You Are Here:
Send URL
Fill in the form below and click on the "send" button. Our server will send an e-mail message to the recipient that includes the URL of the story you want to share.
You can send to multiple e-mail addresses by separating them with COMMAs: a.name@aserver.com, another.name@anotherserver.com
Owners of Australia's most greenhouse polluting power station, Hazelwood, in Victoria, could be paid $111 million in compo.
Enlarge imageBut 84% of Australians say this compensation should go to renewable energy investments, in a recent Newspoll(1).
Kevin Rudd’s current emissions trading scheme funnels cash into the pockets of Australia’s big polluters. It’s rewarding them for pumping climate-causing carbon into the atmosphere.
How much money do the polluters get?
Electricity supplier, TRUenergy, owns the third dirtiest power station in Australia, Yallourn in Victoria, which emits 16.1mt of CO2 a year. Under Rudd’s scheme, it could receive $97 million in compo. Queensland’s biggest coal-fired power station, Gladstone, is owned by wealthy mining giants, Rio Tinto and NRG. It emits 11.8mt of polluting CO2 every year, yet these companies could gain compo of $70.8 million under the ETS.
In New South Wales, the biggest coal-fired power generator is the state-owned Macquarie Generation. It owns Bayswater and Liddell power stations, jointly emitting 34.7mt of CO2 per year with no reductions in sight. Under Rudd’s compo deal, Macquarie could be paid $208 million in compensation.
The total amount pledged is equal to paying the electricity bills of almost one million households for a year.
Community groups and unions want cash compensations to coal-fired power generators cut from the government’s carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS).
Says Greenpeace climate campaigner, Trish Harrup, "The AMWU, ACTU and even the CFMEU have said the federal government should not give the owners of coal-fired power stations a blank cheque. Instead profits from the CPRS should be invested in renewable energy to create green jobs and used to ensure a just transition for coal communities."
(1) Newspoll conducted by telephone from 19-21 September, 2008.
1200 respondents were asked: "Thinking about the proposal to use some of the money raised from the emissions trading scheme to compensate coal fired power plants. Do you personally believe that this money should be used to compensate coal-fired power plants or should the money be invested in renewable energy such as wind and solar power?"
Results: 84% said it should be invested in renewable energy
10% said it should be used to compensate coal-fired power generators
7% didn’t know.
Take action
