http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/future-is-coal-and-nuclear-howards-says/2\
007/01/31/1169919398978.html

....
Please consider a few lines to the Herald letters@...
in reply to this article and please forward this message throughout your
networks.

Below is my letter.
-----------------------
Dear Editor,

I view the article "Future is Coal and Nuclear says Howard"
http://www.smh.com.au/news/environment/future-is-coal-and-nuclear-howards-says/2\
007/01/31/1169919398978.html as "Coal and Nuclear Industry Propaganda" and
wonder if these industries paid the Herald for the advertising space?

John Howard's "climate change addressing" energy policies are NOT what his
people want or NEED at this critical time in earth's climatic history. He must
face the reality and truth about climate change and our energy supply
alternatives. Our energy taxes must be used to give Australian people the REAL
energy solutions they need NOW. Not a continuation of the nest feathering
towards industries that are destroying our planet and all her occupants as I
write.

Clean and sustainable energy technology exists that can replace both of these
energy industries. Nuclear power is not safe, and it never will be. The Coal
industry must be phased out if our planet is to continue to exist as we know it.

WHAT ABOUT : Solar, Tidal, Wave and the massive energy supplies waiting to be
tapped from directly under our feet? Geothermal. Combinations of these energy
supply sources CAN supply our energy needs and in the process of giving natural,
safe, sustainable energy supplies, will curb our Carbon Dioxide emissions and
create jobs in new industry. New industries creating energy supplies that can
give BACK to the grid from individual properties is what Australia (and our
fragile planet) needs.

John Howard is a fool. I hope the majority will cease to blindly follow at the
next federal election.

Anne Goddard
http://globalclimatechangeaction.org

-----------------------------------------------------
The media nuclear propaganda saturation begins...
Please write letters of reply!!!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
Future is coal and nuclear, Howard says
a.. January 31, 2007 - 7:16PM

Page 1 of 2 | Single page
Prime Minister John Howard has backed a new energy report which supports his
push for nuclear power as a way to combat climate change.

The Energy Supply Association of Australia (ESAA) said that substantial
greenhouse gas emission reductions were possible by the year 2030 but it would
cost $75 billion.

It also says nuclear power, cleaner coal and gas would help reduce greenhouse
gas emissions, but renewable energy such as wind and solar power would not be
cost effective.

"The answer is a greater emphasis on clean coal and nuclear power," Mr Howard
told reporters.

"It (the report) recognises that while renewables such as solar and wind have a
role to play, and we have always argued that, they will not provide the
fundamental answer.

"It's just simply not feasible to run power stations in this country on solar
and wind energy."

The ESAA, which represents more than 40 electricity and downstream gas
businesses, says the increasing pressure to restrict emissions from power
stations means families will inevitably face higher costs for domestic power
bills.

Without expensive new technology, up to 100 per cent of brown coal power
stations would have to be shut down by 2030 just to stabilise emissions at 2000
levels, the report says.

Around two thirds of existing black coal power stations - which currently
generate about 60 per cent of Australia's electricity - within current
technology would have to close by then as well.

Under the most severe scenario, cleaning up emissions under the expanded
requirements of the year 2030 would require an investment of $75 billion.

The federal government has a policy of pouring large sums of money into
supporting research into and trials of clean coal technologies.

The ESAA says advanced fossil-fuel technologies, including carbon capture and
storage (CCS), are not likely to be commercially available until at least 2020.

But for emissions cuts to be achieved and in a least-cost manner, the widest
possible range of generation technologies will be needed, including some not
proven or commercially available as yet.

The report said around 15-20 per cent of Australia's energy supplies by 2030
could be contributed to by nuclear reactors.

ESAA chief executive Brad Page said a price on carbon emissions was inevitable.

Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane rejected the suggestion that adoption of a
price on carbon emissions should be done without delay.

"We have put in place the prime minister's task group on emissions trading and
we will give an answer on that as we look through the real issues in relation to
carbon trading," he told ABC radio.

Australian Coal Association executive director Mark O'Neill said the ACA had
long held that it was critical that Australia invest in the research and
development effort to quickly get new technologies into the marketplace.

"Every analysis that's out there ... has concluded that it's a way of
significantly reducing the cost of achieving any kind of target in this area,"
he said.

The Greens said the ESAA report was self-serving, arguing for the nation to put
its hopes in CCS while ignoring the potential gains from energy efficiency.

"It is in the interests of the fossil fuel industry to claim that renewable
energy and energy efficiency are no solution to climate change and that we must
rely instead on an experimental and costly technology," Greens senator Christine
Milne said.

Democrats leader Lyn Allison said the report's claim that Australia could cut
greenhouse emissions by 30 per cent without resorting to nuclear power showed it
underestimated the potential for alternative, low and zero emission
technologies.

AAP


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]