Australia Approved Coalmine Because It Isn't A 'Neo-Colonialist' Power, Greg Hunt Claims

The Guardian - Lenore Taylor

Environment minister defends approval of Indian company Adani’s $16bn Carmichael mine, saying ‘poorest should be able to make their own decisions’

Abbot Point, surrounded by wetlands and coral reefs, would become the world’s largest coal port should the Carmichael mine and the associated port expansion go ahead. Photograph: Tom Jefferson/Greenpeace

The Australian government approved Adani’s controversial $16bn Carmichael coalmine in Queensland because it was not a “neo-colonialist”power that tried to tell poor countries what to do, environment minister Greg Hunt has told a side event at the Paris climate summit.
Hunt was speaking about the coalition’s Direct Action policy at an OECD event on different climate policies when he was challenged by a questioner about why the government had approved the Adani mine given the huge quantity of emissions its coal would create.
“This is not an Australian government project, it is a private sector firm from India and ... I thought we were over neocolonial moment where the wealthy decide what happens to the poor,” Hunt countered.
“I hope you would agree the poorest countries should be able to decide their own energy future. I am not a neo-colonialist. I think the poorest should be able to make their own decisions,” he said.
And he said the federal environment law allowed him to judge projects according to strict criteria, but greenhouse emissions weren’t one of them.
“It is not our project, there is no federal money, the federal government of Australia acts as a judge not as an advocate and I think it is very important that individual countries set their targets and make their own decisions,” he said.
Conservation groups have asked the federal court to overturn the Hunt’s approval Carmichael because he did not take into account the impact on the Great Barrier Reef of the greenhouse gases emitted when the coal is burned.
A recent report designed to highlight the quantity of emissions that would be created by the coal from the mine found that it would create annual emissions similar to those from countries like Malaysia and Austria and more emissions than New York City.
Others on the panel, including the head of the renewable energy division of the International Energy Agency, Paolo Frankl, said “reverse auctions” like Australia’s Direct Action scheme were proving very efficient around the world, especially in financing renewable energy projects. (Australia’s scheme has not been used for this purpose, but has mainly financed land use, waste and energy efficiency projects.) But he said a carbon price was usually also needed to drive a long term price signal.
Asked if reverse auctions could be used on their own to give business the long term price signals, Frankl said “it can but it would not be very useful. If you look at Brazil and Australia that is exactly what they are doing now, but in addition to that there should be a carbon price which could give an additional signal ... we need some long term price signal but also some short term signals.”
Hunt is leading Australia’s delegation in the first week of the two-week Paris climate summit which aims to reach an agreement to progressively increase the ambition of global efforts to reduce greenhouse gases out to 2030.
The foreign minister, Julie Bishop, will take over the negotiating lead next weekend. The talks began in earnest on Tuesday after a day of speeches by 150 world leaders designed to give them purpose and momentum.
Over the two weeks delegates will seek to overcome deep divisions over issues including whether rich and poor countries must face the same rules for reporting and checking their emission reductions and the amount of financing developed countries will provide to help poor nations reduce their emissions and deal with the impact of climate change.

Links

• Coal from Carmichael mine 'will create more annual emissions than New York'
• Shorten: Coalition rightwingers forcing Australians to 'pledge loyalty' to coal
• Prominent Australians ask world leaders to consider ban on new coalmines

No Matter What He Says In Paris, Turnbull Is Still Handcuffed To The Climate Change Dinosaurs

The Guardian - Larissa Waters

Turnbull’s speech at the Paris climate change conference was a stunning example of fine but empty rhetoric, but we’re still left with the status quo

‘As Malcolm Turnbull demonstrated at the Paris climate change conference this week, the climate dinosaurs of the coalition parties still pull the strings’ Photograph: Francois Mori/AP

