(AU ABC) How Satellites Are Challenging Australia's Official Greenhouse Gas Emission Figures

ABC News - Steve Cannane

Queensland's Bowen Basin has a similar carbon footprint to countries like Austria, new research has shown.(Reuters: James Regan)

Key Points Methane is more potent than carbon dioxide It is responsible for more than 30 per cent of global warming to date Australia did not sign up to a COP26 commitment to reduce methane levels by 30 per cent by 2030

Inside a shared workspace for technology start-ups in south-west London, Christian Lelong has a bird's-eye view of some of the dirtiest secrets of Australia's mining industry.

Using satellite imagery from the European Space Agency combined with meteorological data and atmospheric models, Mr Lelong, the director of natural resources at geospatial analytics firm Kayrros, has been able to measure methane leaks from the fossil fuel industry around the world.

What he has found above Queensland's coal-rich Bowen Basin raises serious questions about whether Australia has been accurately reporting its greenhouse gas emissions to international bodies.

"We found that emissions for all the 50-odd mines in that basin in total add up to about 1.5 million tonnes of methane per year," Mr Lelong told the ABC.

According to federal government figures for the same period, only a third of that amount of methane was reported in the area.

If accurate, Kayrros's data portrays an extraordinary picture of the potential impact Australia's coal industry is having on the Earth's atmosphere.

A map provided by Kayrros shows the distribution of methane hotspots detected in Australia since 2019 and associated with coal mining. (Supplied: Kayrros/Sentinel-5P data)

"These numbers [in the Bowen Basin] are the equivalent of the total carbon footprint of a medium-sized European country like Austria or the Czech Republic," Mr Lelong said.

In the fight to keep global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius, methane matters. It is far more potent than carbon dioxide (CO2) and is responsible for around 30 per cent of global warming to date.

Typically, methane leaks occur from coal mines, oil and gas wells and natural gas pipelines.

Reducing these leaks helps buy the planet time to get other greenhouse gas emissions under control and is one of the easiest ways to reduce emissions.

At the global climate change summit COP26, over 100 nations signed a pledge to reduce methane levels by 30 per cent by 2030. 

Australia's government did not sign the agreement, and the opposition Labor party has no plans to sign up to the pledge if it wins at the next election.


New data suggests Australia could be underreporting methane gas emissions from coal mines. 3min 33sec

The Australian government doesn't want Christian Lelong's help

Mr Lelong knows the Australian mining industry well

He worked for BHP for seven years before joining Goldman Sachs as a commodities analyst. Now he wants to help the Australian energy sector reduce its methane emissions.

Christian Lelong is the director of natural resources at geospatial analytics firm Kayrros. (ABC News: Dan Loh)

He has approached the federal government through the Department of Energy and offered to share his company's knowledge and expertise. That offer has not been taken up.

Greens environment spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young met with Mr Lelong at COP26 in Glasgow and cannot understand why Australian officials are not jumping at the chance to use the technology.

"The Prime Minister says that they want a technology solution to climate change," Senator Hanson-Young said.

"Well, here we have incredible data satellite technology.

"We could pinpoint exactly where these leaks of pollution are happening and hold the companies accountable if he was just willing to listen.”

When the ABC approached Energy Minister Angus Taylor for comment, his office referred the matter to the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources.

A spokesperson for the department said: "The Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources is developing a National Greenhouse Account Methane Monitoring System using Sentinel data to assess the implications of methane releases for the preparation of Australia's next National Greenhouse Accounts and is not looking for data analytic services from London."

The spokesperson also said that "the department believes, like the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change], that it is premature to use the satellite data to quantify emissions directly".

Mr Lelong disputed that and said that view was expressed in the IPCC's 2019 report before it had evaluated modern satellites.

Australia snubs pledge
to cut methane emissions

Australia snubs one of the key global actions to come out of the UN climate change conference by bowing out of an international pledge to reduce methane emissions. Read more

"Now we have a new generation of satellites, it changes everything," he said.

"They are much more accurate and precise."

However, the Department of Energy insists the Kayrros data "has not yet been well-verified by ground stations or more targeted studies" and that its approach "lacks transparency ... and would not be acceptable under the Paris Agreement".

That has not stopped the UN's new International Methane Emissions Observatory from working with Kayrros.

It told the ABC it was collaborating with the company and planned to use its tools and analytics in the coming months.

Dutch scientists raise further doubts about Australian emissions reporting 

A peer-reviewed paper published this week by a group of Dutch scientists raises similar concerns about Australia's publicly released greenhouse gas figures.

It analysed data from satellite imagery of six coal mines in the Bowen Basin and found they were emitting much more methane than would be expected from what Australia is reporting.

