Hopes Emerge For A 'Great Era Of Bipartisanship' On Clean Energy Policy

Fairfax - Peter Hannam

In the wake of last month's re-election of Gladys Berejiklian's Liberal-led government, prospects have brightened for a sudden - and even surprising - narrowing of the gap between state and federal energy policy.
The elevation of Rob Stokes to head the key Planning & Industry cluster brings to the fore a Minister known for his support of renewable energy.
Having Matt Kean - the head of the dominant moderate faction - run the cluster's Energy and Environment portfolio, will bring political nous to Stokes' intellectual clout, a senior NSW Liberal source says.

Sunset on the climate wars? State and federal energy policies could soon be more coordinated than they have been for decades. Credit: Sitthixay Ditthavong

"A great era of bipartisanship" is possible, this source says - provided Labor takes over in Canberra.
NSW's position at COAG Energy Council will more closely resemble those of other Liberal-led states of South Australia and Tasmania where renewable energy dominates their electricity supplies.
In fact, the NSW government has been distancing itself from the federal Coalition for some time.
Don Harwin, Kean's predecessor as Energy Minister, publicly clashed with his federal counterpart prior to Christmas, calling for an end to the "climate wars" at a COAG meeting.
While some wondered if Harwin's outburst was a stunt - "he wasn't active on these issues at previous COAG events", one Labor-state participant said - his comments didn't go down well with conservative colleagues at home.
“The hard right went into a meltdown”, a senior government source says. “What about our base?”
According to the senior Liberal source, one consequence was that an internal truce was made, between the state and federal governments, and within the NSW Coalition.
One result was the Berejiklian government shelved plans for a  bigger renewable energy announcement during its re-election campaign, apparently aimed for release around the Australia Day weekend.
Instead of taking to voters a policy closer to the Labor offering - such as the ALP plan to drive 7 gigawatts of new renewable capacity into NSW through reverse auction – the Berejiklian government promised much less.
The main offering was a no-interest loan scheme for as many as 300,000 households to buy solar panels and batteries over the next decade.
Another battle, though, was taking place out of view: resistance by NSW to a push by the Morrison government for a coal-fired power station in the state as part of its proposal to underwrite new electricity generation.
With the biggest population, big coal reserves, and an existing grid, NSW was the prime target. Securing support would also have given a shot in the arm for pro-coal Coalition MPs, especially those hailing from NSW.
Instead, the Berejiklian government rejected the plan, the senior Liberal source said. Minister Angus Taylor had to settle for a $10 million feasibility study for a plant in Queensland - also without support from that state's Labor government.
Minister Taylor's office rejects that, noting three of the 12 projects on the Underwriting New Generation Investments program are in NSW.
These include a minor revamp of the Vales Point coal-fired power station, a potential gas import facility at Port Kembla, and pumped hydro plant at Armidale.
Senior Liberals in NSW say further distancing between their position on climate change and renewable energy and those of their federal counterparts is likely. But don't expect them to become public until after the federal election.

Links

• Australia Stops Payments To Green Climate Fund
• Labor's Climate Change Policy Explained: Here's What We Know
• Coalition's Climate Solutions Fund Must Last A Further Five Years
• Federal Budget 2019: Environment Restoration Fund Secures $100 Million To Cut Waste, Protect Threatened Species
• Four Corners Report Shows Climate Change Concerns Heating Up Ahead Of Federal Election
• Labor's Emissions Trading Scheme
• Greens Set 2030 Cut-Off For Coal Exports And Coal-Fired Power Stations
• Heavyweights Now Speaking With One Voice On Climate Change Risks
• What Are Major Parties’ Climate Change Policies?
• Why Climate Change Risks Are 'Material' For Big Finance
• APRA Demands Banks, Insurers Act On Climate Risk

Australia’s 2018 Environmental Scorecard: A Dreadful Year That Demands Action

The Conversation - Albert Van Dijk | Shoshana Rapley*

Bushfires ravaged parts of central Queensland amid heatwaves in November 2018. QFES Media/AAP

Environmental news is rarely good. But even by those low standards, 2018 was especially bad. That is the main conclusion from Australia’s Environment in 2018, the latest in an annual series of environmental condition reports, released today.
Every year, we analyse vast amounts of measurements from satellites and on-ground stations using algorithms and prediction models on a supercomputer. These volumes of data are turned into regional summary accounts that can be explored on our Australian Environment Explorer website. We interpret these data, along with other information from national and international reports, to assess how our environment is tracking.