Saying one thing and doing the opposite is clearly not a smart political strategy but it seems to be becoming the prime minister’s modus operandi, especially on climate change policy.
As Malcolm Turnbull demonstrated in Paris this week, the climate dinosaurs of the coalition parties still pull the strings on what he can actually do to tackle global warming. On the other hand, what he says about climate change does appear to be crafted with the intensifying public momentum for climate action in mind.
The government’s many climate deniers are determined to stick with Tony Abbott’s weak climate policies. The Nationals handcuffed Malcolm Turnbull to those dangerous policies in their coalition agreement which locks him in for the life of his prime ministership.
You only need to look at the conservative revolt led by Ian Macfarlane, Barnaby Joyce and George Christensen on Monday that prevented Australia from signing a New-Zealand-led agreement of 40 countries to phase out fossil fuels subsidies. Australia was left looking isolated as an obvious wrecker, content to keep propping up coal at the expense of taxpayers and the clean energy industry.
The anti-science, coal-obsessed ranks of the backbench are completely out of touch with the vast majority of Australians. More than 170,000 people marched across the country on the weekend and about two-thirds of Australians want the government to commit to significant climate pollution cuts. Stuck between the two opposing forces, Malcolm Turnbull appears to have let the dinosaurs control his actions while trying to sound like he speaks for all Australians. Surely though, he realises this isn’t going to work – Australians aren’t stupid and don’t like to be treated as though they are.
The prime minister’s speech in Paris was a stunning example of fine but empty rhetoric. He made what sounded like three announcements but at the end we were left with the status quo.
Firstly, the prime minister announced Australia would ratify the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol. This was basically confirmation that Australia will meet its measly 5% target in climate pollution reduction to 2020.
When the target is that pathetically low, meeting it is nothing to crow about. This is especially galling because this success is partly due to the carbon price that Tony Abbott abolished and the renewable energy target which he cut, supported by Malcolm Turnbull.
Secondly, Malcolm Turnbull announced Australia would double investment in clean energy innovation over the next five years, joining the Barack Obama and Bill Gates-led plan, Mission Innovation. While this sounds very exciting, it’s completely at odds with the Turnbull government’s plan, reiterated only this week, to abolish the two government bodies driving clean energy investment and innovation.
The Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Arena) and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) are both incredible success stories in clean energy innovation. Together they will invest $23bn of public investment in renewable energy and leverage much more private investment over the next 10 years. The CEFC actually makes money for taxpayers through clean energy investment. If it wasn’t for the Senate blocking the government’s plan to scrap both the CEFC and Arena, their amazing work in powering a national clean energy revolution would be lost.
Thirdly, the prime minister announced Australia would contribute some more money from our existing aid budget to help developing countries deal with global warming. Our aid budget is already at a historic low because of the current government’s savage cuts. The slight increase in the proportion of aid funding to be directed to climate finance pales in comparison to the generous announcements of Canada, the UK and Germany.
What’s more, the Turnbull government’s measly contribution fails to live up to our responsibility as the wealthiest country in the Pacific, a region already suffering some of the worst impacts of global warming.
Australia has the potential to be a regional leader in clean energy and climate change adaptation. Not only is it the right thing to do by our regional neighbours and our environment but it will bring our economy into the 21st century. While new coal mines are increasingly set to become stranded assets, clean energy technology is powering ahead offering the jobs of the future. The prime minister needs to stop letting his climate-denying masters get in the way.

Link

• Analysis: Turnbull chalks up a symbolic victory in Paris, but may struggle to achieve more

No More 'Business As Usual' For Australia As Climate Change Hits Economy For $8bn

The Guardian - Amanda McKenzie*

Risks around extreme weather are high for Australian companies, but there are also plenty of opportunities to benefit from the ‘business boom’

Steam billows from the cooling towers at TruEnergy Holdings Pty’s Yallourn coal-fired power station in Yallourn, Victoria. Photograph: Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images