Ilse Aben, who was the lead researcher on the paper, told the ABC that by studying emissions from the Hail Creek mine, run by Glencore, you could see that the figures did not add up.

Hail Creek coal mine lies in the heart of coal country in Queensland's Bowen Basin, 125 kilometres south-west of Mackay. (ABC News: Louisa Rebgetz)

"For Hail Creek, which is a surface mine, we found that it's actually responsible for roughly 20 per cent of the methane emissions, as reported by Australia for the total of all coal mines," she said.

"It is one surface mine and there are 73 surface mines in Australia.

“If this one mine already gives a 20 per cent contribution, then it is unlikely that the total is right."

A spokesperson for Glencore said in a statement: "It is not credible that a single open cut coal operation is responsible for 20 per cent of the industry's total annual methane emissions."

"Glencore reports emissions in accordance with the Australian National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGERS) regulatory measurement criteria. 

"The emissions from our Bowen Basin operations are accounted for in Glencore’s robust climate change targets. These targets include a 15 per cent reduction in total (including Scope 3) emissions by 2026; a 50 per cent reduction in total emissions by 2035 and an ambition to be a net zero total emissions company by 2050."

A satellite measure of methane concentrations in the Bowen Basin, with three identifiable plumes and a zoom in (right) on coal mines located upwind of these plumes. (Supplied: Kayrros/Sentinel-5P data)

Bryce Kelly from the University of NSW, who has led research teams mapping emissions from coal mines, said the Dutch study had undergone extensive peer review.

"There is merit in the results," Dr Kelly said.

"Kayrros's independent studies further support that there are methane anomalies above what would be expected for the region based on reported emissions.

"We now need ground and airborne studies to verify the satellite observations." 

Professor Aben said that while she had not seen Kayrros's results, they had found the emissions from six mines in the area were two times higher than was reported by the mining companies.

"So I'm not totally surprised … it's certainly not contradicting each other," she said.

Industry-supplied figures questioned

Currently, the data relied on by the federal government for its Greenhouse Gas Inventory is provided by mining companies which can then be subject to auditing and review.

The ABC asked BHP and Anglo American, two of the largest coal miners in the area, how they measured methane levels in the Bowen Basin. Neither company provided details.

In a statement, a spokesperson for Anglo American said: "We have invested significantly in methane capture infrastructure, generating enough electricity to power 90,000 Queensland homes every year, and reducing our emissions by about 5 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent per annum."

"We are actively working on technology solutions to further reduce methane emissions in our underground metallurgical coal mines as part of our commitment to operate carbon-neutral mines by 2040."

A spokesperson for BHP said: "BHP Mitsubishi Alliance estimates and publicly reports emissions from its Australian operations in accordance with the rigorous requirements of the National Greenhouse and Energy Act."

Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young said the government should be doing more to measure methane emissions in Australia. (ABC News: Dan Loh)

Senator Hanson-Young questioned whether industry figures supplied to the government were accurate.

"This is just more of how the Morrison government behaves with the fossil fuel industry, hand-in-glove dismiss the independent advice, dismiss the independent data and take the data and the word of the fossil fuel industry," she said.

"I know who I believe."

Links

• Methane Emissions from Super-emitting Coal Mines in Australia quantified using TROPOMI Satellite Observations (pdf)
• Australia refuses to join global pledge led by US and EU to cut methane emissions
• Methane emissions are driving climate change. Here’s how to reduce them.
• Australia joins China, Russia, India and Iran in refusing to join global pledge to cut methane emissions
• Methane emissions higher than earlier estimates in CSG region
• Nations reach climate deal at COP26 after compromise on coal

(Business Insider) Green Energy Is Rapidly Nearing A Turning Point. To Combat Climate Change, Our Leaders Need To Point To A Cleaner, Cheaper Tomorrow.

Business Insider Australia - Paul Constant

Environmental activists protest climate change on Indigenous Peoples Day, outside the White House in October. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

For decades, our conversation about climate change has been stunted by mixed signals.

Our elected leaders’ speeches aim high, with lofty talk about coming together to avert calamity, but their policies fail to address the scale of the crisis.

Now, with most parts of the country regularly experiencing extreme weather events, nearly two-thirds of Americans believe the government should do more to combat climate change — but world leaders still failed to take dramatic action to limit the global rise of temperatures at the COP26 climate conference convened by the United Nations this fall.

On the latest episode of Pitchfork Economics, two professors at the Institute of New Economics at Oxford University, Erick Beinhocker and Doyne Farmer, join Nick Hanauer to address the flaws in the way we discuss the problems of, and solutions to, climate change.

“We’ve had the wrong economic ideas about how climate change is framed,” Beinhocker explains.

