The Garnaut interim report on climate change was handed down on Friday – it calls for an Emissions Trading Scheme, including petrol, to be introduced from 2010. The emissions trading scheme revolves around a yet-to-be-announced price put on carbon, paid by polluters, as an incentive to reduce their emissions.

I’d like to hear your feelings on the scheme in general. Environment groups say 2010 is too late; Opposition leader Brendan Nelson says 2010 is too soon, saying if the government acts too quickly industries like power generation could be destroyed.

But I’d particularly like to hear what you think should be done with the money raised through the scheme. One of Professor Garnaut’s recommendations is that 50% of the revenue go to helping poor families with the inevitable rises in food and fuel as a result of the scheme; 30% goes to help businesses with their cost rises, and 20% goes to research. I’m particularly interested in what new energy sources you believe that 20% should be spent on. Some say trees would be the greatest investment. Others say solar. What about wind power or geo-thermal, or nuclear or clean coal?

Which form of alternative energy do you think has the most potential, and should therefore get the most attention and dollars spent?