This week, world leaders are meeting in Paris to reach a new climate agreement to keep global temperature rise to no more than 2C above pre-industrial levels. Yet the responsibility for tackling climate change, and sustainability issues more broadly, does not rest on the shoulders of politicians and diplomats alone.
Australian business also has an important role to play and there are two reasons they should care: risk and opportunity. Climate change is a massive risk to the business community. Every industry must consider its specific risk to income and expenses but most commonly these will include physical impacts, regulation, competition, insurance, changing markets, investment, energy infrastructure and litigation.
For Australian businesses, the risks around extreme weather are particularly high. More than half of the world’s natural disasters occurred in the Asia Pacific in 2014 and Australia is the most vulnerable advanced economy to the impacts of climate change. More than $226bn in commercial, industrial, road, rail and residential assets around Australia’s coast are potentially exposed to flooding and erosion hazards at a sea level rise of 1.1 m – a high end but quite plausible scenario for 2100.
There’s also a growing body of research which looks at the possible ways in which our financial systems themselves may be vulnerable to climate risk.
Consider the physical impacts alone: so far global temperatures have increased nearly 1C. That may not sound like much, but in the past 50 years heatwaves have become hotter, last longer and occur more often. The increase in hot weather observed in the decade between 2000 and 2009 has already reached the best estimate projected for 2030.
In the summer of 2013/14 – known as the “angry summer” – 156 records were broken in 90 days. Similarly 2015 is likely to surpass 2014 as the hottest year on record, while October was the hottest October on record for Australia.
Recent research by David Karoly and colleagues from the University of Melbourne shows that human-driven climate change made this new record at least six times more likely than it would otherwise have been. October’s temperature was also the most above-normal month globally in history and was the eighth month this year to set a new heat record.
These impacts have many consequences for business. Lost productivity and absenteeism due to extreme heat is costing the Australian economy almost $8bn a year.
Recently a study from the University of Cambridge described how, as awareness of climate-related risks grows, climate–smart businesses are beginning to question how global environmental trends – such as increasing pressure on agricultural land, food security, soil degradation, local water stress and extreme weather events – will affect financial markets.
This builds on the work of leading economists such as Nicholas Stern in the UK and Ross Garnaut here in Australia, who argue the benefits of early action lead to significantly higher economic growth rates and returns over the long run, especially when compared to a worst-case scenario of climate inaction. Simply put, inaction is a risky business.

US President Barack Obama at the Apec summit in Manila, Philippines on 18 November 2015, where he said bold climate action will mean a business boom in Asia and around the world. Photograph: Aaron Favila/EPA

Of course business is also about creating opportunities and there will be plenty as humanity weans itself off fossil fuels and creates a clean, healthy and vibrant economy.
Back in 2007, the Climate Institute described how the move to a carbon-constrained global economy could deliver strategic opportunities, such as building new markets, corporate positioning, gaining regulatory intelligence and competitive advantage. “Business as usual” is no longer an option and that change is inevitable.
A recent New Climate Economy report contends it is possible to have more equitable, more sustainable and more resilient economies. An exciting area is the rapid innovation and declining costs of clean energy technologies.
The price of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules, for example, has dropped 75% and onshore wind power has fallen 30% over the last five years. More than 7.7 million people are now employed globally in the renewable energy sector. Last year for the first time, global emissions shrank while the economy grew. This was driven primarily by clean energy solutions.
The United States has witnessed a swathe of corporate giants sign up to the White House’s American Business Act on Climate Pledge.
The pledge recognised that delaying action on climate change will be costly in economic and human terms, while accelerating the transition to a low-carbon economy will produce multiple benefits with regard to sustainable economic growth, public health, resilience to natural disasters and the health of the global environment.
General Mills, a global food company and recent signatory, said addressing climate change was imperative to its long-term viability as climate change places significant pressure on vulnerable growing regions that produce many important crops.
In Australia, the most significant business announcement to date arrived from Commonwealth Bank and NAB. Both banks have made overarching commitments to the 2C goal. Although they are still working out the finer detail, these commitments are significant because they inherently require the banks to transition funding away from fossil fuels that drive climate change.
So what can all Australian businesses do?
First, they must make their voices heard on climate change. Business is a powerful advocate for policy change and has been largely silent in the climate debate in Australia until recently.
Second, business should be powered with renewable energy. Ten percent of all emissions are created by commercial buildings and addressing this is a prudent business decision as well as beneficial to the environment.
Finally there is huge scope to invest in energy efficiency in Australia, which will also impact the bottom line. These investments will provide a competitive edge as information on energy and greenhouse gas management practices are increasingly requested by customers and are required in tender documents.
In a recent blog, KPMG’s Adrian King discussed what a climate deal in Paris might mean for businesses, stressing that high-carbon activities would be costlier and businesses would face tighter regulation, carbon pricing and more stringent targets for emissions cutting.
On the up side, this means the case for becoming a low-carbon business will be stronger (and more profitable) than ever before.
When it comes to such opportunities, the adage “first in, best dressed” holds true. While there is still time to act, the window of opportunity is finite and shrinking.
Those who are nimble and forward-looking enough to act first will be in the best position to benefit from what US President Barack Obama referred to at the Asia-Pacific Forum on Economic Cooperation to as a “business boom”.

