic impacts of the “high price” scenario were buried in more than 300 spreadsheets within the Climate Change Authority’s website.
The models, commissioned by the Labor government, also warned that wages growth would be 6 per cent lower than forecast, under a “high-price scenario”, which it said was consistent with a 40-60 per cent cut to 2000 emissions levels by 2030.
Gross national income (GNI) would also be 4.3 per cent lower than it would be with no carbon price, equating to a loss of $4900 in nominal GNI terms per person.
The emissions cut would also cost tens of thousands of jobs and would likely lead to the closure of all 37 coal-fired power stations in Australia.
Related modelling figures suggested it would require a renewable energy target of closer to 69 per cent — more than Labor’s 50 per cent goal, which has been costed at more than $85 billion. Real carbon price per tonne would be $73 by 2020 and $135 by 2030.
But this figure is based on 2012 dollar, which equates to a nominal carbon price of $209 a tonne in 2030 when taking into account Treasury’s assumption of 2.5 per cent annual CPI growth.
The Labor Party national conference last month resolved to adopt the latest recommendations of the Climate Change Authority to achieve a 50 per cent chance of limiting global warming to a 2C rise — which would require reducing emissions by 40-60 per cent on 2000 levels by 2030 and 80 per cent by 2050.
Modelling by Treasury and the Department of Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education priced a “high price” or “ambitious” scenario consistent with this target.
This economic modelling for the 2030 target, while referred to in a major report on emission reduction targets by the Climate Change Authority in 2014, was largely left out of the major report.
Instead, more favourable economic growth forecasts under the 2020 targets were given priority.
That report, however, did concede that “a stronger target would have an impact on the Australian economy”.
One Treasury graph modelled the economic impact of the high-price scenario and concluded it would cut 2.6 per cent from expected GDP growth by 2030.
It showed that although the economy would continue to grow, GDP would be $100 billion a year lower than it would have been by 2030.
