Two things stand out from the extensive survey of our readers' opinions on global warming and what should be done about it.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
One is your overwhelming view is it is happening and it is being caused by human activity, primarily burning carbon fuels - coal, oil and gas.
The other is though there is a strong sense of mistrust of information provided by governments and by energy companies, you want more and better information which you can trust.
Of the 1300 people who completed the online survey, 80 per cent said they believed human-induced climate change was happening.
Seventy-one per cent said Australia had a responsibility to tackle its greenhouse gas emissions and 66 per cent strongly agreed governments must act quickly to build renewable energy technology to address Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.
But the downside of these clear views was four in five respondents said governments - local, state and federal - were giving communities barely any or not enough information about the transition to renewable energy. Similarly, 79 per cent of respondents said the same was true of renewable energy developers.
Part of the problem is politics is now polarised on the issues. Australia's political leaders present increasingly opposed visions of the pathway to net zero (where our production of global warming gases is either nil or is offset by other activities like planting trees which offset those gases).
Take the announcement by Opposition Leader Peter Dutton that the Coalition would build nuclear power stations on seven sites if it won the next election.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers told an energy conference the proposal was "the dumbest policy ever put forward by a major party".
This was not constructive language, and may have fed the feeling revealed by our survey that hard, cool-headed information has not been forthcoming. Energy policy has become a political football - and that is not good for energy policy or for the country.
Our survey also reveals those closest to solutions are most against those solutions.
Those who selected an inland masthead including The Canberra Times, The Courier in Ballarat, the Bendigo Advertiser, The Border Mail, Daily Advertiser, Northern Daily Leader, Central Western Daily, Western Advocate and The Daily Liberal expressed greater opposition to transmission infrastructure than those in the coastal titles (Newcastle Herald, Illawarra Mercury, Warrnambool Standard, Burnie Advocate and Launceston Examiner).
Of those who selected an inland masthead, 23 per cent expressed strong opposition to transmission infrastructure in their community, compared to 12 per cent in coastal areas.
This is to be expected. People faced with unsightly transmission lines are more likely to oppose them than those not faced with such sights.
But it highlights a problem for government. It is sneeringly called "nimbyism" but nobody wants a windfarm to alter a beloved landscape, whatever the benefits to the wider community.
There is all the more reason, then, to persuade. And persuasion means clear information. Politicians need to step back from making political points about energy policy. It's too important for that.
There needs to be a clear and calm debate about how we head off what threatens to be a catastrophic change in the world's climate.
Scientists need to be at the centre of that debate. And these scientists themselves have to be calm and leave their own ideological certainties behind.
Just give us the facts.
Send us a letter to the editor
- Letters to the editor should be kept to 250 or fewer words. To the Point letters should not exceed 50 words. Reference to The Canberra Times reports should include a date and page number. Provide a phone number and address (only your suburb will be published). Responsibility for election comment is taken by John-Paul Moloney of 121 Marcus Clarke Street, Canberra. Published by Federal Capital Press of Australia Pty Ltd.