*Amanda McKenzie is the CEO of the Climate Council and is the chair of the Centre for Australian Progress

How World Can Go 100% Renewables By 2050 – And Save Money

Renew Economy - Giles Parkinson

On the eve of the Paris climate conference, a new analysis from Stanford University has laid out a roadmap for 139 countries to power their economies with solar, wind, and hydro energy by 2050.
The idea of net zero emissions, or a decarbonised economy, is being openly discussed at the Paris conference, even by Australia, with prime minister Malcolm Turnbull talking (but not yet acting) of a push to zero carbon energy, and Labor putting it into their policy modelling. The Greens are pushing for 90 per cent renewables by 2030.
For most however, zero carbon means including carbon capture and storage and nuclear, or offsets from forestry, land use and other sequestration. Some, though, are talking of meeting that talking with 100 per cent renewable energy only.
The Stanford study focuses on what is has dubbed “WWS” – wind, water and sunlight. And it includes not just electricity but transportation, heating and cooling, industry, and agriculture, forestry and fishing.
It says the world can reach 80 per cent “WWS” by 2030, which puts the Greens target for 90 per cent renewable energy for electricity only for Australia by the same date in a different perspective.

The roadmap outlines numerous benefits – millions of jobs, no impact on economic growth – and total savings from fuel costs, environment and climate damage of nearly $US5,000 a year.
Stanford study estimates that it will save each person in the 139 countries an average of $170 a year on fuel costs, and $2,880 a year in air-pollution-damage cost and $US1,930/person/year in climate costs (2013 dollars).
They have even broken now the equipment and installations needed into each country. It appears eye watering, but Stanford says the land use requirements are minimal – just 0.29 per cent of the land area, mostly for solar PV, not including reclaimed fossil fuel plants.
Their plan, under one generalised scenario, would require:

• 496,900 50-MW utility-scale solar-PV power plants (providing the most power, 42..2% of the 139-country power for all purposes).
• 1.17 million new onshore 5-MW wind turbines (19.4%).
• 762,000 off-shore 5-MW wind turbines (12.9%).
• 15,400 100-MW utility-scale CSP power plants with storage (7.7%).
• 653 million 5-kW residential rooftop PV systems (5.6%).
• 35.3 million 100-kW commercial/government rooftop systems (6.0%).
• 840 100- MW geothermal plants (0.74%).
• 496,000 0.75-MW wave devices (0.72%).
• 32,100 1-MW tidal turbines (0.07%).
• Zero new hydropower plants. (Stanford says the capacity factor of existing hydropower plants will increase slightly so that hydropower supplies 4.8% of all-purpose power).
• Another estimated 9,300 100-MW CSP plants with storage and 99,400 50-MW solar thermal collectors for heat generation and storage will be needed to help stabilize the grid.

