12/02/2021

(AU) Almost Alone: Australia Isolated On Climate Despite PM’s Ambitions

Sydney Morning Herald - Mike Foley

The world has shifted in the two years since Scott Morrison warned electric cars would end the weekend during the election campaign.

This week President Joe Biden completed a policy U-turn for the US, pledging to convert his federal government’s fleet of 650,000 vehicles to electric cars as a centrepiece of the nation’s commitment to hit net-zero emissions by 2050.


From presenting a piece of coal to parliament, to aspiring to net zero emissions by 2050.

The bold policy was a catalyst for General Motors which announced that week it would stop making petrol commuter vehicles by 2035, and it’s now rolling out big-budget advertisements claiming its commitment to reach net-zero emissions by 2040 can jumpstart the country’s beleaguered auto industry.

Biden’s electric vehicle transition, estimated to cost around $20 billion, is backed with market-driving policies including tightened fuel efficiency rules for cars, extending the $10,000 rebate for electric vehicle buyers and funding the roll-out of 500,000 charging stations across the country.

The President has also launched a $2 trillion green stimulus fund, which will include funding for electric vehicle manufacturing, which he claims will generate one million new jobs across the automotive supply chain.

The US agency responsible for government vehicles, the General Services Administration, said the government is “working with the American automotive manufacturing industry to ensure that these next-generation vehicles are built in America by American workers”. The contrast with Australia couldn’t be more stark. The Morrison government released on Friday its long-awaited electric vehicle strategy, which unlike other developed nations included no targets for market share, and no incentives to drive uptake.

Morrison’s warned, on the hustings ahead of the May 2019 election, that former Labor leader Bill Shorten pledged to lift the market share of electric vehicles to 50 per cent by 2030 and that Shorten “wants to end the weekend when it comes to his policy on electric vehicles.”

“It’s not going to tow your trailer, it’s not going to tow your boat, it’s not going to get you out to your favourite camping spot with your family,” he said.

Climate policy
Morrison government rules out subsidies in electric vehicle strategy
However, in a sign of increasing pressure on climate action Morrison used his strongest language yet at the National Press Club on Monday, declaring he wants Australia to reach net-zero greenhouse gases by 2050. But he stopped short of committing to a deadline.

The federal government has said it’s on track to reach its 2030 emissions reduction commitment under the Paris Agreement, but its long-term climate pledge is unchanged: to reach net-zero emissions sometime before the end of this century.

Morrison said on Monday he wouldn’t commit to an emissions’ deadline until “I can tell you how we get there”, and argued there weren’t “too many other places” which had mapped out a pathway to net-zero.

The policy commitments of Australia’s major trading partners like Japan, South Korea, China and the UK isn’t rated above Australia’s by the independent analyst at the international Climate Action Tracker.

Climate policy
PM’s climate ambition heats up investment in Australia’s carbon market

But like the US under the Biden administration, these countries have formed a coalition of the willing and pledged to reach net-zero by 2050 or 2060, which former diplomats and climate-policy watchers say could create enough leverage to push Australia to match their rhetoric.

UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Friday ordered government departments to model a carbon price across all areas of the economy, which will include a policy framework to achieve net-zero emissions. This is expected to be announced in the lead-up to the UN climate talks that the UK is hosting in November.

Carbon Market Institute chief executive John Connor, a former head of the Climate Institute think tank, says there was “no question Australia is falling behind on climate action”.

“We lack the framework countries are putting in place to guide business investment for industry in infrastructure, transport or agriculture,” Connor says.

Climate Council researcher Dr Simon Bradshaw says Australia “is now almost alone among major advanced economies in remaining stubbornly wedded to its existing target for 2030, rather than stepping up its ambition in line with expectations under the Paris Agreement”.

Economists say despite Morrison’s increasing ambition to hit a 2050 deadline for net-zero, the government’s focus on low emissions’ technology will not be enough on its own to achieve it.

Steven Hamilton is a senior economist at the Blueprint Institute, which includes former Liberal MPs Christopher Pyne and Robert Hill. Hamilton says “technology won’t get us there. It’s necessary but not sufficient. What we need is incentives″⁣.

“It’s inconceivable we can get to net-zero without a market mechanism to drive investment in lowering emissions,” he says.