As an example of this flawed thinking, he cites the the Nobel Prize-winning work of Yale economist William Nordhaus, which has warned since the 1990s “that it’s going to be very expensive and costly to transition from our fossil fuel economy to a clean energy economy, but those costs have to be weighed against the benefits of avoiding an ecological collapse and potential mass extinction event.”

Nordhaus’s models have helped frame the conversation about climate change as a negative one. We’ve been told since the dawn of the modern environmental movement in the 1990s that saving the planet will cost us all a great deal in profits, convenience, and quality of life.

Environmental advocacy groups often explain their policies in terms of what ordinary people will have to give up, both financially and in terms of convenience, in order to save the planet.

New research indicates that this punitive, eat-your-spinach style of thinking may be completely wrong.

“We think that converting to renewables, and doing so reasonably quickly within a span of about 20 years, is going to save the world money,” Farmer says. “It’s going to make energy cheaper for us, as well as evading climate change.”

Farmer participates in one of the two major academic groups researching rates of technological advancement, and the indicators point to a fast-growing future for affordable green energy.

While green energy keeps getting cheaper, fossil fuels and their attendant costs have remained basically flat for nearly a century and a half.

If solar, wind, and hydrogen power continue to stay on their current development path for another decade or two, and if battery storage capacity continues to improve as well, green energy will overtake fossil fuels to become the world’s dominant power source.

“We’re going to see energy cheaper than it’s ever been” in the history of the world, Farmer predicts.

“We still have a long way to go,” Beinhocker warns. “Only about 20 percent of global energy is from non-fossil fuels today, and 80 percent from fossil fuels. But the growth [of green energy] has been extraordinary.”

Beinhocker says that renewable energy capacity increased by 45 percent in 2020, making it “the only energy source to actually grow during the pandemic, and 90 percent of new power additions in the world now in the electrical sector are from renewables.”

The global switch to green energy is nearing “a tipping point,” he says, “but it’s a race against the clock.”

This research, though, should mark a significant change in the conversation about climate change.

Rather than focusing on punitive policies which make fuel more expensive for the average American, our leaders should instead be investing deeply into research to advance cheap clean technologies, as well as speeding up the construction of green infrastructure, making the adoption of clean fuels more desirable.

As we’ve seen in increased electric vehicle adoption rates around the world, consumers are happy to make the switch to a clean alternative, when they’re presented with an affordable, convenient option.

The evidence is clear: it’s time for the environmental conversation in America to become an additive, positive one, rather than a negative story of sacrifice and punishment.

When it comes to the green economy, it’s no longer about saying no to Exxon; it’s about saying yes to building a faster track to a cleaner, cheaper future for the whole human race.

Links

• 6 takeaways from the U.N. climate conference
• We're Finally Catching a Break in the Climate Fight
• Empirically grounded technology forecasts and the energy transition (pdf)
• Are We on the Brink of an Electric Vehicle Boom? Only with More Action
• Renewable Energy: A key climate solution
• Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation

(AU ABC) Promising Signs Of New Life On Australia's Largest Oceanic Reef, Despite Frequent Heat Stress

ABC News - Tyne Logan

Researchers have observed promising signs of new life on Scott Reef, five years after the global mass bleaching event of 2016. (Supplied: AIMS Shannon Duffy)

Key Points Scientists say Scott Reef is slowly recovering after the 2016 mass bleaching event They have concerns about frequent heatwaves impeding the overall recovery of the reef The findings reflect a pattern around the country

A research trip to Australia's largest oceanic reef system has shown promising signs of new life, following the 2016 mass bleaching event, which impacted coral reefs all over the globe.

But unlike mass bleaching events of the past, scientists are concerned Scott Reef is facing a barrier to its recovery.

Coral ecology research scientist James Gilmour, from the Australian Institute of Marine Science, said repeated, smaller marine heatwaves since the 2016 event were compounding bleaching impacts.

"Unfortunately since 2016 we've seen additional heat stress in 2017, 2019 and 2020," he said.

"We're getting this recurrent heating and stress to the reefs which obviously are going to impede its recovery.

"We see this overlying resilience, but the effects of ongoing heat stress impeding that."

Scott Reef is located in the Timor Sea and consists of three separate reef structures. (Supplied: AIMS Luke Thomas)

Located 200 kilometres to the north-west of Broome, the three reefs are incredibly isolated, a trait Dr Gilmour said made them a good case study in pinpointing the impacts of climate change on Australian reefs.

"Because of its isolation, it doesn't have these additional pressures, such as fishing pressure or the pollution pressure that you see on other reefs that can confound our inferences about what is happening from climate change and coral bleaching," he said.

Case study for climate change impacts

The observations at Scott Reef reflect a dire pattern emerging not only in Australia but around the world.

