Australia announced plans to ban incandescent bulbs.
A story "According to the Government, phasing out incandescent globes over the next three years could save about 800,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions a year by 2012 and as much as 4 million tonnes in 2015."
But goes on to say...
"At best, that would be far less than a 1 per cent cut in Australia's greenhouse emissions, which were 564.7 million tonnes at last count in 2004 and are forecast to keep growing rapidly."
The "far less than a 1 percent cut in Australia's greenhouse emissions" agrees with my own analysis which I posted to another thread recently.
IMO it would make far more sense to c "The IPCC report doesn't call for particular reduction figures. It does, however, make clear that reduction in emissions must be quick and deep. There is no more optimistic alternative. Even if we do everything right, we're still going to see serious increases in temperature, and all of the physical changes (to one extent or another) predicted in the report. However, there's reason to hope that if the US acts extremely aggressively and quickly we might be able to avoid an increase of two degrees Celsius, the rough threshold at which runaway polar melting might be stopped. This means that any useful legislation will have to feature both a very rapid start to reductions and a long and uncompromising mandate to continue them."
An advance copy of McKibben's article is at...