Battle for the Planet

Broadband - a tool for the times

noreply@blogger.com (Don Hewett) — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 05:30:00 +0000

It seems there is a serious disconnect between arguments for the operational separation of Telstra and the reality of the current situation, viz. rapid climate change. We are facing what can only be described as a battle for the planet, and we must just as rapidly put ourselves on a war footing if we are to have any chance of winning this battle.

We need no less than a (worldwide) cultural change – from consumer to conserver. As a not-for-profit organization focused on developing a (global) model for community engagement in climate change action, we see high speed broadband as an essential tool in the reconditioning of people’s attitudes and behaviour. As a frontline nation with more to lose than most, we must get this model right and robust here if we are to export the model and have a significant impact on global emissions.

While public debate can be conducted in the print media, and to a lesser extent television and radio, high speed broadband can deliver the message and the information required into homes in an engaging and effective (including interactive) way other mediums cannot match. It is a tool for the times.

Whatever the merits of competition on paper (and there is an equally valid argument that it would compromise efficiency), now is not the time to divert attention from the really serious challenge of global warming. (For those still basking in the belief that it’s scare mongering, why are Melbourne’s deciduous trees in bud in the middle of winter, and before they had even lost their leaves?)

Telstra is a behemoth in Australia, a bit like an aircraft carrier in a flotilla of fishing boats. It is a correspondingly big target, particularly for competitors (who of course are only pursuing their own self-interest, and include another ‘monopoly’, SingTel). But love it or loath it, Telstra is an invaluable asset of national strategic importance at this time. Sensible policy would no more distract such a strategic industry with internal reorganisation in the face of the climate change challenge than we would scrap an aircraft carrier at the outbreak of war.

As for the issue of predatory pricing, surely even the most rapacious telco would realise it’s no use building a vastly expensive network if nobody can afford to use it. The National Broadband Network will need customers and lots of them if it is not to become Australia’s most expensive white elephant. That is the competitive burr under the saddle for Telstra.

The Federal Government should cut to the climate change chase and instruct Telstra to build the network as soon as possible, starting now.

Hal and Don Hewett
Global Green Plan Foundation
More information at www.globalgreenplan.org

Points of Difference resoundingly similar

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Sat, 10 Nov 2007 02:17:00 +0000

If you watched "Difference of Opinion" on ABC TV this week (Episode 17, 8 November 2007) you may have been taken by the unanimity within the supposedly otherwise opposed panel over one thing.

Sure, there were differences, mostly over whether Australia should ratify and agree to be bound by the Kyoto Protocol immediately; or whether the Kyoto Protocol was so faulty, as to be inherently useless, and we should move on to something much more effective, such as a carbon tax, cap and trade, or strict regulation.

No, the key point of similarity in the opinion of normally warring parties was this: Something needs to be done, and we need to start doing it now. It needs to involve the wider community, not just large point emitters.

And if we don't start soon, and start making small differences immediately, consistently, and over a long period of time, we will fail to halt the relentless pace of Climate Change.

The panel agreed action is required.

They agreed this is an emergency.

Heated agreement indeed, over a global heating problem.

What would be cool, would be to get the job started.

Ignoring climate change puts Gen X'ers super at risk

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Mon, 03 Sep 2007 01:46:00 +0000

Gen X'ers stand to lose some of their retirement earnings -or may even have to postpone retirement - due to delayed action - inaction - on climate change and carbon trading reducing the value of their superannuation investments, according to a new report from the Climate Institute.

Most affected will be people born between 1960 and 1970, with women worse off - because they live longer.

The report contains a full list of assumptions and several case studies, and makes worthwhile reading. It brings home the point often made by the Global Green Plan Foundation - acting now is many, many times lower cost, than the much higher cost of delayed action - or even total inaction - against climate change.

In fact, many of the GGP's strategies are actually cost-neutral, or cost-reductive. In other words, acting now can save consumers money now, as well as saving the planet in the longer term.

The Battle is on, and it's urgent!

noreply@blogger.com (Unknown) — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 15:10:00 +0000

Take a look at Breathing Earth, a website showing births, deaths and carbon emissions for every country in the world. Now try to tell yourself you're not concerned what kind of a mess you'll be leaving for the next generation to inherit.

What to do? We need a plan. A plan that will work.

There may be little time before the situation becomes irreversible.

One plan that would work is the Global Green Plan.

The Global Green Plan (GGP) is targeted to save at least 3 billion tonnes of emissions, globally, over the first six years of its implementation. It's a demand management plan, so it doesn't require everyone to go out and buy hybrids, or invest in solar arrays for their rooftop.

Join the GGP Foundation today. It's a non-profit, funded to date entirely by personal donations.