Should the government increase environmental regulations on businesses to reduce carbon emissions?

No, global warming is a hoax/myth

no, We should aim to recycle as much as posible, global warm has not been proven in any reports and should be a factor in this question.

Depends cost of living should be consider. Where possible business try do keep the carbon footprint within range. Such a businesess be awarded.

No, It should be working with states that are yet to improve their environmental regulations to a standard that is in line with Australia before we increase ours. China and India have far lower standards than Australia. working with these states will have much larger impacts to the slowing of global warming than a country as Australia.

Yes, through a mix of light legislated regulations on business activities as well as incentivising in alternate, environmentally friendly energy production alternatives such as wind, hydro, solar and nuclear.

Yes, but only to large businesses and provide more incentives for alternative energy production.

Yes, but this needs to be regulated with humility due to what we want, and what we can realistically get

yes, but there needs to be consideration for the cost and time implications this may have on small businesses.

Yes and no, depending on the businesses and what they do they should put regulations to each and everyone

Instead of regulating businesses, why not plant more trees to absorb carbon. That can reduce carbon emissions.

No, until there are more alternative energy productions available regulations should not be increased, companies, should be incentivised to be looking for alternative energies.

No. China, India and the US produce more waste and carbon emissions than all other countries combined

Yes, however the local focus must shift to include Air Pollution and Human Health and rather than Carbon Credits a program must be put in place to cost all externalities and make them the sole responsibility of companies and their investors - not communities and governments - via bonds and other mechanisms.

I think they should enforce it slightly but the technology to do so has not been made so we have to wait until it is made

Enforce the regulations slightly but I don't think we should be too harsh, still apply more rules in place though.

The government should phase out greenhouse gasses, but slowly, and correctly to ensure the Australian economy isn't destroyed.

Yes but only for big businesses with high carbon emissions

Yes, but global warming is still a natural occurrence, and the global temperature is fluctuating.

No I believe global warming is a natural occurrence and the government is over regulating businesses

To be honest as long as society grows powerful to do whatever it can its fine

I think this is up to one's personal choice and preference, not up to the government.

Yes, but only if they're using fossil fuels or are hurting the native animals

Only regulate major pollution companies, and move from there

Yes but not yes

Yes, and a 75% windfall profits tax should be put on all fossil fuel companies.

Use nuclear energy

No. Stop wasting money. Make china do it. We are a drop in the ocean

On large corporation

Climate change is a joke

Only if the science legitimately supports it.

Yes, I believe that global warming is a natural occurrence, but there should alternative energy production incentives as well

Yes and don't allow them to pass the cost to low level employees

Yes but only if it doesn't not negatively impact employees of this business

No, and stop buying fuel resources from dictatorships such as Russia and the Middle East

The government needs to apply the same environmental regulations on imports as it does on business within Australia

No, and they should stop controlling the weather with geoengineering to implement WEF agenda.

Big business should be hit harder and small businesses left as it is

I believe Jesus will return before the world implodes from this global warming nonsense.

No. Climate change is a natural occurrence, and all this will do is cost more money and more jobs

Yes and Address overconsumption reducing over production

Yes but also include research into green energy - in a way which doesn't harm the economy too severely and too quickly

do not understand question

If the business is contributing to pollution or plastic waste, then regulations should be put into place. I don’t care about global warming.

need to tax overseas imports the same if not more

Carbon emissions are only one variable in a large system that is impacted by many factors such as; urban expansion (concrete and steel in place of areas which once had grass etc) which absorbs more heat from the sun than what was present before development

No, but it can be decreased by 10%

Yes and redistribute any earnings back to taxpayers

No more legislation, yet encourage it with incentives. However, Be more accepting to the possibility of climate change being largely natural.

No, and I believe global warming is a natural occurrence for the most part. However there is no reason why we shouldn't also provide more incentives for cleaner energy production as well.

How about actually attempting to solve the problem instead of using it as a stream of income?

yes, but focus mainly on larger corporations who have the most impact rather than smaller, struggling businesses.

Yes, even if global warming happens naturally, accelerating it isn't good either.

Just stop government funding for existing fossil fuels

They should try their best to but shouldn't be enforce if required

I don’t believe in climate change

Nucealer energy and yes

Only for Very large companies and not farmers

I don’t get this question

If businesses are endangering the environment in a way, then the government should increase regulations to those businesses. But if they’re doing a good job avoiding endangerment to the environment, then why raise environment regulations at all?

Give incentives to reduce co2

use nuclear weaponry to make the climate worse

I think you need a little but of government control but not need to much.

Think there are more Important environmental issues now than global warming.. try seeing how much water is used in the manufacture of cotton for fashion! #StaceyDooley

No but provide incentives for research and startup into creating competitive clean energy

No carbon tax but a carbon emissions trading scheme instead, along with rebates and other incentives for business to switch to clean energy

We should be encourage to not waste energy, and apply new technologies for more effective and sustainable (I.e. cleaner coal & nuclear)

With financial support from the government where appropriate

Yes, Especially on larger corporations

When current alternatives are improved and safe.

Rich companies will just continue with what they are doing and pay or smaller companies that can not afford the expense of eco friendly items will be forced out of business

Yes, but provide guidance and extension services rather than penalties except for major breaches

I do no believe that this should be expensive but they should help businesses be eco friendly.

to a reasonable degree, but for CO2, methane & CO, not just Carbon particulates emissions.

keep it the same at the moment

just enough to not kill the world

yes, but only to some companies because construction make quite a bit of carbon to make buildings

I'm here for a good time, not a long time. So its not a issue that I see as relevant.

i dont rlly care abt all this

Recycling should be free for businesses permanently.

Carbon taxes only get passed onto the public, and prices are already way too high. Help companies to change to clean energy or go out of business.

carbon fibre

Not at this current time - or at a slower rate

it depends on what it is.

Yes and work with businesses to invest in carbon neutral technologies and energy sources

Yes except for small businesses

Yes, as long as these regulations do not cost much money for growing businesses

Yes, all pollution

Regulate industry. A carbon tax is here to stay.

To some extend. I believe that they should increase it a little, but not go over the top with regulations.

The government should put measures in place to stop the erosion and degradation of our planet i.e. total bans on plastic and non-biodegradable materials, total transfer from fossil fuel industry to complete green and renewable energy.

Yes, but only according to a scale based on the size of the business. Larger businesses should be expected to do more to reduce emissions.

Yes, though I’m also not a fan of big government. Not knowledgeable enough to provide appropriate answer.

they should stay neutral and plant more trees

No. Whilst i do believe global warming is a natural occurrence, i do not deny that human activity has likely accelerated this warming period, and i have no issue with renewable energy, however, the amount of carbon emissions predicted to leave Australia will likely make no difference whatsoever as the major emission nations such as China have made no significant changes to their behaviour. Our best option would be to look at periods of cooling and heating and come up with solutions to tackle these situations, such as surviving an ice-age, which will likely require mass fossil fuel consumption with our current technology.

It should add more regulations over time bit by bit,

Large companies should be regulated to be more energy efficient

Make the manufacturers of pollution and plastic etc stop

When every country on this planet is onboard

No, the government should not increase regulation on carbon dioxide emissions by business. The IPCC have posted carbon dioxide levels in our environment as a major threat to society. The science supporting this is weak at best. Carbon dioxide, which is plant food, is a highly improbable villain.