Zali's emissions evasion
There seem to be all too many inconvenient truths for the Member for Warringah and others in the climate change debate. By Tim James.
The IPCC report this week warrants careful, calm and fact-based consideration and action, not a panic-stricken knee-jerk reaction.
The Member for Warringah who says “we desperately need to have a sensible discussion around climate change policy and emissions reduction” this week committed to a doubling of Australia’s 2030 emissions reduction target. Just like that, Zali Steggall said we must double our 2030 target in response to this “clarion call for climate action”.
Before the last so-called #climateelection Ms Steggall committed to a 60% emissions reduction target, way beyond Australia’s agreed Paris target of 26-28% reduction by 2030. She said at the time it “would not hurt the economy” and would lead to a boom. At the same time Labor’s target was 45% and the Greens’ between 62% and 82%.
Shortly thereafter Ms Steggall shook off her 60% target telling the SkyNews Manly Daily Warringah candidate forum on 2 May 2019 that her target was 45% “at a minimum”. There was no mention of her otherwise committed 60% target.
Neither Labor, the Greens nor Zali had done any modelling of the costs and consequences of their commitments. An independent, peer reviewed academic report by leading economist Dr Brian Fisher found that Labor’s 45% reduction by 2030 would cost up to:
333,000 Australian jobs lost
Australians paying 67% more for electricity
Over half a trillion dollars in lost (cumulative) gross national product, and
Nearly $12,000 in average real wages gone.
So now Zali is back very close to her earlier commitment at 56% by 2030, but still there’s no costing or modelling to back it up. This commitment was among 29 tweets from Zali within 24 hours of the IPCC report, not one of them mentioning or focusing on her electorate of Warringah.
The efforts of Ms Stegall and others to demonise Australia’s achievements know no bounds. Here are three among many examples from Ms Steggall’s dissenting report to the House Standing Committee on Environment and Energy which recently recommended, notably with bi-partisan support, that her proposed bills not be passed:
Claim: Australia will not meet its commitment under the Paris Agreement
Fact: Australia is unquestionably on track to meet and beat its 2030 target
Claim: Australia is “cherry-picking” and “redefining” data by using a per capita measure because we’re a small country
Fact: Per capita measures are entirely objective, reasonable and justifiable
Claim: Australia has “chosen the base year of emissions [2005]” to make our record look better than it is
Fact: 2005 is the base year under the Paris Agreement – there was no choice in it.
So many claims in Ms Steggall’s report just don’t stack up.
Meanwhile others used the IPCC report to rapidly put their panic-laden politics forward.
Richie Merzian from the Australia Institute tweeted remarks in response to the IPCC report including this: “Solving climate change is actually relatively simple. We need to get to 100% renewable energy and then go further. We need to electrify everything, our cars, our homes, our industries. And then we need to plant more trees and sequester more carbon. It’s that simple.”
It’s simple, he says to Australian businesses who need reliable and affordable energy, to the 70% of Australians who use gas at home (yes he expressly says we must “get off gas” in our homes), and to regional communities underpinned by essential fuel production. It’s that simple, apparently.
Former President of Ireland and Former UN Climate Envoy Mary Robinson accused Australia of being out of sync with other western industrialised countries and attacked Prime Minister Scott Morrison asking if he’d read the IPCC Report. Of course the Member for Warringah furiously shared the remarks.
Since 1990 Ireland’s total net emissions have increased by 8% while Australia’s have fallen by 19% (UNFCCC National Inventory Reports, 2019 Data). A comparison since 2005 shows both Australia and Ireland have reduced emissions by 15%, so clearly 2005 was a higher water mark in Ireland.
Ireland’s Minister for the Environment, Climate and Communications recently pointed out that Ireland has particular challenges ahead of meeting its targets because it is “unique” among the EU and “has the highest national proportion of agriculture emissions”. He added that “Ireland fully supports the enhanced ambition at EU level.” So basically Ireland will have difficulties hitting its target but the EU’s ambition more than make up for them.
To be fair, EU emissions have between 2005 and 2018 declined by 21%, whereas Australia’s declined by 15% (Statista analysis using IEA and OECD data). European economies have greater flexibility and diversity of energy sources, including nuclear power. Also, putting it in the context of Australia’s average GDP growth since 2005 (2.8%) being twice that of the EU (1.4%) (Statista), Australia’s emissions reduction performance relative to the EU is strong and sound.
Zali Steggall went on and said Australia is a “global laggard” on emissions and “not playing our part”. Given Australia’s emissions reductions between 2005 (the Paris baseline) and 2019 (the most recent data set) of 15% are greater than those of Canada (1%), New Zealand (4%), Japan (10%) and the United States (13%), will she point the finger at them? (Sources: UNFCCC National Inventory Reports, 2019 Data) Are they laggards? Isn’t Australia playing its part better than them? Does Zali agree with UK Minister Alok Sharma, who will preside over the coming Glascow conference and this week said the biggest emitters including China, India and Brazil must make drastic carbon cuts?
There seem to be all too many inconvenient truths for the Member for Warringah and others in this debate. For them it seems “sensible discussion” is only driven by targets without any regard to track-record. Is a target more credible than an outcome? Is ambition worth more than real action? Do achievements delivered count for nothing? Yes on all counts when your politics and re-election hinges on having people believe Australia’s a failure.
There’s never any mention from Zali and others of Australia’s world leading investments in renewables including:
Australia now has the highest total amount of solar PV capacity installed per person in the world as confirmed by the CSIRO; and
Australia has the most wind and solar per person of any country outside of Europe as confirmed by the Clean Energy Regulator.
Facts matter. In combatting climate change, as in life, actions and results speak louder than mere ambition and targets. “Deeds not words” as they say. Australia can and will be more ambitious on emissions reductions, just not in the hurried, haphazard and highly politicised manner put forward by Ms Steggall and others.
Australia’s national interest will be served by having truly “sensible discussion” and action.