A bad year
Whereas 2017 was already quite bad, 2018 saw many indicators dip even further into the red.
Temperatures went up again, rainfall declined further, and the destruction of vegetation and ecosystems by drought, fire and land clearing continued. Soil moisture, rivers and wetlands all declined, and vegetation growth was poor.
In short, our environment took a beating in 2018, and that was even before the oppressive heatwaves, bushfires and Darling River fish kills of January 2019.

Indicators of Australia’s environment in 2018 compared with the previous year. Similar to national economic indicators, they provide a summary but also hide regional variations, complex interactions and long-term context. Source: http://www.ausenv.online/2018

The combined pressures from habitat destruction, climate change, and invasive pests and diseases are taking their toll on our unique plants and animals. Another 54 species were added to the official list of threatened species, which now stands at 1,775. That is 47% more than 18 years ago and puts Australia among the world’s worst performers in biodiversity protection. On the upside, the number of predator-proof islands or fenced-off reserves in Australia reached 188 in 2018, covering close to 2,500 square kilometres. They offer good prospects of saving at least 13 mammal species from extinction.
Globally, the increase of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere accelerated again after slowing down in 2017. Global air and ocean temperatures remained high, sea levels increased further, and even the ozone hole grew again, after shrinking during the previous two years.
Sea surface temperatures around Australia did not increase in 2018, but they nevertheless were well above long-term averages. Surveys of the Great Barrier Reef showed further declining health across the entire reef. An exceptional heatwave in late 2018 in Far North Queensland raised fears for yet another bout of coral bleaching, but this was averted when sudden massive downpours cooled surface waters.
The hot conditions did cause much damage to wildlife and vegetation, however, with spectacled flying foxes dropping dead from trees and fire ravaging what was once a tropical rainforest.
While previous environmental scorecards showed a mixed bag of regional impacts, 2018 was a poor year in all states and territories. Particularly badly hit was New South Wales, where after a second year of very poor rainfall, ecosystems and communities reached crisis point. Least affected was southern Western Australia, which enjoyed relatively cool and wet conditions.

Environmental Condition Score in 2018 by state and territory, based on a combination of seven indicators. The large number is the score for 2017, the smaller number the change from the previous year.

Source: http://www.ausenv.online/2018

It was a poor year for nature and farmers alike, with growing conditions in grazing, irrigated agriculture and dryland cropping each declining by 17-20% at a national scale. The only upside was improved cropping conditions in WA, which mitigated the 34% decline elsewhere.

A bad start to 2019
Although it is too early for a full picture, the first months of 2019 continued as badly as 2018 ended. The 2018-19 summer broke heat records across the country by large margins, bushfires raged through Tasmania’s forests, and a sudden turn in the hot weather killed scores of fish in the Darling River. The monsoon in northern Australia did not come until late January, the latest in decades, but then dumped a huge amount of rain on northern Queensland, flooding vast swathes of land.
It would be comforting to believe that our environment merely waxes and wanes with rainfall, and is resilient to yearly variations. To some extent, this is true. The current year may still turn wet and improve conditions, although a developing El Niño makes this less likely.
However, while we are good at acknowledging rapid changes, we are terrible at recognising slow, long-term ones. Underlying the yearly variations in weather is an unmistakable pattern of environmental decline that threatens our future.

New South Wales was hit hard by drought in 2018. AAP Image/Perry Duffin

What can we do about it?
Global warming is already with us, and strong action is required to avoid an even more dire future of rolling heatwaves and year-round bushfires. But while global climate change requires global action, there is a lot we can and have to do ourselves.
Australia is one of the world’s most wasteful societies, and there are many opportunities to clean up our act. Achieving progress is not hard, and despite shrill protests from vested interests and the ideologically blind, taking action will not take away our prosperity. Home solar systems and more efficient transport can in fact save money. Our country has huge opportunities for renewable energy, which can potentially create thousands of jobs. Together, we can indeed reduce emissions “in a canter” – all it takes is some clear national leadership.
The ongoing destruction of natural vegetation is as damaging as it is unnecessary, and stopping it will bring a raft of benefits. Our rivers and wetlands are more than just a source of cheap irrigation for big businesses. With more effort, we can save many species from extinction. Our farmers play a vital role in caring for our country, and we need to support them better in doing so.
Our environment is our life support. It provides us our place to live, our food, health, livelihoods, culture and identity. To protect it is to protect ourselves.