A major global analysis of coral reefs, released in October, found about 14 per cent of the world's coral, the equivalent of more than all living coral in Australia, had been lost in less than a decade.

It found the main cause of the decline was "recurring large scale coral bleaching events" that were "preventing coral from recovering".

But the analysis also found there was hope, with some corals showing strong, and at times surprising resistance to ongoing heat stress.

Dr James Gilmour said some corals were showing impressive signs of recovery, despite recurring heat stress. (Supplied: AIMS)

University of Western Australia and AIMS research associate Luke Thomas said this was observed on Scott Reef too.

"Considering this reef has gone through three serious bleaching events in the last 20 years, it's just been hammered and hammered over and over... the fact that there's any coral left is a remarkable story and a testament of the system," he said.

Making the most of heat-tolerant corals

Dr Thomas said researchers were trying to utilise this surprising resilience.

"One way is if we know this pocket of reef houses heat resistance corals, let's protect them, let's avoid anchor damage or overfishing," he said.

He said a second way was to breed tolerant coral populations for restoration.

"So if we want to restore a degraded section of reef, we don't want to just replace those corals with ones that will bleach and die the next heatwave," he said.

"We want to replace them with much more fit, tougher individuals.

"So we can target this pocket of heat resistance corals as a broodstock, or a supply for those reefs."

Scientists conducted heat tolerance research while at the Scott Reefs. (Supplied: AIMS Luke Thomas)

The science and restoration work on Scott Reef is similar to that happening on the Great Barrier Reef, with the government kicking in half a billion dollars in 2018 to help deal with the problems facing the Great Barrier Reef.

Glasgow climate talks 'discouraging'

The management and restoration work of corals is crucial to saving reef systems in the future, researchers say, but it comes second to the need to cut down carbon emissions.

James Cook University marine biologist Jodie Rummer said Australia left "a lot to be answered for" after the COP26 conference in Glasgow.

"There was a clear message over the past five years of what increased emissions and climate change have been doing to Australia, let alone the entire world, and we weren't able to stand up to do anything about it."

Marine Biologist Dr Jodie Rummer said the recent climate conference in Glasgow left a lot to be answered for in terms of cutting Australia's carbon emissions. (ABC: Travis Mead)

Dr Rummer said the federal government priorities were wrong.

"Clean economic recovery is win win for Australia," she said.

"This is what needs to be the priority for Australia but for some reason Australia is still prioritising coal, gas and oil exploration.

"This goes in complete conflict with Australia's national priority of protecting people, our ecosystems and natural spaces."

Links

• Great Barrier Reef in 'recovery window' after year without major heatwaves, cyclone disturbances
• New study reveals extent of coral bleaching worldwide, with WA reefs suffering at alarming rate
• (Washington Post) Photos Show Vast Coral Spawning Event In Great Barrier Reef, Giving Divers Hope For Climate Change Recovery
• (USA TIME) UNESCO Says Australia's Great Barrier Reef Isn't In Danger Yet. Many Environmentalists And Divers Disagree
• (AU The Conversation) Not Declaring The Great Barrier Reef As ‘In Danger’ Only Postpones The Inevitable
• (AU SBS) Australia Accused Of ‘Censoring Science’ After Great Barrier Reef Avoids World Heritage ‘In Danger’ Listing
• (AU ABC) Coral Reefs Across The World 'In Danger' As Scientists Note Slowing Calcification
• It Might Be The World’s Biggest Ocean, But The Mighty Pacific Is In Peril
• A Race Against Time To Rescue A Reef From Climate Change

(AU AFR) Australia Tops Climate Litigation List

AFR - Michael Pelly

Australia has more climate change litigation per capita than any other nation and 2021 has been a breakout year for cases based on human rights concerns, according to an NSW Law Society study.

The society, the professional body for more than 30,000 solicitors, notes in a new briefing paper that Australia is second only to the United States for the number of climate change cases since 1993. At 121 cases, its total is five times that of Canada.

“Significant shift”: NSW Law Society president Juliana Warner

When the statistics – taken from the Climate Change Laws of the World database run by the UK-based Grantham Institute on October 30 – are adjusted for population, Australia is ahead of New Zealand and the US.

The society noted Australia has 121 climate cases (4.7 per million), Britain 77 (1.15 per million), European Union 56 (0.12), Canada 25 (0.65 per million) and New Zealand 25 (4.1). The latest figure for the US is 1343 cases (4.1 per million).

Climate change cases are defined as those that “raise material issues of law or fact relating to climate change mitigation, adaptation, or the science of climate change ... before a range of administrative, judicial, and other adjudicatory bodies”.