Energy efficiency and changing industrial practises will be important. The average end use load will fall 39.2 per cent, with 82 per cent of this fall due to electrification and eliminating the need for mining, transport, and refining of conventional fuels.
The cost reductions come from the fact that that levellised costs of electricity for hydropower, onshore wind, utility-scale solar, and solar thermal for heat is already similar to or less than natural gas combined-cycle power plants.
And as the LCOE for rooftop PV, offshore wind, tidal, and wave energy fall below conventional fuels in coming years and decades.
Stanford says the major benefits of a conversion to WWS are the near-elimination of air pollution morbidity and mortality and global warming, net job creation, energy-price stability, reduced international conflict over energy because each country will be energy independent.
It will bring power 4 billion people worldwide who currently collect their own energy and burn it, and reduced risks of large-scale system disruptions because much of the world power supply will be decentralized.
“Finally, the aggressive worldwide conversion to WWS proposed here will avoid exploding levels of CO2 and catastrophic climate change.”

Paris UN Climate Conference 2015: Malcolm Turnbull Blazes The Path Of Least Resistance

Fairfax Analysis - Peter Hannam

Keeping the speeches of national leaders to under 10 minutes may go down as one of the minor achievements of the global climate summit that formally began in Paris on Monday.
In the case of Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's generally safe speech, fresh details were in short supply.

Malcolm Turnbull gave a safe speech to world leaders in Paris that was short on details about climate action. File photo. Photo: Bloomberg

Australia "will contribute at least $1 billion over the next five years" - but how much of that will add to the $200 million over four years already committed to the Green Climate Fund remains unclear.
Given the federal government's worsening fiscal balance, he says the money will come from the "existing aid budget". That implies there is not a lot - if any - new money on the way.
Rich nations have promised to provide $US100 billion ($139 billion) in climate aid per year by 2020, and increasing after that. The Climate Institute estimates a fair contribution from Australia's public purse is in the order of $1.5 billion a year by 2020.

French President Francois Hollande greets Malcolm Turnbull as he arrives for the UN Climate Change Conference in Paris. Photo: AP

On Monday's speech, Turnbull offered about one-seventh of that figure - with no call to Australia's private interests to match the effort, nor what Australia's contribution might be after 2020.
Developing nations looking for encouraging signs from Australia wouldn't have found any. Australia, too, was missing from a list of nations pledging $343 million for the most vulnerable countries – some of which are South Pacific neighbours.

Kyoto move
However, they are likely to be more heartened by the other major detail in Turnbull's speech - the promise to ratify the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
While the detail is somewhat arcane since the Paris treaty is aimed at outlining future action, the decision means the government won't just declare that Australia will beat its 2020 carbon reduction targets – as Environment Greg Hunt announced earlier this month – but will make it legal.
Only a handful of the developed nations that signed up for the second protocol have actually ratified it, and so Turnbull's commitment will likely go down well with developing nations looking for proof rich nations back their talk with action.
Businesses, too, will welcome the move if it gives them access to cheap international carbon credits - which may one day come in handy.
And while Turnbull avoided the soaring rhetoric of Barack Obama – future generations must look back at Paris 2015 grateful for "suffering that's averted and a planet that's preserved", the US President said – he sent a message to members of his coalition and segments of the population and media that continue to dismiss climate change as real.
"We do not doubt the implications of the science, or the scale of the challenge," Turnbull said, adding that the impacts of global warming will continue to be felt "even after we reach global net zero emissions".
The Prime Minister ended his Paris speech by returning to a favourite theme since deposing Tony Abbott in September by emphasising his confidence in the future: Australia is "not daunted by the challenge", and he had "great optimism and faith in humanity's genius for invention".
Australia had its share of successes, Turnbull noted, including the University of New South Wales holding the world record for solar cell efficiency for 30 of the past 32 years.

