I recently rang my electricity company to discuss GreenPower. I knew I wanted 100% GreenPower but I didn’t want it now. I wanted it in January 2010. Right now, I want to do my bit to keep the government’s 2009 GreenPower baseline as low as possible – so my efforts towards emissions reductions really count.
‘Give me the dirtiest coal electricity you have,’ I said to the operator.
I explained that under the government’s proposed emissions trading scheme, me paying extra for GreenPower wouldn’t actually reduce Australia’s carbon emissions – beyond what would happen if I didn’t take any action at all.
But it would from 2010 - so I didn’t want to buy it until then.
The operator replied tersely, ‘Victoria, I can guarantee that our GreenPower is fully accredited and it does reduce Australia’s carbon emissions.’
The call left me with 100% dirty electricity and lingering questions over why GreenPower energy retailers were still guaranteeing emissions reductions even when they weren’t able to demonstrate it.
We all cheered when Kevin Rudd committed to ratify the Kyoto Protocol on 3rd December 2007, but implications of ratification means that any current action taken voluntarily by consumers or business to reduce carbon emissions - like purchasing GreenPower - is in vain.
Last year the ACCC released new guidelines - Carbon Claims and the Trade Practices Act – in response to a proliferation of misleading carbon claims. The guidelines state that misleading carbon claim occurs when an energy retailer can not demonstrate that the emissions reduction is ‘additional’ to what would normally happen, or ‘business-as-usual’.
By ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, the government guaranteed Australia would achieve a 108% emissions reduction target on 1990 levels by 2012. If we fail to meet this target domestically, the government will purchase additional credits internationally. Either way – we will achieve 108%. This essentially means that all present voluntary action, like GreenPower, is accounted for as ‘business-as-usual’.
The government has tried to overcome this by making GreenPower additional to emission reduction targets under the CPRS using 2009 GreenPower sales as the baseline. But what about the 984,024 GreenPower customers that already pay a premium for GreenPower, without receiving any personal benefit other than knowing they are supporting renewable energy and thinking that they are reducing Australia’s greenhouse emissions?
Since we committed to ratifying the protocol over 18 months ago, GreenPower, a government-accredited program guaranteeing renewable energy, has done remarkably well. It has increased its customer base by 243,144 customers, or a third – not bad for tough times. But are GreenPower retailers really being honest with their customers?
I suspect the government-run GreenPower has known about this misleading carbon claim issue for a while but only this week have they contacted the retailers of GreenPower products to advise of a new communications strategy, the language of which is designed to keep you guessing:
The tag line:
GreenPower. A simple switch for you, significant results for our environment.
Has been replaced with:
GreenPower. A simple switch for you, renewable energy for our future.
Meaning:
You will continue to support renewable energy, but you will no longer achieve positive changes for the environment…
The tag line:
GreenPower. You have the power to make a real difference.
Has been replaced with:
GreenPower. You have the power to choose.
Meaning:
You will no longer make a difference, but you will have a choice to not make a difference…
And energy retailers have been struggling to get their marketing pitch right. Many GreenPower retailers are misleading hundreds of thousands of households and that’s not okay, so far as CHOICE is concerned.
Of course all this tricky marketing-speak would be irrelevant if the federal government were to remove its ridiculous 2009 baseline and made sure that every current and future GreenPower purchase is additional to Australia’s mandatory emissions reduction target – which is exactly what nearly a million households want when they choose GreenPower.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
Good story by @ashermoses on the mass gaming of a website poll about alternative medicine http://t.co/3XNE2BF5
OK, so am I the last person in Australia to see this Herald front page mockup thru the Rinehart lens? http://t.co/LSNBPkVl
RT @mumbletwits: Our judgement is that ANZ will lift interest rates despite the RBA announcement, but only by about 0.06 per cent. #hindsightbrokers
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Would you kill for a job?
Who would work in an abattoir? Most of us have done jobs we didn’t want to do because we needed…
Friday Dilemma: child cruelty or harmless fun?
Parenting. It’s the new oneupmanship. Ah, how quaint the days now seem when parents could raise…
Hipsters with hip replacements
Someone once told me that when people reach a certain age they begin dressing in the manner they did…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: Punch on: Open thread 09/02/2012
marley says:
I'm one of the older ones, so I've certainly seen a few changes in my time. When I started school I learned to write with a nib pen, dipped in an inkwell (no, I'm not kidding). My mother became a dab hand at getting inkstains out of my clothes. Flicking ink at one another in the classroom was an essential… [read more]From: I’d rather have a piece of toast than listen to crap lyrics
Erick says:
Led Zeppelin are responsible for my all-time favourite mixed metaphor: "There you sit, sit and stare, like a book on a shelf rusting." (Misty Mountain Hop) I laugh every time I hear it. Hmmm, I believe I've decided what to play on the way to work today. [read more]Gentle jabs to the ribs
No wuckin forries. These nuckin futs are tuckin fops
Well, puck me with a fitchfork. The F-word is apparently an acceptable part of Australian speech. That’s… Read more
Most commented