*Shoshana Rapley is an ANU honours student and research assistant in the Fenner School of Environment and Society.

Links

• Australia’s Environment in 2018
• Australia’s Environment Explorer
• Australia's 2017 environment scorecard: like a broken record, high temperatures further stress our ecosystems
• The Darling River is simply not supposed to dry out, even in drought
• Australia is not on track to reach 2030 Paris target (but the potential is there)
• To reduce fire risk and meet climate targets, over 300 scientists call for stronger land clearing laws

2018 Was Boom Year For Renewables Despite Political Chaos, Report Finds

The Guardian - Katharine Murphy

Clean Energy Australia snapshot shows investment in large-scale projects has doubled to $20bn

A windfarm near Burra in South Australia. The energy industry report card shows that Australia’s large scale renewable target will be met ahead of time. Photograph: Angela Harper/AAP

Despite Canberra remaining locked in ongoing partisan war about emissions reductions, and Malcolm Turnbull losing the prime ministership after a conflagration about energy policy, 2018 was a boom year for renewable energy, according to the latest Clean Energy Australia report.
The new assessment, to be released Thursday, finds the amount of renewable energy capacity committed in Australia during 2018 increased 260% on 2017, with 14.8 GW underway in 2018 compared to 5.6 GW in 2017.
The upbeat industry report card comes as the energy minister Angus Taylor will tell parliament on Thursday that Australia’s 2020 large scale renewable energy target of 33,000 GWh will be met ahead of time.
Taylor will report that approximately 5.2 gigawatts of new renewable capacity was added during 2018, and also cite forecasts from the Clean Energy Regulator predicting an increase to at least 6.5 gigawatts in 2019, with the trend likely to persist in 2020 and 2021.
Guardian Australia understands the energy minister will note that large-scale generation certificate prices have crashed from around $85 a year ago to $34 today, reducing subsidies by 60%, which has a positive impact on consumer power bills.

The new Clean Energy Australia snapshot says renewables generated 7,000 jobs since 2017, with investment in large-scale renewable energy doubling to $20bn. Renewable energy generation now comprises 21% of the market, which is a record share.
The report says more than 2m households now have rooftop solar, and the installed capacity of household solar has now topped 8.1 GW, which is four times the capacity of the ageing Liddell power plant in New South Wales.
It says the top three postcodes with the highest uptake of rooftop solar are Bundaberg, Hervey Bay and Toowoomba – in National party heartland.
The chief executive of the Clean Energy Council, Kane Thornton, noted while the industry was going gangbusters, “unfortunately, the politics around energy reached another new low in 2018, with the federal government opting to tear itself apart rather than implement its own national energy guarantee”.
Thornton said while the coming federal election would create another pivotal year for clean energy in Australia, “we have thankfully reached a point where politics isn’t as existential to the industry as it once was”.
The upbeat trends in renewables comes as the Australian Energy Market Commission will report on Thursday that Australia’s energy grid is meeting consumers’ needs, but also note the energy market operator is intervening more frequently to preserve the stability of the network.
The AEMC says the switch in the mix in favour of cleaner and greener technologies is a structural change that is putting pressure on power system security and reliability. The new report notes system security–related costs are a relatively small proportion of a customer’s total bill, “however, these costs are increasing, with potential flow-through effects to consumer bills in coming years”.
While the AEMC is concerned about a looming crunch point, with the upcoming retirement of thermal coal power stations across the eastern seaboard and deteriorating system strength, the energy market operator has already declared the future of power generation in Australia will be renewables with storage, and gas, with those technologies able to replace the power currently supplied by coal generators at least cost.
In its integrated system plan released last year, the Australian Energy Market Operator plan noted that 30% of Australia’s coal generators will approach the end of their technical life over the next two decades. It said it was important to avoid premature departures if the looming transition in the national energy market was to be orderly.
But Aemo said the lowest-cost replacement options for retiring coal plants “will be a portfolio of resources, including solar (28GW), wind (10.5 GW) and storage (17 GW and 90 GWh), complemented by 500 MW of flexible gas plant and transmission investment”.
The energy market operator concluded that mix of generation can produce 90 terawatt hours of energy per annum, “more than offsetting the energy lost from retiring coal-fired generation”, also noting that transmission infrastructure would need to be reinforced to ensure the grid performs optimally after the shift.

