business learning training articles new learning business training opportunities finance learning training deposit money learning making training art loan learning training deposits make learning your training home good income learning outcome training issue medicine learning training drugs market learning money training trends self learning roof training repairing market learning training online secure skin learning training tools wedding learning training jewellery newspaper learning for training magazine geo learning training places business learning training design Car learning and training Jips production learning training business ladies learning cosmetics training sector sport learning and training fat burn vat learning insurance training price fitness learning training program furniture learning at training home which learning insurance training firms new learning devoloping training technology healthy learning training nutrition dress learning training up company learning training income insurance learning and training life dream learning training home create learning new training business individual learning loan training form cooking learning training ingredients which learning firms training is good choosing learning most training efficient business comment learning on training goods technology learning training business secret learning of training business company learning training redirects credits learning in training business guide learning for training business cheap learning insurance training tips selling learning training abroad protein learning training diets improve learning your training home security learning training importance

« January 2013 | Blog home | March 2013 »

February 2013

Just few years ago, politicians talked about drought proofing this country. Not only did they talk, but they delivered: NSW Government went on and built a desalination plant at a cost of $3 billion to the public. Month or two after the plant opened, the skies opened up too, and the Warragamba Dam started to fill again. So much so, that the desal plant was never really needed to operate. The Dam is currently spilling.

Did we learn anything from this? Apparently not. We are now hearing calls to flood proof Australia.
After a long drought (and long forgotten by know) we had several very wet years, with severe and repeated flooding events, especially in South-East Queensland and Northern NSW: some of the very same regions that were severely affected by drought only few years ago.

Now that we drought proofed Australia, it is time to flood proof. We will again spend billions from the public coffers to build expensive infrastructure. Surely enough, once we are done flood proofing, a new drought will come in and we will be looking at more white elephants. We must be able to do better than that!

0 comments |

I have been less active on the blog in the last 3 weeks or so mainly due to two reasons: 1). The AARES Conference that was held in the Sydney Convention Centre, 5-8 February
and 2) My department has moved to new offices in the Biomedical Building at the Australian Technology Park (ATP), and I was busy moving office.

On with the deliberations on Environmental Economics. It was reported just yesterday in the papers that the NSW Government will impose a mandatory separation distance, or buffer or exclusion zones, between Coals Seam Gas (CSG) development and residential areas broadly defined, including specific businesses, such as horse studs. The proposed separation distance is 2 km, which has been in use in Queensland for some time.

Of course, miners immediately started to cry foul saying they are set to loose billions as a result of the buffer zones. On the other hand, many environmentalists are likely to tell you that 2 km exclusion zones for CSG are not nearly enough. So, what is the right separation distance?

The short answer is: nobody knows. How did we come up with 2 km? The same answer: nobody knows. It is all a result of bargaining based on rather murky politics! And the outcome is a rather arbitrary number that does not necessarily make much environmental or economic sense.

And this is not unique to CSG. We see environmental standards, or environmental policy targets, being set in this manner all the time: how do we know that we should reduce our CO2 emissions by 5% by 2020? Why not by 8%, or by 3%? How do we know that we need 2,750 GL as a baseline target to be recovered for environmental purposes in the Murray Darling Basin? Why not 3,000 GL or 2,000 GL? Nobody knows.

Getting back to CSG, it seems very unlikely that a uniform magnitude of a buffer will work in a diverse landscape, underlined by diverse mineralogy and hydrology. One could easily imagine that in some cases we might need a buffer of 5-6 kilometers, and in other perhaps only 500 meters will do. One thing is certain: such a uniform, arbitrary number as 2 km, is not going to bring the most overall benefit to society. We surely can do better, and the knowledge of how to do it is there. All it remains is to convince the politicians to give it a serious thought rather then to react only to day-to-day politicking.

0 comments |