The paper cites comments by King & Wood Mallesons partner Daisy Mallett that Australia is a “particularly fertile testing ground for public interest litigation on climate change, given its sophisticated and independent legal institutions, a government policy supporting heavy industry, and the severe climate change impacts in the region”.

The first climate case was Greenpeace v Redbank Power in 1994, when the NSW Land and Environment Court ruled a new power station in the Hunter Valley could proceed, subject to several mitigation conditions.

Broader focus

The paper says cases “now often have a broader focus on holding companies and governments to account for their actions, or inactions, related to climate change”.

It predicts greenwashing claims – against those that trumpet eco-friendly credentials – “are likely to continue in coming years and focus on individual directors as well as corporate entities”.

New ground was broken in 2021, when 25 landholders and conservationists
known as The Bimblebox Alliance cited human rights law as they challenged an application by Clive Palmer’s Waratah Coal to develop a thermal coal mine in the Galilee Basin.

Waratah objected but the Land Court of Queensland said it did have jurisdiction because of the state’s Human Rights Act. There will be a hearing in February.

‘Rights turn’

The paper said the case was part of a “rights turn” in which litigants in Australia, Europe, the Philippines, South Africa, Pakistan and the Netherlands are arguing that climate change is a threat to human rights such as the right to life, health and a healthy environment.

The paper noted a crucial hurdle for litigants - “there is no freestanding right to a clean and healthy environment under core international human rights instruments, although over 100 national constitutions do now include such a right”.

Federal Court judge Mordy Bromberg also ruled in July that Minister for the Environment Sussan Ley had a duty to take reasonable care to protect children from the effects of climate change. An appeal has been heard.

NSW Law Society president Juliana Warner said climate change was “already having a significant impact on the economy, businesses, investor groups and the community”.

“Over the course of this year, there has been a really significant shift in the community about climate change and the urgent action which must be taken.”

Links

• Court gives student OK to sue government over climate disclosure
• (AU SMH) Can Court Cases, Boardroom Takeovers And Protests Save The Planet?
• (AU AFR) Court Gives Student OK To Sue Government Over Climate Disclosure
• (AU Canberra Times) Climate Warriors Counting Their Legal Wins
• Top judge urges lawyers to take stand on climate change
• Climate change excuses won't wash in court, say lawyers
• Senior environment judge Brian Preston tips wave of climate change litigation
• Climate change lawsuits are on the rise
• Lethal Heating: Doctrine of Public Trust

(AU Climate Council) Carbon Emissions Creep Down In Australia As Global Warming Accelerates

Climate Council

THE RACE IS ON to respond to accelerating climate change with rapid and deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions this decade, but the latest federal government data shows Australia’s pollution is only creeping down.

Analysis by the Climate Council shows that Australia should be cutting its emissions 21 times faster than we are to play our part in avoiding catastrophic climate change, and that

• Year on year, emissions were down (by 2.1 percent), with COVID-19 lockdowns and interstate travel restrictions a large reason for this.
• States, territories and households solar installations are driving down emissions in the electricity sector (by 4.5 percent since the previous year) in spite of little or no support from the federal government.
• Since this federal government came to power in 2013, emissions other than land clearing have fallen by a paltry 2.4 percent – or one third of a percent per year – with a sizable share of this due to the global pandemic.

Climate Council Senior Researcher Tim Baxter: “Today’s quarterly emissions data reveals that our sluggish and inadequate national response continues. We know from painful, recent experience throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, that delaying a response or being slow to act carries serious consequences. We can’t afford to go slow on this.”

“The time for leaning on the achievements of others is long since past. We need a federal government willing to step up on emissions reductions and take charge with real policy, not wish lists,” he said.

The current La Niña is driving storms, extreme rainfall and flooding in parts of the country – a stark contrast to the Black Summer bushfires that scorched Australia in 2019/2020 – but nonetheless amplified by accelerating climate change.

“There is no hiding the fact that the federal government will make this problem worse via its dangerous National Gas Infrastructure Plan. Expanding and opening up new massive fossil fuel basins will only see Australia’s emissions increase at a time when the rest of the world is shifting away from coal, oil and gas,” said Mr Baxter.

“Following the pathway that underpins the federal government’s new gas plan will put us on track for a world that is a catastrophic 3.5 degrees hotter. This is an unthinkable future,” he said.

The Climate Council recommends Australia aims for a 75 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2030. This would equate to emissions cuts occurring 21 times faster than what the federal government is doing.

“Addressing the climate crisis is a race. Communities across Australia recognise it’s a race because they’re dealing with worsening extreme weather, like the Black Summer bushfires. Businesses recognise it’s a race because there are economic consequences in acting slowly, but many opportunities to cash in on if we do step up. Countries all over the world are racing towards net zero, but Australia’s response remains woefully inadequate. That should be of huge concern to every Australian,” said Mr Baxter.

