The coalition's new climate change policy lacks detail, but it is an important contribution to the national debate, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry says.
"The coalition's statement doesn't provide industry with a full range of information about the adequacy of the proposed fund," ACCI chief executive Peter Anderson told reporters.
He said detail was lacking as to whether or not the proposed fund will ultimately be able to meet industry expectations and be funded by the budget if demand for access to the fund is greater than anticipated.
"Copenhagen told Australia that there is great uncertainty as to how other nations will respond. That uncertainty should lead our policy makers to take greater caution in domestic responses before we impose major adjustments on our economy," he said.
The Minerals Council of Australia welcomed the shift to a policy designed to use incentives as a driver to reduce emissions rather than an approach that is preoccupied with penalising business to raise revenue.
No deep cuts
The opposition's alternative climate change plan effectively rules out deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions.
The government wants to reduce emissions by five to 25 per cent by 2020 through an emissions trading scheme.
Opposition Leader Tony Abbott on Tuesday unveiled an alternative plan, which would reduce emissions by five per cent.
Incentives and rewards
The plan involves an emissions trading scheme of a kind.
Big polluters, such as coal-fired power stations, would only be allowed to pollute a certain amount from July 2011.
If they emit more than that amount, they would be fined. If they emit less, they would be rewarded by the government.
The plan also includes a $1.1 billion annual fund to be spent encouraging farmers, businesses and households to cut emissions.
"Our policy will be simpler, cheaper and more effective than the government's because it relies on incentives not penalties," Mr Abbott said as he released the policy in Canberra.
He described it as "quintessentially Australian", saying it was about solar and about soil.
The $1.1 billion fund would go largely towards paying farmers to store carbon in the soil, a relatively new green tactic which cannot be counted against international targets under United Nations rules.
Millions of trees to be planted
The fund would be used to plant 20 million trees along highways, city streets and in urban parks.
The government rebate for rooftop panels would be increased by $1000.
The $1.1 billion annual fund would come out of the federal budget.
Mr Abbott said the opposition would reveal at a later date exactly where the money would come from.
The government and the opposition now appear to have different policies on how ambitious should be climate action.
The government says it will cut emissions by five per cent if there is no global deal on reducing emissions, rising up to a 25 per cent cut if there is a strong deal. It says the ETS can achieve all those possible targets.
No hope for a global deal
Mr Abbott said his scheme would cut emissions by five per cent. He cast doubt on whether a global climate deal could be struck, in the wake of the failure of the Copenhagen conference.
"I'm far from confident that we are likely to be in that position," he said.
"In the event of that hypothetical coming to pass then we can deal with it."
The opposition's scheme could be ramped up to achieve deeper cuts to emissions, but Mr Abbott did not provide any details of how this might occur.
The UN hopes a climate deal can be struck at the end of this year.
Australia hopes for 25 per cent cut
More than 50 countries, including Australia, have submitted their greenhouse reduction targets for the next round of talks.
Australia's target is a five to 25 per cent cut.
The government's ETS levies a price on carbon pollution from all big polluters. The government would collect more than $10 billion a year from the ETS, and return it to taxpayers as compensation to households and businesses.
Under the ETS, the government sets a cap for emissions and the market then sets the price for emissions permits.
The rationale behind the ETS is that consumers are made to pay for the pollution embedded in the goods and services they buy, to encourage greener habits.
Share
