Renew Economy - Giles Parkinson
Australia will be locked into significantly more ambitious climate
policies by the end of the year, as one of the key conditions of the
far-reaching Paris climate deal was met overnight and the remaining
condition appears merely a formality.
The Paris climate deal, which aims to cap average global warming at
“well below” 2°C and as low as 1.5°C, will come into force within 30
days of it being ratified by at least 55 countries representing at least
55 per cent of total emissions.
On Wednesday, the first threshold was reached when another 31
countries, including major emitters Mexico and Brazil, and many of
Australia’s vulnerable Pacific island neighbours, signed the deal. That
took the running total to 60, and 48 per cent of emissions, including
the two biggest emitters China and the US.
Another 14 countries, including the UK, France, Germany, and
Australia, then promised to ratify the deal by the end of the year. This
will ensure that the second condition will also be reached and that the
pact will be in place before end of 2016, just a year after the
agreement was reached in Paris and then signed in April.
This is virtually unprecedented in international agreements. “This
momentum is remarkable,” UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon said. “It can
sometimes take years or even decades for a treaty to enter into force.
It is just nine months since the Paris climate conference. This is
testament to the urgency of the crisis we all face.”
Ban said that the early entry into force of the Paris Agreement would
trigger the operational provisions of the agreement and accelerate
efforts to limit the global temperature rise to well below 2°C, and to
build climate resilience.
This is where it impacts Australia. In excerpts of a speech he is due
to make in New York (Friday morning Australia time) Turnbull said all
the right things.
“We all understand what is at stake – the future of generations around the globe and the wellbeing of our planet.”
And then: “We also know that our commitment to action creates new
opportunities for innovation and growth, which means more jobs. Over the
past decade or so Australia has reduced emissions and grown the economy
by nearly 50%.”
Turnbull says that the significant and complex threat of climate
change “demands every one of us to act together towards a better world”.
“We all understand what is at stake – the future of generations
around the globe and the wellbeing of our planet.” Australia will play
its part, he says, describing the Paris conference of last year as “a
shining example of global co-operation for the common good”.
But it is one thing to make pleasing remarks on the international
stage and quite another to implement those promises and engagements at
home. He has been prime minister for more than 12 months but has yet to
move beyond the policies of his climate sceptic predecessor, Tony
Abbott.
Even the one initiative he has made, the $1 billion Clean Energy
Innovation Fund, is to be stripped of nearly all its funds because of a
compromise the government agreed to make on Australian Renewable Energy
Agency funding.
But the task for the Turnbull government is monumental. As Reputex
pointed out in a report on Wednesday, its current policies will likely
leave Australia one billion tonnes of greenhouse gas abatement short of
its own modest target of a 26-28 per cent cut in emissions by 2030.
The individual targets committed in Paris still fall well short of
the 2°C mark, and a long way from 1.5°C. According to some estimates, it
will leave the world facing a warming scenario of 3°C or more.
Australia, according to its own Climate Change Authority, will likely
need to find another billion tonnes of abatement to meet the fair share
promised by Turnbull.
We may have to wait another year to learn what it might be that
Turnbull will do, or feel he can do with a one seat majority in
parliament, and a large climate science denying conservative rump within
his own party.
A review in 2017 could be a launch-pad for tightening baselines,
shifting to some sort of trading scheme – as suggested by the CCA and
Labour – and expanding and lifting renewable energy targets, or imposing
tight emission regulations for vehicles, buildings or coal fired
generators.
So far, though, the minister for the environment and energy, Josh
Frydenberg, has committed to nothing more than a “sit-rep”, a term so
oblique we had to ask what it meant. “A situation report,” we were told.
In other words, an assessment of where the country is, not of what it
might or should be able to do.
Yet, the case for urgent action is clear, as even Turnbull
recognises. The activist group 350.org, which wants warming limited to
1.5°C, says there remains a massive gap between what the agreement calls
for and what world governments are actually doing to meet these
targets.
“Each of the last 16 consecutive months have been the hottest in
history, with 2016 shaping up to be the hottest year on record — a title
that we’re getting far too accustomed to applying year after year,”
said executive director May Boeve.
The Paris accord, which Australia will ratify and be beholden to,
commits the world, Australia included, to zero carbon emissions by the
middle of the century. Even the latest CCA report indicates that coal
generation will have to disappear by around 2035.
The fact remains that Australia, without strong and clear action,
will blow its “climate budget” by 2030 on its current course, and will
miss out on the huge economic opportunities that could have been offered
a global renewable energy superpower and technology leader.
And the uncomfortable truth for Turnbull and the conservative rump he
is forced to deal with is that climate change is inextricably linked
with all the major issues facing the country – security, immigration and
trade.
US president Barack Obama on Wednesday directed his National Security
Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy to
systematically include “climate change assessments” in all national
security decisions.
“Climate change is an urgent and growing threat to our national
security, contributing to increased natural disasters, refugee flows,
and conflicts over basic resources like food and water,” the White House
said in an accompanying
fact sheet.
“It is well-established that climate change is a threat multiplier
that catalyzes conflict and creates instability,” said Andrew Light, a
senior fellow at the World Resources Institute.
“Climate change is a underlying driver of natural disasters
and extreme weather events, increases human migration, and contributes
to conflicts around resources, such as food and water. Without action,
these threats will surely increase.”
In Australia, something has to change, and it has to change soon. But how?
Links