Links

• Clean Energy Australia Report
• Renewable energy will be world's main power source by 2040, says BP
• Morrison government seeks to divide Labor and unions over emissions
• Scott Morrison says national energy guarantee 'is dead'
• Energy analysts forecast 'the end of coal' in Asia as Japanese investors back renewables
• Australia’s renewables sector doubles output in boom year
• Queensland could reap $24bn renewables boom if it phases out coal generators
• Renewables generated more electricity than brown coal over summer, report finds
• The Queensland election's renewables versus coal debate isn't about jobs. It's a culture war
• Greens propose new energy storage target to drive switch to renewables
• Most Australians want renewables to be primary energy source, survey finds

Australia Stops Payments To Green Climate Fund

Climate Home News - Karl Mathiesen

Australian budget offers nothing to flagship UN scheme as its board seeks replenishment, while climate shapes as divisive election issue

Despite broad public concern about rising drought and bushfire risk, Australia's government has failed to bring emissions down. (Photo: Commons/virtualsteve)

Australia will stop contributions to the UN’s major fund for battling climate change this year, according to government budget papers released on Tuesday.
With a federal election looming, the government followed up on prime minister Scott Morrison’s threat not to “tip money into that big climate fund”.
Since 2015, Australia has given $187m to the fund, which finances projects in the developing world that cut emissions or promote resilience to climate impacts. The budget document said Australia made its “final” contribution of $19.2m in December.
Around a third of Australia’s overseas development budget is spent in the climate-vulnerable Pacific. But the Australia Institute’s Richie Merzian said multilateral institutions, such as the Green Climate Fund, were able to leverage private investment in projects in “a way that the Australian Government has struggled to do”.
“The GCF has co-financing capabilities and regional coverage that Australia couldn’t possibly provide,” he said. Merzian also noted that Australia’s overall aid budget was dropping when measured against the growing economy.
In a statement, Oxfam Australia said the budget was a “catastrophic failure of leadership in the face of the climate crisis – which is out of step with a majority of Australians – and growing inequality and it undermines the future of our Pacific neighbours”.
The Green Climate Fund formed part of a compact between poor and rich countries that was the basis for the Paris climate agreement. Having spent nearly half of its original $10.3bn allocation, the fund has signalled it intends to start raising new finance from developed countries this year.
By the time the hat is passed around, Australia’s position may have changed. The country is expected to hold elections next month, with the major parties sharply divergent on climate policy.
In a speech last year, shadow foreign minister Penny Wong said “it goes without saying” Labor would “be willing to work with” multilateral organisations including the Green Climate Fund to combat global warming.
This week, Labor gave an indication of the domestic climate package it will take to the poll. The partial release indicated it will try to revive the national energy guarantee, formerly a government scheme that saw Australia’s last prime minster overthrown in favour of Morrison.
The Labor version is more stringent and would cut emissions in the electricity sector 45% on 2005 levels by 2030. (The now-dropped coalition government plan aimed for 26%.) Labor also pledged that half of all new cars sold would be electric by 2030.
Polling puts the opposition Labor party, with leader Bill Shorten, in the lead. The government, on the defensive, has called Labor’s climate policy a “Trojan horse for a carbon tax” and announced tax cuts in a bid to win back voters.
In its budget, the Liberal-National coalition announced $2bn over 15 years to finance what treasurer Josh Frydenberg called “practical emission reduction activities”. These include funding farmers and indigenous land managers to store carbon in the soil.
“Through our measures, as we have done in the past, we will beat our international emission reduction targets,” Frydenberg said on Tuesday.
Australia’s emissions grew last year by 0.9%, according to the latest government data. The country has been criticised for using a system of pollution credits from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol to meet its targets while allowing real emissions to continue rising. Labor has said it would close that loophole.
The Australian Conservation Foundation’s chief executive officer Kelly O’Shanassy said the scheme needed reform to close loopholes that could see some of that money spent upgrading old fossil fuel plants.
The amount available for climate projects pales in comparison to fuel tax breaks for businesses, O’Shanassy added. “In this budget the government plans to spend $4.36 subsidising pollution for every dollar it spends on climate action.”