All countries that recently signed up to the Glasgow Climate Pact but are yet to increase the ambition of their 2030 targets – including Australia – are required to do so by November at the latest.

Links

• Government’s gas investment framework ‘sets fire’ to COP26 agreement
• Woodside’s climate-wrecking new gas project is disastrous and irresponsible: Climate Council
• Downward Spiral: Energy Regulator Sounds Alarm on Gas
• COP26 ends with stark warning: step up on emission cuts this decade Aus, or pay the price
• Federal Government’s Net Zero by 2050 modelling fails to meet own goal
• COP26 Calls Time on Coal, but Aus Stuck in Dark Ages
• Nothing under the kilt: PM presents climate con to the world at COP26

(AU The Guardian) Labor’s Climate Plan Can’t Fix 12 Years Of Broken Politics – But It Could Be The Catalyst Australia Needs

The Guardian - Adam Morton, Climate and Environment Editor

With parts of the business community ready to move on emissions, the opposition’s modest goal could be easily met – or surpassed

Anthony Albanese says the Labor party’s climate policy will create jobs and cut power bills, while boosting renewable energy. Photograph: Dean Lewins/AAP

Labor’s new climate policy, released on Friday afternoon at the very end of the parliamentary year, is impossible to assess without holding it up against 12-plus years of broken Australian climate politics – but let’s give it a try.

Yes, Labor has lost a string of elections at which it promised to do more than the Coalition on climate and was rewarded with lies and misinformation. Attention will probably quickly turn to whether the opposition’s plan for 2022 is electorally viable. Fair enough.

But we should start at first principles: is the policy – called Powering Australia – up to the task of addressing the climate crisis? And could it set up Australia to thrive in a future that no longer relies on fossil fuels?

At first blush, the short answers are (1) no, not on this alone and (2) possibly.

Anthony Albanese’s plan is aimed at hitting a 2030 emissions target while expanding industries that could ultimately deliver net zero emissions by 2050. Unlike the Coalition, it does not pretend to map a path to hitting that goal mid-century.

The headline emissions goal – a 43% cut by 2030 compared with the 2005 levels – will be described by some as a stretch, and was quickly attacked by Scott Morrison as bad news for coal regions and manufacturing. But the plan tells a different story.

In reality, it’s a modest goal when measured against what would happen anyway, while still being more ambitious than the Coalition’s “technology will save us” approach. Which, of course, is the point.

Anthony Albanese commits Labor to emissions reduction target of 43% by 2030. Read more

It falls well short of what scientists have found Australia should be doing if the world is to limit global heating to 2C above pre-industrial levels, let alone the 1.5C goal backed by more than 190 countries in the recent Glasgow climate pact.

Several studies have suggested Australia should be making at least a 50% reduction this decade, and almost certainly substantially more, to play its part in tackling the crisis.

ClimateWorks Australia found rapid, deep cuts can be achieved using technology that is mature and available.

This is now widely accepted in significant parts of the business community. Bizarrely, given the long history of industry running scare campaigns against climate policies, the country’s major business groups now want governments to make deeper cuts in emissions than either major party proposes.

Albanese and his climate change spokesperson, Chris Bowen, emphasised their plan was built on official government projections that the country will make at least a 30% cut even without introducing any new policies. Separate assessments have found state government action – particularly in the biggest states, New South Wales and Victoria – are likely to lift that to somewhere in the mid-to-high 30s if delivered as promised.

It tells us that, even before we get into the details, Labor’s goal is more than achievable, and should be seen as a floor to what’s possible.

Albanese’s central claim is that the policy will create jobs – it estimates 64,000 direct and 540,000 indirect – and cut power bills while boosting renewable energy.

The central driver is a previously announced off-budget $20bn “re-wiring the nation corporation” charged with upgrading the electricity grid. Bringing forward planned new transmission links is meant to allow a faster influx of large-scale solar, wind and batteries in regional renewable energy zones. It is also committing $300m to developing community batteries and shared “solar banks” for households and businesses who can not put panels on their roofs.


Anthony Albanese announces Labor's 2030 emissions target. 1min 46sec

The energy and climate firm RepuTex, which modelled Labor’s policy, estimates it will lead to renewable energy providing 82% of electricity by 2030, up from 68% on the current trajectory. The rise in cheap clean energy is forecast to, on average, cut power bills by $275 by 2025.

Implausibly, Labor’s plan claims the accelerated rollout of renewable energy will not lead to the early closure of ageing coal-fired power plants, despite experts having already forecast that some could shut earlier than scheduled. The idea that coal power and its jobs will continue when its electricity is no longer needed is remarkably hard to shake in Canberra, if not elsewhere.

