24/10/2021

(The Conversation) Glasgow Showdown: Pacific Islands Demand Global Leaders Bring Action, Not Excuses, To UN Summit

The Conversation - 

Mick Tsikas/AAP

Author
 is Researcher, Climate Council, and Research Fellow, Griffith Asia Institute, Griffith University     
The Pacific Islands are at the frontline of climate change. But as rising seas threaten their very existence, these tiny nation states will not be submerged without a fight.

For decades this group has been the world’s moral conscience on climate change. Pacific leaders are not afraid to call out the climate policy failures of far bigger nations, including regional neighbour Australia. And they have a strong history of punching above their weight at United Nations climate talks – including at Paris, where they were credited with helping secure the first truly global climate agreement.

The momentum is with Pacific island countries at next month’s summit in Glasgow, and they have powerful friends. The United Kingdom, European Union and United States all want to see warming limited to 1.5℃.

This powerful alliance will turn the screws on countries dragging down the global effort to avert catastrophic climate change. And if history is a guide, the Pacific won’t let the actions of laggard nations go unnoticed.

Chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, Fiji prime minister Frank Bainimarama, has said Pacific island countries ‘refuse to be the canary in the world’s coal mine.’ Richard Drew/AAP

A long fight for survival

 Pacific leaders’ agitation for climate action dates back to the late 1980s, when scientific consensus on the problem emerged. The leaders quickly realised the serious implications global warming and sea-level rise posed for island countries.

Some Pacific nations – such as Kiribati, Marshall Islands and Tuvalu – are predominantly low-lying atolls, rising just metres above the waves. In 1991, Pacific leaders declared “the cultural, economic and physical survival of Pacific nations is at great risk”.

Successive scientific assessments clarified the devastating threat climate change posed for Pacific nations: more intense cyclones, changing rainfall patterns, coral bleaching, ocean acidification, coastal inundation and sea-level rise.

Pacific states developed collective strategies to press the international community to take action. At past UN climate talks, they formed a diplomatic alliance with island nations in the Caribbean and the Indian Ocean, which swelled to more than 40 countries.

The first draft of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol – which required wealthy nations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions – was put forward by Nauru on behalf of this Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS).

Climate change is a threat to the survival of Pacific Islanders. Mick Tsikas/AAP

Securing a global agreement in Paris

Pacific states were also crucial in negotiating a successor to the Kyoto Protocol in Paris in 2015. By this time, UN climate talks were stalled by arguments between wealthy nations and developing countries about who was responsible for addressing climate change, and how much support should be provided to help poorer nations to deal with its impacts.

In the months before the Paris climate summit, then-Marshall Islands Foreign Minister, the late Tony De Brum, quietly coordinated a coalition of countries from across traditional negotiating divides at the UN.

This was genius strategy. During talks in Paris, membership of this “High Ambition Coalition” swelled to more than 100 countries, including the European Union and the United States, which proved vital for securing the first truly global climate agreement.

When then-US President Barack Obama met with island leaders in 2016, he noted “we could not have gotten a Paris Agreement without the incredible efforts and hard work of island nations”.

The High Ambition Coalition secured a shared temperature goal in the Paris Agreement, for countries to limit global warming to 1.5℃ above the long-term average. This was no arbitrary figure.

Scientific assessments have clarified 1.5℃ warming is a key threshold for the survival of vulnerable Pacific Island states and the ecosystems they depend on, such as coral reefs.

Warming above 1.5℃ threatens Pacific Island states and their coral reefs. Shutterstock

De Brum took a powerful slogan to Paris: “1.5 to stay alive”.

The Glasgow summit is the last chance to keep 1.5℃ of warming within reach. But Australia – almost alone among advanced economies – is taking to Glasgow the same 2030 target it took to Paris six years ago. This is despite the Paris Agreement requirement that nations ratchet up their emissions-reduction ambition every five years.

Australia is the largest member of the Pacific Islands Forum (an intergovernmental group that aims to promote the interests of countries and territories in the Pacific). But it’s also a major fossil fuel producer, putting it at odds with other Pacific countries on climate.

When Australia announced its 2030 target, De Brum said if the rest of the world followed suit:
the Great Barrier Reef would disappear […] so would the Marshall Islands and other vulnerable nations.
In the months before Paris, the late Tony De Brum – then Marshall Islands foreign minister – quietly coordinated a genius strategy. Mick Tsikas/AAP
 Influence at Glasgow

So what can we expect from Pacific leaders at the Glasgow summit? The signs so far suggest they will demand COP26 deliver an outcome to once and for all limit global warming to 1.5℃.

At pre-COP discussions in Milan earlier this month, vulnerable nations proposed countries be required to set new 2030 targets each year until 2025 – a move intended to bring global ambition into alignment with a 1.5℃ pathway.

COP26 president Alok Sharma says he wants the decision text from the summit to include a new agreement to keep 1.5℃ within reach.