Connor says other countries were straightening their 2030 targets and the EU and New Zealand are pursuing reforms of markets that price carbon emissions while China launched a pilot emissions’ trading scheme this week.

Climate policy
Australia defies international pressure to set emissions targets

“They are coherent policy frameworks that send signals to industry and provide clear guidelines for investment,” he says.

An international race is on to be the first nation to develop a hydrogen export supply chain. The fuel source is viewed as a potential boom commodity if it’s adopted as a zero-emissions replacement for petroleum products.

Former Chief Scientist Alan Finkel and eminent economist Ross Garnaut say Australia, with its abundant land and sunshine, can become a hydrogen superpower, and the Morrison government has committed $500 million to support the hydrogen industry.

But Australia’s investment to date pales in comparison to other nations.

Saudi Arabia, the world’s biggest oil exporter, is investing $6.5 billion to drive down production costs and make exports economically viable. Other heavy fuel users in Japan, France, Spain and Germany are each planning to invest more than $10 billion in production and to switch from fossil fuel energy generation to hydrogen.

Future Power
How is Australia travelling with the switch to electric cars?

Australia’s business community is voting with its wallet for more ambitious climate action. An investment splurge on Australia’s carbon credits markets revealed this week investors have started betting Morrison will wind up with firm climate targets one way or another.

Australian export behemoths including Rio Tinto and BHP, as well as the Business Council of Australia, employer groups, major agriculture lobbies and multinational food companies are pursuing carbon neutrality deadlines - in part to avoid being stung with trade tariffs or charges by countries that have set net-zero targets.

Climate change is a key concern for Pacific Island leaders, and showing willing to act on climate action could boost our standing in the region - now viewed as crucial due to China’s efforts to grow its influence.

But a coal-borne wind blowing out of the Nationals’ party room and against the climate current, is creating choppy waters for the Coalition. Outspoken backbenchers Barnaby Joyce and Matt Canavan raised concerns over the Prime Minister’s net-zero pitch this week, warning regional communities and blue-collar workers will suffer.

It’s an open question whether Morrison thinks the fight on the domestic front is worth it - and he’ll be keenly aware his performance in the Pacific is unlikely to influence voters in what’s expected to be an election year.

However, former adviser to Julie Bishop when she was foreign affairs minister, Philip Citowicki, disagrees with this calculation.

“Increasing international pressure driven by the US means the net-cost to Australian foreign policy is begging to outweigh the domestic political gain,” says Citowicki, also a former political aide to Australia’s High Commissioner to the UK George Brandis.

'It’s a ticking time bomb for the government to act in this space. There’s an election sooner rather than later, and it makes increasing sense to realign with international momentum.”

Climate policy
'Sacrificial canary': Fiji warns Australia not to let Pacific sink
Fiji Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama warned in December that inaction on climate change would lead “Fijians and our Pacific Island sisters and brothers to be some sacrificial canary for coal-burning countries and high-emitting companies.”

“When it comes to climate change, I’m fond of saying every nation is in the same canoe. Currently, that collective canoe is taking on water and there are too few of us trying to patch the holes,” he said.

Citowicki says growing geostrategic competition in the Pacific is the focus of Australian foreign policy priorities, and working enthusiastically with the Biden administration would help overcome negative perceptions of the Morrison government’s closeness to the former Trump Whitehouse.

China labelled Australia a “condescending master” in the Pacific in 2019 and has since committed to net-zero emissions while rapidly expanding infrastructure and delivering loans throughout the region.

He doesn’t expect the US to force Australia’s arm, but to diplomatically state climate deadlines and co-operation in the Pacific is “something that is much preferred for the Coalition to pivot to”.

“My personal fixation is John Kerry as the (US) Climate Envoy who has a heavy focus on national security elements of climate change, and it brings a whole new lens for (the Morrison government) to enact legislation to assure Australians we have a climate-resilient strategy,” Citowicki says.

Washington-based national security expert Richard Weitz says the disruptive threats from climate change will be front and centre in diplomatic relations with the US.

“Just like when foreign leaders came to Washington during the Obama administration they would come prepared to talk about nuclear disarmament, now they will come ready to talk about making progress on climate change,” says Weitz, a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute Center for Future Security Strategies.