Links

• The Green Climate Fund
• Federal Budget 2019: Environment Restoration Fund Secures $100 Million To Cut Waste, Protect Threatened Species
• Australian selected as head of the Green Climate Fund
• Australia won’t give money to Green Climate Fund, says PM
• Australia pledges $165 million to Green Climate Fund
• Australia starves green fund, denting climate credibility
• Federal budget 2019: $3.9b fund to deal with the fallout from climate change
• NRMA dismisses claim Labor's electric vehicle target will leave tradies stranded
• Budget blind to dual crises of inequality and climate change
• Australia government proposes new fund to meet emission reduction targets
• Why is tiny Nauru getting $26.9m in climate finance to build a port?

Labor's Climate Change Policy Explained: Here's What We Know

The Guardian - Katharine Murphy

As the partisan debate roars back to life with Coalition claims of ‘carbon tax 2.0’, these are the facts

Bill Shorten charges an electric car after launching Labor’s climate change policy in Canberra on Monday.
Photograph: Mick Tsikas/AAP 

Just days before the federal election is called, Labor has released the final component of its climate change policy. Scott Morrison has promptly declared it is carbon tax 2.0 and the regulations will impose massive costs on Australians. Given this partisan debate, which has paralysed Australian politics for a decade, has been characterised by hyperbole and misinformation, let’s work through this latest policy instalment, sector by sector, and then consider the implications.

Energy
Labor says if it wins the coming election it will try to implement the national energy guarantee abandoned by the Coalition, with a higher emissions reduction target – 45% by 2030. The government’s electricity target was 26%. If the Coalition in opposition declines to support the Neg, Labor will pursue plan B. Plan B involves topping up the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to the tune of $10bn and a new $5bn fund to modernise ageing transmission infrastructure. The objective of the intervention is to drive higher take-up of renewables in the grid. Labor has a target of sourcing 50% of electricity from renewables by 2030. Coupled with this, a Just Transition Authority will be established to help manage the retirement of the coal fleet, with generators required to give three years’ notice of closure.

Heavy industry
As well as reviving the national energy guarantee, Labor is borrowing another existing Coalition policy to bring down industrial pollution. It will use the current safeguard mechanism, which is part of the Direct Action scheme, but will extend coverage so that more companies are captured. The scheme works like this: companies are allocated baselines, and if they pollute above that level, they need to buy carbon credits (more about this is in minute), which imposes a cost on their business. Labor says it will reduce pollution in the covered entities by 45% on 2005 levels by 2030, but is planning to consult with firms on what their baseline should be, and about the specific emissions reduction trajectory for each entity. It is also planning to assist emissions-intensive trade-exposed companies with the transition.

Transport
The approach in transport is two pronged. Labor is proposing to introduce vehicle emissions standards “in line with” 105 grams of CO2 pollution per kilometre, which is the same as the US. The standard is imposed on car retailers (not manufacturers), which means car dealers will have to offset sales of high-emissions vehicles with sales of low-emissions vehicles. Coupled with this, Labor is setting targets for the take up of electric vehicles. It wants a national EV target of 50% of new sales by 2030, and a government fleet target of 50% of new sales by 2025, and it will also allow businesses to claim deductions if they buy EVs valued at more than $20,000. It will also require all federally funded road upgrades to incorporate EV charging infrastructure.
Given Labor will impose significantly tougher pollution rules than the Coalition, it also wants to boost the supply of carbon offsets. With this market becoming more important, Labor is flagging a new certification framework to ensure that carbon credits are sufficiently high quality. It will also strengthen the Carbon Farming Initiative, which allows farmers and landholders to generate carbon credits which they can sell on the carbon market. It will also allow heavy emitters to use international permits to meet their pollution reduction requirements, but Labor is not yet saying what limits might apply. It will not use carryover credits from the Kyoto period, which the Morrison government intends to use to help meet the Paris target.