The biggest new element on Friday – or revamped old element, given it was part of Labor’s abandoned 2019 policy – is that Albanese and Bowen plan to use the Coalition’s safeguard mechanism to cut emissions at big industrial sites.

The safeguard mechanism was introduced under Tony Abbott with a promise it would put a limit on industrial emissions. In practice, it has failed – companies have consistently been allowed to increase their carbon pollution without penalty, and industrial emissions are up 17% since 2005 and 7% since the safeguard began in 2016. Both industry representatives and climate activists believe it has made the scheme a waste of time.

Greg Hunt, the scheme’s architect when environment minister, planned for emissions limits under the safeguard to eventually tighten, but the Coalition ultimately rejected forcing companies to take action. Labor is now promising to do what Hunt always intended by working with business to cut industrial greenhouse gases by 5m tonnes – about 1% of Australia’s total emissions – a year from 2023.

Combined with direct funding from business from a new $15bn national reconstruction fund, which would provide low-cost financing to industry to embrace clean solutions, the modelling suggests this will cut emissions by up to 48m tonnes a year by 2030.

Bowen said on Friday he expected about 50% of the cuts through the safeguard to come through use of improved technology, the rest from companies paying for carbon offsets.

Labor has some political cover here. It is not only using an existing Coalition policy, but has adopted a model released by the Business Council of Australia in October. The government was quick to attack it anyway, describing it as a “sneaky new carbon tax”.

Albanese is promising much less in the short-term to cut emissions from transport, which was a major area of growth in carbon pollution growth before the Covid-19 lockdowns.

He has dropped Labor’s 2019 commitment of a vehicle emissions standard requiring average tailpipe emissions to be cut over time.

 It is further evidence that Morrison’s false claim before the last election that the ALP planned to “end the weekend” by forcing people to drive EVs continues to have an impact.

‘Vandals’: Victoria, Queensland fume over federal climate intervention. Read more

Instead, Labor is focusing on tax breaks for low-emissions cars. Along with the rollout of charging infrastructure, the modelling suggests this will help lead to 89% of new car sales and 15% of all vehicles being EVs by 2030.

These policies add up to a promise of a smaller cut in emissions by 2030 than Labor was promising under Bill Shorten less than three years ago, when its target was a 45% reduction.

From one perspective, this is remarkable, given the global urgency for action has only increased in the past two years. From another, Labor has made a more ambitious emissions pledge than many expected, given the internal concern about another News Corp-backed scare campaign.

Asked on Friday for his response to those who say his policy falls short of what climate science demands, Albanese argued the new target was roughly the same as Canada’s – another fossil fuel economy – and suggested the ALP had acted responsibly by first designing its policies and then paying for independent modelling to calculate what they would deliver.

Few would argue it is how you would design a climate policy if starting from scratch.

What is routinely described as the most efficient way ahead – a well-designed carbon price – remains off-the-table since the Coalition repealed a functioning scheme in 2014. And there is no commitment to cut fossil fuel subsidies or curb the government-funded expansion of the gas industry.

Perhaps the major thing in Labor’s favour if it wins next year’s election is that significant parts of the business and investment community are now ready to move in a way they haven’t been before.

People may be surprised how quickly a 43% emissions reduction target could be met, or surpassed, under a government more inclined to back that push.

Links

• View from The Hill: Albanese’s 43% emissions reduction target by 2030 has some political cover
• Labor’s 2030 climate target betters the Morrison government, but Australia must go much further, much faster
• Carbon cuts: ALP climate policy targets big emitters
• ALP net-zero plan sensible, workable: business
• As the world surges ahead on electric vehicle policy, the Morrison government's new strategy leaves Australia idling in the garage
• COP26 left the world with a climate to-do list: Here are 5 things to watch for in 2022

(AU The Guardian) Anthony Albanese Commits Labor To Emissions Reduction Target Of 43% By 2030

The Guardian - Katharine Murphy

In opposition leader’s most significant policy announcement to date, Albanese also pledges to boost renewables share of grid to 82%


Anthony Albanese announces Labor's 2030 emissions target. 1min 46sec

Anthony Albanese will set an emissions reduction target of 43% by 2030 and boost the share of renewables in the national electricity market to 82% if Labor wins the coming federal election.

The ALP leader has unveiled Labor’s most electorally risky policy commitment since the 2019 election defeat, declaring a more ambitious target would spur $76bn in investment and reduce average annual household power bills by $275 in 2025 and $378 in 2030.

Guardian Australia revealed on Friday the shadow cabinet had signed off on a 43% target, which is lower than the 45% medium term target Labor promised at the 2019 election, but higher than the Morrison government’s Abbott-era commitment of a 26-28% cut on 2005 levels.