Weitz’s research details how climate-related disasters like droughts and floods could spark conflicts over resources, declining agricultural yields and rising sea levels could cause mass migrations of people across international borders.

“It would be seen as a sign of a healthy US-Australia partnership, and conversely if Australia was seen as not supporting these initiatives, that could be seen as a source of tension,” he says.

It’s worth noting that the Morrison government had no problem setting a tight deadline on another form of pollution, announcing last a year a 2024 phase-out of dangerous waste exports.

But a bold move on carbon emissions is still off-limits.

Links
at No comments:

Surge In Court Cases Over Climate Change Shows Increasing Role Of Litigation In Addressing The Climate Crisis

United Nations Environment Programme

Pixabay


The UNEP Global Climate Litigation Report: 2020 Status Review provides an overview of the current state of climate change litigation globally, as well as an assessment of global climate change litigation trends.
It finds that a rapid increase in climate litigation has occurred around the world.  In 2017 there were 884 cases brought in 24 countries.
As of 1 July 2020, the number of cases has nearly doubled with at least 1,550 climate change cases filed in 38 countries. This growing tidal wave of climate cases is driving much-needed change.
Climate litigation cases have spiked in recent years, making the courtroom increasingly relevant to efforts to address climate change around the world.

A UN Environment Programme (UNEP) report finds that climate cases have nearly doubled over the last three years and are increasingly compelling governments and corporate actors to implement their climate commitments, as well as pursue more ambitious climate change mitigation and adaptation goals.

The report, published by UNEP in cooperation with the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, shows climate litigation has become more common and more successful worldwide. 

In 2017, 884 cases were brought in 24 countries; as of 2020, cases had nearly doubled, with at least 1,550 climate change cases filed in 38 countries (39 including the European Union courts). 

While climate litigation continues to be concentrated in high-income countries, the report’s authors expect the trend to further grow in the global south – the report lists recent cases from Colombia, India, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines and South Africa.

The background of plaintiffs is becoming increasingly diverse as well, with NGOs and political parties joined by children, senior citizens, migrants, and indigenous peoples. 

Just as they are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19, those groups of plaintiffs often stand at the forefront of climate change, enduring extreme weather, rising sea levels, and pollution.

“Citizens are increasingly turning to courts to access justice and exercise their right to a healthy environment,” said Arnold Kreilhuber, Acting Director of UNEP’s Law Division. “Judges and courts have an essential role to play in addressing the climate crisis”.

Some of the recent trends in climate litigation identified by the report include:
  • Violations of “climate rights”, i.e. cases are increasingly relying on fundamental human rights including the right to life, health, food, and water.
  • Failures of governments to enforce their commitments on climate change mitigation and adaptation.
  • “Greenwashing” and non-disclosures, when corporate messaging contains false or misleading information about climate change impacts.

A local fisherman fishes near submerged buildings of the Soi Lodge on the shores of Lake Baringo on October 6, 2020, where floods have displaced entire villages and submerged farms. FILE PHOTO | NMG

In the coming years, UNEP expects climate litigation to increase in national and international bodies, especially with respect to companies misreporting climate risks, governments failing to adapt to extreme weather events, and cases brought to enforce previous court decisions. 

A rise is also expected in cases concerning persons displaced by climate change impacts.

"Climate litigation is a key lever for keeping governments and corporations on task in the fight to combat climate change," said MIchael Burger, Executive Director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change at Columbia Law School. 

"And it is a powerful tool for holding them to account for their failure to do so. Courts can equalize the power imbalances in society and give force to the rule of law."

Links
at No comments:

Greta Thunberg Effect: People Familiar With Young Climate Activist May Be More Likely To Act

The Conversation -  | 

Andrew Matthews/PA Archive/PA Images

Authors
  •  is a PhD Student in Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science
  • Professor of Social Psychology in Society and Director, Cambridge Social Decision-Making Lab, University of Cambridge     
She was declared Time magazine’s person of the year in the same month that Donald Trump told her to “work on her anger management issues”.

Greta Thunberg has attracted international attention since her lone demonstration outside the Swedish Parliament in August 2018.

Her “school strike for the climate” has now grown into a global movement that has brought more than 10 million people onto streets worldwide to demand action on climate change.