This sets the stage for a showdown. Major powers like the US and the EU are set to work with large negotiating blocs, like the High Ambition Coalition, to heap pressure on major emitters that have yet to commit to serious 2030 ambition – including China, India, Saudi Arabia, Mexico and Australia.

The chair of the Pacific Islands Forum, Fiji’s Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama, has warned Pacific island countries “refuse to be the canary in the world’s coal mine.”

According to Bainimarama:
by the time leaders come to Glasgow, it has to be with immediate and transformative action […] come with commitments for serious cuts in emissions by 2030 – 50% or more. Come with commitments to become net-zero before 2050. Do not come with excuses. That time is past.
Links
at No comments:

(AU BBC) Climate Change: Why Australia Refuses To Give Up Coal

BBC - Frances Mao
Scott Morrison famously praised coal's value to Australia in a parliamentary debate on renewable energy in 2017.  ABC NEWS
 In a world racing to reduce pollution, Australia is a stark outlier.

It is one of the dirtiest countries per head of population and a massive global supplier of fossil fuels. Unusually for a rich nation, it also still burns coal for most of its electricity.

Australia's 2030 emissions target - a 26% cut on 2005 levels - is half the US and UK benchmarks.

Canberra has also resisted joining the two-thirds of countries who have pledged net zero emissions by 2050.

And instead of phasing out coal - the worst fossil fuel - it's committed to digging for more.

So it's no surprise that Australia is being viewed as a "bad guy" going into the COP26 global climate talks in Glasgow, analysts say.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison's government is under huge pressure to do more.

Loyalty to the industry

 Mining has helped drive Australia's economy for decades, and coal remains the country's second-biggest export.

Only Indonesia sells more coal than Australia globally.

The government often credits coal for much of the country's wealth, but many analysts argue this is overblown.

Coal exports totalled A$55bn (£29bn; $40bn) last year, but most of this wealth was kept by mining companies. Less than a tenth went to Australia directly - that's about 1% of national revenue.

The coal workforce of 40,000 is about half the size of McDonald's in Australia. But coal jobs do sustain some rural communities.

Australia has 99 operating coal mines, and ambitions to build more The mining sector has always wielded influence in Canberra. Getty Images
 
Though most voters want tougher climate action, some coal towns lie in swing constituencies that are key to winning elections.

The mining lobby has "distorted" much policy over the years, says Prof Samantha Hepburn, a climate law expert at Deakin University.

The current government dismantled Australia's emissions trading scheme in 2014, shortly after winning power in a campaign heavily backed by mining interests.

It's never again tried to put a price on carbon, or to restrict emissions from fossil fuel producers.

Instead it's provided extra support to coal. This includes:
  • Approving new mines and extensions: There are over 80 proposed projects including plant upgrades
  • Tax subsidies: About A$10bn went to fossil fuel companies last year alone
  • 'Clean coal' investments: Schemes such as carbon capture and storage, often criticised as ineffective

Chasing a shrinking market

 Australia argues coal will continue to generate national wealth for decades to come.

It talks up demand in Asia, particularly from industrialising economies.

China and India alone account for 64% of global coal consumption. Demand in Indonesia and Vietnam has also surged.

But analysts say there's no long-term market as countries race to meet emissions goals.

 
Australia's biggest coal buyers - Japan, South Korea and China - have all pledged net zero targets by mid-century.

Coal use has already plunged in North America and Europe. The G7 rich nations and China, as well as many banks, have committed to stop financing overseas coal projects.

"Australia knows the party is over. But the police haven't been called yet. So they'll continue to party on until they're stopped," says Richie Merzian, a climate expert at the Australia Institute.

Missing the green opportunity?

Australia could end its literally toxic relationship with coal fairly quickly, experts say.

Its economy is stable and well-diversified to absorb the loss of coal exports.

But Australia controversially sees liquified natural gas - another dirty fuel - as its next big domestic energy source.

The government has already pledged half a billion dollars to new gas basins and plants, defying global calls for an end to new fossil fuel projects.

This has frustrated those who say Australia should be investing to become a renewables superpower.

As one of the sunniest and windiest continents on Earth, Australia is "uniquely placed to benefit economically" from its abundant natural resources, says the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), an intergovernmental organisation.

Its industries are also well positioned to pivot to new export markets like green steel and aluminium.

Australia's lack of climate action is harming its own people, activists argue

Advocates say coal workers could instead mine for the rare minerals needed for batteries and magnets that will power renewable energy grids.

Canberra has put some money into renewables, but the majority has come from state governments and businesses.

Its allegiance to fossil fuels has scuppered progress, critics say.

The government has cut its renewables spending in recent years, and there is no current national clean energy target.

It has also withdrawn from the UN's Green Climate Fund, and tried to change one local fund's mandate so taxpayer money could go to coal projects instead.

"The rest of the world is accelerating past coal," says the Climate Council, a group of scientists.

"Australia can either choose to reap the opportunities of this transition, or be left poorer and less secure."

Links
at No comments: