by Sharon Gunason Pottinger

Created on: February 09, 2007   Last Updated: April 19, 2007

I think we are in danger of losing the good will of the public to change their behaviours by politicizing global warming. Government here in the UK wasted no time in jumping on an eco bandwagon, but their bold inititiatves seem comprised of taxation-more taxes on "bad" behaviors, such as air flights; and tax reductions on "good" behaviors, such as having a zero-carbon house.

The increased tax on air travel is real and certain. It is in effect now. What is not so certain is how or if it will result in any reduction in air travel, and hence, carbon savings. In addition, there is no certainty that the increased taxes will be applied to energy efficiency, development of renewable energy, or other issues related to fuel poverty, which we feel most acutely here in the far north of Scotland.

The more troubling issue with the tax initiatives to my mind is the fact that the promised reduction in stamp duty on a zero carbon house is almost impossible to satisfy. First of all, it is almost impossible to determine exactly what is a carbon-free house. Past experience suggests that even a working definition can be bogged down in red tape for years. Secondly, it is very difficult and expensive to create such a house. It is theoretically possible with a new built house, but very difficult and expensive with an older home. "Microrenewables," the term for wind turbines, solar panels, and other devices suitable for a single household are so expensive that they payback period may exceed the life of the mortgage and the reduction of stamp duty would be available to the homeowner only at the time of selling his or her house, not much help with the cost of purchase, installation, or any maintenance.

There are grants available for the purchase of microrenewables. They offer, however, less than half of the cost and are plagued by the bugaboo of red tape and restrictions, such as limiting the installation to only those who have been certified by an agency and then not having training available.

When faced with these disappointing initiatives from the government compounded by a welter of isolated agencies and funds that change names and temporarily cease and are reborn under a different name, the individual can easily become cynical. We need the good will of everyone to do their 20% reduction and more. The government needs to have a coherent, consistent, and effective policy to demonstrate their own good will and to ensure that of the public in meeting the challenge of global climate change.

Learn more about this author, Sharon Gunason Pottinger.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.