In the same time that Greta Thunberg has become a household name, public concern about climate change has reached record highs in the US. But what role has Thunberg’s personal influence played in this? Do her speeches appeal to diverse audiences or is she simply preaching to the choir?

Based on a nationally representative survey of over 1,300 US adults, our study found that Americans who report being more familiar with Greta Thunberg also feel more confident that they can help mitigate climate change as part of a collective effort. They are also more willing to take action themselves, by contacting elected officials or giving time and money to campaigns. We call this the Greta Thunberg effect.

Familiarity breeds empowerment

Seeing or hearing Greta Thunberg once doesn’t instantly turn someone into a climate activist. Nonetheless, we discovered a potentially important pattern of associations. Those more familiar with Thunberg were more likely to think their actions were effective and meaningful and were more intent on doing something about climate change.

Our model seemed to show this might be the case because people who knew Thunberg’s story – how her lonely stand inspired millions around the world to join her – were more likely to recognise the potential for ordinary people to make a difference.

We wanted to know how widespread this effect might be, so we tried to find out which audiences Thunberg most appealed to. In her public appearances, she’s often surrounded by young people and her demands for climate action align most strongly with liberal policy preferences. Since people tend to listen more to those they identify with, we thought that young and left-leaning people would be more strongly influenced by her.

Young people are likely to be most receptive, but Thunberg’s influence defies generational and political divides. Antonello Marangi/Shutterstock

Surprisingly, the Greta Thunberg effect seems to be similar across age groups and the political spectrum for US adults, though it was stronger among liberals than conservatives. We didn’t survey children and teenagers, but we expect them to be most strongly influenced by Thunberg’s school strikes.

‘No one is too small to make a difference’

Pope Francis, James Hansen and Jeff Bezos have all tried to spur momentum on climate action using their religious, academic and financial authority. Greta Thunberg lacks any such elite status, so how has she been able to succeed?

Given the prevailing sense of doom about climate change, empowering people to take action requires an ability to convey that change is possible. In her speeches, Thunberg proclaims that “there is still time to change everything around”. Her Fridays for Future campaign is also founded on the empowering message that anyone – even school students – can make a difference.

Greta Thunberg’s example to others is that ordinary person can inspire extraordinary change. Liv Oeian/Shutterstock

Most importantly, Thunberg’s actions are consistent with her words. Her fiery demands to world leaders, whether at the United Nations or the US Congress demonstrate that anyone can – and should – challenge powerful institutions and people.

What does this mean for climate action?

How can we be sure that our findings reflect Greta Thunberg’s own effect and not the influence of climate activism more generally? The short answer is that we can’t. But to help isolate Thunberg’s influence, we asked our study participants to rate their support for climate activism and found that familiarity with Thunberg remained relevant even when controlling for this.

Of course, there are other things that could explain why people may want to take action on climate change, such as their prior support for environmental reform or their having heard about climate change in the news. But much of this is already captured indirectly by political ideology in our model, which is one of the most important predictors of what a person reads and how much they support climate action.

So, while there are many reasons people might want to tackle climate change, being familiar with Greta Thunberg appears to have a unique influence on the extent to which they feel empowered to make a difference.

Munich, Germany on Friday September 20, 2019: 30,000 people strike for the climate. FooTToo/Shutterstock

But what if the Greta Thunberg effect is actually operating the other way? Did we instead find that people who are already more likely to act on climate change are just more familiar with Greta Thunberg? We can’t be certain because this type of study can’t prove cause and effect, it can only show associations. But statistical tests showed that this reverse explanation did not explain the data as well as our original one.

Of course, reality may be more complex than what our models can capture. A positive feedback loop – where both explanations operate in tandem to inspire climate action – is also possible.

Future research can build on our findings using controlled experiments, but the patterns in our data at least suggest that Greta Thunberg is a particularly inspirational leader in part because she’s a convincing example that sudden, big change is possible. Now, how can activists amplify their own impact?

Considering how politicised climate change is, one answer might be appealing to people across the political spectrum by highlighting aspects of their identity that they tend to share with the wider public.

The Greta Thunberg effect suggests that calls to action may be able to mobilise broad segments of society, regardless of age or politics.

Links
at No comments: