Senate debates
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Customs) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — Excise) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges — General) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009 [No. 2]; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Amendment (Household Assistance) Bill 2009 [No. 2]
In Committee
9:42 pm
Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Water) Share this | Hansard source
Senator Joyce has left the room, but I thought I might refer him to (xi) of Australia’s low pollution future: The economics of climate change mitigation which sets out, perhaps in clearer terms, the assumptions about the rest of the world. There are two scenarios—and I will not bore the chamber by reading them out. The Garnaut minus 10 and minus 25 assumed one set of scenarios in relation to the international action, CPRS minus five and CPRS minus 15. Various assumptions were made about different groups of economies: for example, international emissions trading gradually expanding, developed economies participating from 2010, developing countries joining over time and global participation by 2025. That is an indication of some broad explanation of the assumptions that Senator Joyce was asking about.
No comments