28/04/2021

(AU ABC) Scott Morrison's Climate Change Policy Is Being Left Behind By Corporate Action

ABC BusinessIan Verrender

Scott Morrison addressed the climate summit last week. (Reuters)

It's no easy task, attempting to make a virtue out of inaction.

So spare a thought for Prime Minister Scott Morrison in his address to US President Joe Biden's virtual climate conference with global leaders late last week.

Despite being at odds with the bulk of those present, many of whom upped already ambitious targets to hit net zero carbon emissions by a particular date, Mr Morrison was upbeat, confident and a man who sounded in command of his country's destiny.

Australia would focus on delivering the goods rather than making promises on the timing to a net zero carbon future, he declared. We are all about the how rather than the when, he said.

With the slimmest of majorities and a looming election, the Prime Minister's reticence to commit to anything concrete is understandable from a domestic political perspective. Climate policy has been a career killer for much of this century, with at least three Prime Ministers seen off by point-scoring rivals.

But there was one statement from the Prime Minister that hit the mark.

Our push to slash emissions, he said, would be driven by technology, innovation and our dynamic private sector.

It's difficult to disagree. Since 2005, the shambolic approach from Canberra — abrupt policy reversals, leadership vacuums, indecision and broken promises – has meant any progress Australia has made on climate policy has been driven almost entirely by a frustrated private sector increasingly alarmed about the prospect of being isolated by global investors.

Even so, despite boasting one of the greatest penetrations of rooftop solar in the world, and as ageing coal-fired generators are retired early in favour of renewables, our carbon emissions have fallen at a much slower clip than the US and Europe.

How bad is Australia when it comes to global warming?

Here is how we stand in terms of our output. This graph and the one below it measure our carbon emissions on a per capita basis, or as individuals.


Australia was near the top globally when it came to emissions per capita a couple of years ago.

As you can see, we are right up there, vying for Olympic gold.

And here is how we've gone on reducing those emissions.

We're still a world leader in CO2 emissions despite a reduction.

While our emissions have fallen, we are still world leaders on a per capita basis. And that's despite running a mass immigration policy that should have made our per capita numbers look much better.

Even China, where emissions grew strongly in the decade-and-a-half from the turn of the century, has begun to level off at less than half ours.

When it comes to overall emissions as a nation, however, China is the clear leader after it became the world's factory during the new millennium. But we still rank alongside the United Kingdom, despite our much smaller population. In fact, we're now level pegging with the Old Dart when it comes to carbon emissions.

The annual CO2 emissions of China, the US, European Union, Australia and the United Kingdom.

What price the future?


It was the Prime Minister's refusal to put a firm date on a carbon reduction target at the summit that attracted the most criticism.

It wasn't just the when, however, missing from the Prime Minister's address last week.

PM says Australia backs technology, not taxes, to tackle climate change

We certainly had the who; business and households. But despite his assurances on the direction, we didn't get much detail on the how.

There was a plan to spend $539 million on new clean energy projects including "hydrogen hubs". Still, apart from the trifling amount, it wasn't the strategy Mr Morrison's global peers were looking for.

But if they want to hear talk of carbon pricing, they may have to wait.

Traditionally, the Liberal Party has tended to rely upon free market mechanisms to achieve an economic end. Reducing red tape, cutting government spending, eliminating subsidies and individual choice have always been part of the mantra.

The Australian Labor Party, by contrast, is always accused of overspending and direct intervention with subsidies and government-funded programs.

When it comes to climate, however, those preconceptions have been turned on their ear.

Is green hydrogen the fuel of the future?

The Rudd Labor government committed itself to a carbon price and the succeeding Gillard Labor government introduced a carbon tax, that was to convert to a carbon price. The free market would determine our energy and climate future.

But the program was junked by the incoming Abbott government, which instead replaced the market mechanism with a subsidy, the Emissions Reduction Fund. That since has handed out close to $3 billion in taxpayer funds to polluters to encourage them to change their practices.

Malcolm Turnbull attempted to reintroduce a carbon price via his National Energy Guarantee, through a secondary trading mechanism between power companies. It was enough to tip the balance of power within the party — Mr Turnbull departed and Mr Morrison was installed as leader.

Not surprisingly, he last week was adamant that there would be no carbon tax, and no carbon pricing and, again, reverted to a direct government handout.

While we have no qualms about taxing the life out of tobacco, in a direct attempt to raise cash to cover the health costs associated with the drug and to send a price signal to deter Australians from smoking, a price on carbon is as far away as ever.

No carbon tax here — but maybe we'll pay anyway

More than 29 countries – including many in Europe, as well as Canada and parts of the United States – have a carbon price or tax in place, designed to send a signal to energy companies, polluters and consumers about how to invest in energy generation and industrial output.

Despite the policy vacuum, Australian households have become the world's greatest adopters of rooftop solar and our power companies now have accelerated their programs to retire the ageing fleet of coal-fired power generators, with Victoria's Yallourn the next to be axed early.

It's not difficult to understand why. Renewable energy is cheaper to install, and the economics of renewables with backup – either battery, stored hydro or gas – has now undercut coal. They are cheaper to build, operate and are far more flexible.

Even so, when it comes to electricity generation, a recent OECD report singled out our reliance on coal as a major source of concern.

Australia's reliance on coal is in the spotlight.

Without political leadership, Australian businesses risk being stranded by a global community that has embraced a carbon free future.

Longer term, thermal coal faces enormous challenges and even Liquefied Natural Gas – of which Australia recently has become one of the world's biggest exporters – now is being called into question as a fuel for the future.

