Ridiculuous numbers are being tossed around about the possible cost of the CO2 abatement. Let us take a sanity check.

The CPRS Bill aimed to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by 5% and 15% below 2000 levels by 2020. 5% is the minimum target and 15% is the aspirational target.

The chart shows the 2006 emissions per capita for various nations. Two bars are shown for each country. The blue bar shows the emissions including agricultural emissions, the orange bar shows the emissions excluding the emissions from agricultural and forestry activities. I copied this chart from the Garnaut Review. Australian emissions were about 25 tonnes/person in 2004 excluding agricultural emissions. This is in 2004. 2000 numbers would probably be less than 2004 numbers, but to be conservative, let us use the 2004 numbers for the following simple calculation.

Let us take the aspirational target of 15%. What is 15% of the Australian per capita emission of 25 tonnes. It is less than 3.75 tonnes per person. Achievement of a reduction of 3.75 tonnes/person was the aspirational target of the CPRS Bill that failed the Senate. The penalty would have been $11/tonne if an emitter failed to reduce its emissions. Let us assume that all of the CO2 emitters decide to do nothing and pay the penalty. Let us also assume that through electricity pricing and other mechanisms they spread this penalty equally to the population. What is the cost per person? It is $11 times $3.75. Hardly more than the price of a carton of beer. This is per year. Admittedly the price of $11 would probably increase in future years but you get the idea. It is difficult to main that this would have been the end of life as we know it. This is excluding all those CO2 abatement options that would actually save money as I noted earlier this week.

Am I missing something?