Scaling up
At some point, though, Turnbull will have to convince his party that Australia must lift its climate ambitions if it's to do its fair share to keep global warming to less than two degrees - a case that will be easier to make if Paris produces a credible pathway to such an outcome.
As the Climate Change Authority noted on Monday in its draft report on Australia's climate policy options, meeting even the 2030 target of cutting emissions by 26-28 per cent on 2005 levels "is likely to remain a substantial task". (See chart below)

Turnbull's political rivals will go to the next elections promising deeper cuts. Labor leader Bill Shorten has indicated his party will support a cut of 45 per cent of 2005-level carbon pollution by 2030 and net-zero emissions for Australia by 2050.
The Greens say Australia should aim for a 63-82 per cent cut by 2030 and a net-zero carbon economy by 2040.
The task is being made tougher without a broad-based carbon price, an approach Turnbull himself once championed - and may yet to do so again.
As the Climate Change Authority's report noted, the government's centrepiece $2.55 Direct Action policy to pay polluters not to emit could be scaled up by increasing government funding - but cost could become unsustainable.

Links

• Australia 'not daunted' by climate challenge: Turnbull
• Turnbull rejects pledge at last minute
• Australia joins Gates' clean pledge
• Paris: 10 Things You Need to Know
• Paris climate conference: full coverage

Malcolm Turnbull Speech 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference

Malcolm Turnbull Speech 2015 United Nations Climate Change Conference

Mr President, Secretary General, Excellencies, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen.
From Australia we come with confidence and optimism.
We are not daunted by our challenge.
It inspires us. It energises us.
We do not doubt the implications of the science, or the scale of the challenge.
But above all we do not doubt the capacity of humanity to meet it - with imagination, innovation and the prudence that befits those, like us, who make decisions that will affect not just our own children and grandchildren but generations yet unborn.
And Mr President while we come to you in Paris with our deepest condolences, we bring you the most resolute solidarity in our common cause for freedom in the face of terrorism.
Here in Paris Australia supports a new – and truly global – climate agreement.
It is an agreement that must drive humanity’s capacity for inventiveness and a new wave of technological advances.
Good for our environment, good for our economies.
I join over 150 leaders in calling for a strong and effective agreement.
And over 180 countries have now announced post-2020 targets.
This is an extraordinary effort.
For Australia’s part, our 2030 target represents real economic effort, and will halve our per capita emissions – one of the biggest reductions of any G20 country.
We will meet and beat our 2020 emissions reduction target.
Today I announce that Australia will ratify the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
We firmly believe that it is innovation and technology which will enable us both to drive stronger economic growth and a cleaner environment.
We are a highly social and innovative species and so the more we share innovative technologies, the better they will become.
Today Australia joins with many other countries in supporting Mission Innovation which aims to double investment in clean energy innovation over the next five years.
Australian universities are at the forefront of energy and climate science innovation.
To give one example, the University of New South Wales has held the world record for solar cell efficiency for 30 of the last 32 years.
And by 2018 over 60 per cent of the world’s solar cells are to use technology developed by Australian researchers.
But our task, and that of the technologies we deploy, is not just to reduce emissions.
The impacts of global warming are already being felt and will continue to be so even after we reach global net zero emissions.
Adaption to the impacts of climate change is equally important and there too innovation is a key.
Some of the most vulnerable nations are our Pacific neighbours and we are helping them to build resilience through practical action and assistance.
To this end, Australia will contribute at least $1 billion over the next five years from our existing aid budget both to build climate resilience and reduce emissions.
Our agreement here in Paris must provide a common platform for action, the dynamism to build ambition and a robust and transparent reporting system.
Australia is not daunted by the challenge. With great optimism and faith in humanity’s genius for invention, we are confident that with your leadership, Mr President, we will, in common cause, secure our future.