The primary mechanism Labor will use to reduce emissions faster than current projections will be the Coalition’s existing safeguard mechanism. Improvements to that scheme are expected to deliver emissions reductions of 213Mt by 2030.

‘Vandals’: Victoria, Queensland fume over federal climate intervention.  Read more

Ahead of the Cop26 summit in Glasgow, the Business Council of Australia urged the Morrison government to overhaul the existing safeguard mechanism, including reducing baselines to drive an orderly transition to net zero by 2050.

The government rejected that proposal, but Labor has adopted it as a core component of its policy.

The safeguard mechanism currently applies to 215 of Australia’s heaviest polluters – businesses that emit more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide or equivalent greenhouse gasses.

The shadow climate change minister, Chris Bowen, said Labor would overhaul the scheme but not extend coverage to new entities – and businesses will also be permitted to use offsets to achieve their emissions reductions.

Bowen said Labor would not subject any Australian trade-exposed business to any more onerous climate regulation than their international competitors.

In electricity, Labor will significantly upgrade transmission infrastructure to hasten the transition to renewables, invest in solar banks and install 400 community batteries.

These measures are projected to see renewables make up 82% of power generation in Australia’s national electricity market by 2030, instead of 68% under current projections.

Albanese has dumped a 2019 pledge to introduce more efficient fuel standards to reduce transport emissions – a policy the Coalition falsely badged as a “war on the weekend”.

But Labor will remove import tariffs and the fringe benefits tax from electric cars below the luxury car tax threshold to drive consumer take-up of electric vehicles, and will develop a more comprehensive EV strategy if it wins in 2022.

The policy commitments were accompanied by modelling by market analysts Reputex. The analysis says Labor’s transition plan will generate 604,000 direct and indirect jobs compared to a business-as-usual scenario, include $24bn in new public investment, and drive 440Mt of emissions reductions between 2023 and 2030.

The Morrison government limbered up for another scare campaign on the higher 2030 target before the policy was unveiled.

Scott Morrison – who attempted unsuccessfully to boost his own 2030 target before being thwarted by the National party – declared on Friday that Labor’s 43% target was not a “safe” transition for workers in the Hunter Valley, or in the Queensland regional city of Gladstone, or for manufacturing jobs.

Global push for green steel could hit Australia’s $150bn iron ore exports if miners don’t adapt, report finds.  Read more

While the major parties now agree Australia should reach net zero emissions by 2050, and current emissions projections indicate Australia will cut emissions by 35% by 2030, the Coalition will continue to use Labor’s higher medium-term ambition as a political weapon in seats in Queensland and regional New South Wales.

Bowen told reporters in Canberra on Friday he expected the Coalition to lie about Labor’s policy.

“These guys are liars, and they will continue to lie,” he said.

“We are up for a good strong debate about Australia’s future”.

Albanese said the pre-emptive strike showed the prime minister will just “attack anything”. He said it suggested the government was “out of puff”.

“We see a government that doesn’t have a plan for today, let alone any concept of a vision for tomorrow,” the Labor leader said.

Labor’s policy was largely welcomed by stakeholders. The Business Council of Australia said it was “sensible and workable”. The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry said it was “encouraging to see updated 2030 targets that push the frame towards more ambitious action on climate change”.

The Climate Council welcomed the target but urged Labor to strengthen ambition.

“Right now, our country is the worst-performing of all developed countries when it comes to cutting greenhouse gas emissions and moving beyond fossil fuels like coal, oil and gas,” said Climate Council chief executive Amanda McKenzie.

“Labor’s plan is a major improvement, but it will need to be strengthened significantly to genuinely tackle climate change,” she said.

That sentiment was echoed by progressive think tank the Australia Institute. “An increased 2030 target is a good first step, however, the world has moved beyond first steps,” said Richie Merzian, climate and energy program director at the Australia Institute.

“Australia needs a long-term plan to end fossil fuels.”

A number of countries increased the ambition of their 2030 targets in the lead up to Cop26. Australia was the only developed country not to adjust its 2030 commitment ahead of the Glasgow conference.

Labor’s pre-election commitment compares with 40% in South Korea, 40-45% in Canada, 50-52% in the United States, and 46-50% in Japan.

Links

• Labor sets 43 per cent emissions reduction target for 2030
• Labor launches election fight over climate change and household costs
• 'The more you cut, the better': experts measure up Labor's emissions reduction policy
• Labor to dump fuel emissions plan in next step on climate
• Business welcomes a workable plan to reach net zero
• Albanese differentiates from Morrison on climate policy
• Labor offers a far more ambitious climate plan - AFR