Agriculture
Farmers are largely off the hook in Labor’s policy. On the positive side of the ledger there are opportunities to generate carbon credits, which generates income. The sting is land clearing. Labor is signalling it wants to extend the Queensland regime to other jurisdictions, working through the Council of Australian Governments process. That’s a principle though. There’s no detail beyond that in the policy.

Will the policy cut pollution by 45% on 2005 levels by 2030?
This is the big question. Unsurprisingly, given the toxic history, the Morrison government has resumed hollering about carbon taxes and environmental regulations that will bring Australia to its knees, but the fact is we don’t have a number of important details that would allow anyone to make fact-based conclusions. Labor says we’ll have a new vehicle emissions standard, but hasn’t said when that will apply, or the specific level of emissions reduction from transport it is factoring in as a consequence. Similarly Labor is arguing it will achieve a 45% cut from heavy emitters while allowing caveats like consultations on baselines and trajectories. Labor is not planning to release a carbon budget, which would make transparent estimates about the level of pollution cuts it is factoring-in in each sector. It is unable to say how carbon trading between the energy and industrial sectors might work because the proposed regulatory frameworks are conceptual rather than fully fleshed out. Given there are stakeholders sitting on the sidelines ready to go to war, and the Coalition is hoping that calling something that isn’t a carbon tax a carbon tax (again) represents a sound political strategy with an election in sight – the vagueness from Labor is deliberate. But there are significant unanswered questions here.

Will this policy happen, even if Labor wins?
Another big question. The Coalition is not showing any sign of having a substantial conversion on climate change. Labor will likely need the Greens to get various changes legislated and the Greens will want a higher level of ambition than is evident in this policy. The Greens will want Labor to execute a faster transition away from coal, and they are already saying no to the use of international permits. So it’s entirely possible that the long unproductive deadlock will continue. We have a long way to go.

Links

• 50% of new cars to be electric vehicles by 2030 under Labor climate change policy
• Coalition promises one-off energy payments as Labor pledges to 'reset' budget
• Labor's Emissions Trading Scheme
• Greens blast key part of Labor's climate policy as 'fake action'
• Labor's climate change policy explained: here's what we know
• Labor to tighten emissions regime as it draws climate battle-lines
• Morrison government seeks to divide Labor and unions over emissions
• Coalition says Labor must use Kyoto credits – but also that they make little difference
• Australian government backs coal in defiance of IPCC climate warning
• Richard Di Natale: I will work with Labor to get action on climate change
• Greens electric car push: end sale of petrol and diesel vehicles by 2030

Coalition's Climate Solutions Fund Must Last A Further Five Years

The Guardian - Paul Karp

The $2bn promised for Australia’s greenhouse gas abatement projects will be spread over 15 years, not 10, Tuesday’s budget revealed

Emissions from a coal fired power station. The Coalition effectively cut funding to reduce emissions in Tuesday’s budget. Photograph: Ashley Cooper/Getty Images 

The Coalition plans to spend its $2bn “climate solutions fund” over 15 years, not 10, as promised when it unveiled the rebadged emissions reduction policy in February.
The decision, revealed in Tuesday’s budget, effectively cuts the amount spent per year from $200m to $133m over the life of the fund, which pays polluters to implement greenhouse gas abatement projects.
Labor’s climate spokesman, Mark Butler, has accused Scott Morrison of already cutting the “main policy to deliver his weak 2030 pollution reduction targets”, while the Greens attacked the Coalition for spending just $189m over the first four years.
The $2bn relaunch of the Abbott-era emissions reduction fund was part of the Morrison government’s effort to bolster its environmental credentials in the face of rising community concern about the impact of climate change and challenges from independent candidates targeting the Liberal party on its climate record.
In February the prime minister’s office briefed journalists, including Guardian Australia, that $2bn would be invested over 10 years in the climate fund to build on the ERF’s record of reducing emissions by 193m tonnes.

On 25 February Scott Morrison told Sky News the Emissions Reduction Fund was a $2bn investment “over the next 10 years”, a comment he repeated in a speech the following day.
But in the budget papers released on Tuesday, the climate solutions fund is allocated $2bn over 15 years from 2019-20, including $189m over four years.
Butler said: “This was the policy that was meant to do the heavy lifting to deliver the government’s 2030 emission reduction targets, even though government data projects Australia will fail to meet even this government’s weak emission reduction targets.
“This is a budget from a government that has given up governing, and never tried to deliver real climate action.”
The Greens climate spokesman, Adam Bandt, said the government planned to spend just $189m over four years on “its signature climate ‘policy’”, noting “there’s more new money for the Cairns ring road than for climate change” in the 2019 budget.