UN Climate Conference 2015: Revolt Sparks Backdown On Fossil Fuel Phase Out

Fairfax - Phillip Coorey

Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, center, and New Zealand's Prime Minister, John Key. Kamil Zihnioglu

Australia has dumped plans to sign a global agreement to phase out fossil fuel subsidies following a threatened revolt by miners, farmers and the Coalition backbench.
Sources said late Monday that, after some deliberation, it had been decided to not sign the communique on the sidelines of the Paris climate change talks that Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull was scheduled to address overnight Monday.
Following an initial revolt on Monday, the government was still intended to sign the communique on the proviso it was made clear that the diesel fuel rebates provided to miners and farmers were not subsidies but rebates or business inputs.
Pressure built on Mr Turnbull and Environment Minister Greg Hunt, who is also in Paris, when the Minerals Council of Australia contacted the minister several days ago to express concern at the communique, which was being led by New Zealand.

Miners, farmers exercised
On Monday, former industry ministry Ian Macfarlane raised the issue at a backbench policy committee meeting attended by the chief executive of the Minerals Council of Australia, Brendan Pearson.
The National Farmers' Federation was also exercised and the Nationals resolved to oppose the communique at their weekly party room meeting on Monday.
"It's not a subsidy. It's a rebate because a tractor is not going down the M1 planting sorghum," said Nationals deputy leader Barnaby Joyce.
Queensland Liberal-National MP George Christensen took to Twitter.
"To sign this is madness. It will cost jobs & give greens ammo to attack coal further," he tweeted.
The Fossil-Fuel Subsidy Reform Communique speaks of "an urgent need" to transform into action previous global agreement s to stamp out such subsidies as part of the push to keep the increase in global warming to 2 degrees Celsius.
"The elimination of fossil-fuel subsidies would make a significant contribution to this shared objective," it says.
"By keeping prices artificially low, fossil-fuel subsidies encourage wasteful consumption, disadvantage renewable energy, and depress investment in energy efficiency.
"The International Energy Agency highlights fossil-fuel subsidy reforms as a key component of a set of energy measures to combat climate change and estimates that even a partial phase-out of fossil-fuel subsidies would generate 12 per cent of total abatement needed by 2020 to keep the door open to the 2degC target."

$5.5b a year
Each year, the 38¢-a-litre diesel excise rebate costs the budget abut $5.5 billion but is not classified officially as a subsidy.
It is returned to mining, agriculture and other commercial users in dual ­recognition that they do not use public roads and that diesel is a business input. For example, the majority of diesel used by miners is to run electricity ­generators.
On this basis, the government was to sign the communique on the basis diesel was "subsidised" but "rebated".
While not binding per se, people like Mr Macfarlane argued the communique would pose an eventual threat to the rebate because it would give other nations greater leverage to pressure Australia over time.
The Australian Conservation Foundation said the communique had been an "early test" for Mr Turnbull in Paris.
"If the federal government is serious about tackling climate change and about letting the market work, it should stop subsidising big polluters to pollute," said ACF chief economist Matthew Rose.
The MCA declined to comment but was happy with the outcome.
The backdown indicates the sensitivities that still exist in the the Coalition six weeks after Mr Turnbull deposed Tony Abbott for the leadership.
Also on Monday, Treasurer Scott Morrison sprung to the defence of Australia's Islamic community following a series of strong statements led by Resources Minister Josh Frydenberg and Liberal backbenchers that the Grand Mufti and the community in general needed to do more to condemn radical Islam.
Mr Morrison said over time, the Islamic community would become more in tune with Australian culture.
"Over a period of time I think religions become more indigenised in Australia. The cultural component of our religious faiths I think becomes more indigenised," he said.
He said those criticising the Mufti were misguided.
"There are many different leaders within the Islamic community. It is not the sort of representational structure that you see in other organised religions in Australia," he said.
"It's quite different. I think the commentary that assumes very similar structures fails to get it, frankly."

Link

• Full coverage UN Climate Conference 2015