AGL's recent decision to carve out its coal-fired generators into a separate unit, so that investors can choose between green energy unencumbered by its legacy power stations, is a sign of things to come.

More broadly, the European Union recently called for a carbon border tax – a penalty on goods imported from countries that do not have a carbon price.

While some of our leaders still debate climate change and energy policy as an ideological issue, the world is moving on. Australian businesses long ago realised it was an economic issue.

Links

(Carbon Tracker) The Sky’s The Limit: Solar And Wind Energy Potential Is 100 Times As Much As Global Energy Demand

Carbon Tracker

Solar and wind potential is far higher than that of fossil fuels and can meet global energy demand many times over, unlocking huge benefits for society.

With current technology and in a subset of available locations we can capture at least 6,700 PWh p.a. from solar and wind, which is more than 100 times global energy demand.

Opportunities unlocked

The collapse in renewable costs in the last three years means that half of this solar and wind technical potential now has economic potential, and by the end of the decade it will be over 90%.

The land required for solar panels alone to provide all global energy is 450,000 km2, 0.3% of the global land area of 149 million km2. This differs by country as highlighted below.


Humans specialise in extracting cheap energy, and fast, as witnessed by the rapid development of shale gas. Now the opportunity has been unlocked, expect continued exponential growth of solar and wind deployment.

The technical and economic barriers have been crossed and the only impediment to change is political. Sector by sector and country by country the fossil fuel incumbency is being swamped by the rapidly rising tide of new energy technologies. Even countries where the technical potential is below 10 times energy demand, as shown below, have devised innovative approaches to energy generation.


The fossil fuel age is over…

The fossil fuel industry cannot compete with the technology learning curves of renewables, so demand will inevitably fall as wind and solar continue to grow. At the current 15-20% growth rates of solar and wind, fossil fuels will be pushed out of the electricity sector by the mid-2030s and out of total energy supply by 2050.

… and we begin a new era

The unlocking of energy reserves 100 times our current demand creates new possibilities for cheaper energy and more local jobs in a more equitable world with far less environmental stress.

Poor countries are the greatest beneficiaries. They have the largest ratio of solar and wind potential to energy demand and stand to unlock huge domestic benefits.

Links

(AU SMH) Where Australia Stands As The World Resets On Climate Change

Sydney Morning HeraldNick O'Malley

What you need to know about the week that saw the US commit to nearly doubling its emissions reduction target and the world focus anew on the greatest threat to our planet.

  
As he campaigned for the White House Joe Biden told the world that he would make climate change central to his presidency and in the months since his victory, his energy and determination startled even the most optimistic US climate campaigners.

Last Friday, Biden returned the United States to the world stage on climate, convening a meeting of 40 world leaders, including Prime Minister Scott Morrison.

Biden’s goal was to reassert American leadership and encourage the world to focus on the climate crisis in the lead-up to the United Nations climate talks in Glasgow in November.

The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald’s climate and environment team covered the conference from Sydney, Canberra and Melbourne and worked closely with North America Correspondent Matthew Knott.

Our coverage began in the weeks before the leaders convened, with analysis of grim new reports about the state of the climate from Australian and international scientific bodies.

At the start of April, we reported that the Australian Academy of Science believes that because we have delayed action for so long it is now “virtually impossible” to keep global warming under the more ambitious Paris Agreement goal of 1.5 degrees and that as a result, the Great Barrier Reef is all but doomed.

As Australia tiptoes to 2050 climate targets, the world moves on 2030
Soon afterwards the Climate Council released their own report with similar findings, emphasising that it was possible for the world to “overshoot” the mark but still pull temperatures back with real effort and new technologies.

Pressure mounted on Australia to increase our own ambitions. As the talks approached the team began to explore what the impact might be on Australia if it did not.

Pascal Lamy, the former head of the World Trade organisation explained to us why he believed a European Union border tariff on some Australian goods was reasonable and inevitable.

Australian security chiefs and even former Chief of the Defence Force, Admiral Chris Barrie, told The Age and the Herald about their concerns that Australia was not prepared for the security threat presented by climate change.

Days before the summit was to begin, news broke that China and the US had agreed to cooperate on climate, to the massive relief of international observers.

We secured an interview with Australia’s US Ambassador, Arthur Sinodinis, who explained that he had spoken with Biden’s climate envoy, John Kerry, and that Australia planned to work with the world to tackle the threat.

Nonetheless, we learned from a briefing by a White House official that the US did not believe Australia was doing enough.
Scott Morrison’s speech to the Leaders Summit on Climate annotated
As leaders prepared to speak, Prime Minister Scott Morrison again said that Australia’s “preference” was to get to net zero emissions by 2050, and that it would use technology to get there.

By then though the world had moved on, with key players focussed on 2030.
Late on Friday night Australian time, Morrison was invited to speak and told the summit that Australia is on a pathway to achieve net zero emissions.

He boasted about Australia’s prior performance and emphasised that “how” to get to net zero was as important as “when”.

He outlined the significant funding his government was committing to research and development of renewable energy, carbon capture and storage and carbon sequestration methods.

As expected the US committed to nearly doubling its reduction target to 50 percent by 2030, and China reaffirmed its 2060 goal and its plans to see its coal use peak in five years.

Reaction to Australia’s speech was mixed at best, with one scientist telling us that speed of action was absolutely critical and that dismissing this amounted to a “diplomatic affront”.

The former Kiribati president Anote Tong observed that though he was glad Scott Morrison had referred to the “Pacific family” in his speech, family members should care for one another’s welfare.

Links