Labor’s climate policy is to reduce emissions in the electricity sector by 45% by 2030.
On Monday Labor added a target for the rollout of electric vehicles, the promise to introduce vehicle emissions standards and to beef up the safeguard mechanism to impose new pollution reduction requirements for the aviation sector, cement, steel and aluminium, mining and gas, direct combustion and the non-electricity energy sectors.
The budget showed that the balance of the Coalition’s $3.5bn climate solutions package includes:

• Up to $1.38bn in equity over six years for the Snowy 2.0 pumped hydro project and $5.5m for oversight of that project
• $61.2m for the energy efficient communities program
• $56m for a feasibility study for the second inter-connector between Tasmania and the mainland
• $18m on energy efficiency; and
• $400,000 to develop a national electric vehicle strategy

An investigation by Guardian Australia last year found it was often difficult to determine if the emissions reduction fund was offering value for money.
Malcolm Turnbull, who once branded the approach “a recipe for fiscal recklessness on a grand scale”, let the ERF dwindle to almost nothing as he pursued policy alternatives, including the national energy guarantee resisted by conservatives and dumped by Morrison shortly after he took the Liberal leadership last year.

Links

• Federal Budget 2019: Environment Restoration Fund Secures $100 Million To Cut Waste, Protect Threatened Species
• Federal budget 2019: $3.9b fund to deal with the fallout from climate change
• NRMA dismisses claim Labor's electric vehicle target will leave tradies stranded
• Budget blind to dual crises of inequality and climate change
• Australia government proposes new fund to meet emission reduction targets
• Labor's climate change policy explained: here's what we know
• 'Woefully dirty': government accused over Australia's failure to cut vehicle emissions

Federal Budget 2019: Environment Restoration Fund Secures $100 Million To Cut Waste, Protect Threatened Species

Fairfax - Nicole Hasham

Communities will be encouraged to act locally to halt plant and animal extinction, protect coastlines and recycle waste through a $100 million fund announced by the Morrison government on Tuesday.
The Coalition is seeking to boost its environmental record ahead of the May election where climate change is expected to be a headline issue.
The budget confirmed a $3.5 billion climate solutions package announced earlier this year which the government says will help Australia meet its Paris target.
However, there were no major new measures addressing climate change in the budget.

A coalition government would establish a $25 million national centre for coasts, environment, climate research and education at Point Nepean. Credit: Ken Irwin

The $100 million Environment Restoration Fund will grant money to community groups for large projects such as managing erosion around waterways and protecting threatened species habitat. It would also support practical action on waste recovery and recycling.
Australia has one of the world's worst extinction records and critics say a lack of funding for threatened species programs is contributing to the crisis. Erosion is caused by extreme weather and other climate change effects, as well as land clearing.
In NSW, a re-elected Coalition government would spend $21.4 million improving infrastructure at defence heritage sites on Sydney Harbour, opening them for community, educational and recreational use.
In Victoria, the government would establish a $25 million national centre for coasts, environment, climate research and education. Located at Point Nepean, it would research marine and coastal ecosystems, climate and environmental management.
A $25 million Harry Butler Environmental Education Centre would be established through Western Australia's Murdoch University, to develop "sustainable environment outcomes from economic development".
Treasurer Josh Frydenberg said all Australians have a responsibility to "protect our environment and address climate change ... Australians have been gifted a precious inheritance".
He emphasised the climate solutions package, which includes $2 billion for emissions reduction activities plus funding for a national electric vehicle strategy and energy efficiency strategies.
"Through our measures, as we have done in the past, we will beat our international emission reduction targets," Mr Frydenberg said. Several authoritative international bodies have previously disputed this claim.
The government announced most environment and energy measures ahead of the budget, such as $1.38 billion for the Snowy Hydro expansion.

Links

• Federal budget 2019: $3.9b fund to deal with the fallout from climate change
• NRMA dismisses claim Labor's electric vehicle target will leave tradies stranded
• Budget blind to dual crises of inequality and climate change
• Australia government proposes new fund to meet emission reduction targets