The Rudd Government’s ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, and its support by the new Opposition, buoyed spirits in global climate talks at Bali. Australia gave crucial momentum to the talks which no doubt helped them fall over the line with the Bali Action Plan.
12 months later, negotiators gather in Poznan. Australia, in its formal submissions, encouraged other nations to release their medium-term targets. In a disappointing and slightly curious move, on the eve the talks opening, the Australian Government then announces it will not release its mid-term targets until December 15 – three days after the meeting closes! This will limit Australia’s role in Poznan. Whether that is a good thing or bad thing we’ll see in two weeks.
Asked by our researchers the overwhelming public response is concern about dithering. “They did that Kyoto thing in Bali but since then…” This helps explain the polling slump the ALP has experienced in the “better party to handle climate change” ratings since Bali. It’s still tracking better than a Coalition oscillating between delay and extreme delay, but the gap between them has narrowed.
In some ways the punters verdict is unfair with consultation needed on the fetchingly named Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme. The Global Financial Crisis presented a plum opportunity to delay the CPRS but to its credit the Government has persisted.
But around the Budget the Government certainly appeared to lose its climate mojo. It missed opportunities for tax reform, fumbled funding for renewable energy and controversially introduced means testing of solar panel rebates. Rebates are fragile instruments and if we are serious about developing a solar industry here then more sustainable feed in tariff systems are needed.
An even greater priority for pollution reduction outcomes would be more robust energy efficiency measures, especially for lower income households for whom energy bills form a disproportionate part. Over the weekend COAG dithered again on this, postponing a national strategy decision till next year.
Both ALP and the Coalition crumbled to petrol price concerns promising petrol excise offsets that would demonstrably be unfair and unhelpful squandering resources which could be better targeted.
There’s been a considerable focus on carbon capture and storage, a promising technology in our view. But more needs to be done if it is more than a promise and can play its part amongst a diverse commercial scale clean energy portfolio by 2020. Crucial to this latter policy goal is the promised 20% renewable energy target by 2020 and withstanding the Canberra econocrats resisting this policy, refusing to acknowledge that this would accelerate Australian innovation. The ALP made much of renewable industry moving offshore during the Howard years and risks more if this is left to languish further.
Professor Garnaut added real sophistication to the debate over the year, setting out the national interest in strong global targets of stabilising atmospheric greenhouse gas levels to below 450 parts per million. He raised the stakes by crystallising the consequences of going above 450 ppm for Australia as loss of the reef “as we know it” and the “viability of the Murray Darling”. After some confusion it was clear that he recommended Australia put on the table 25% reductions off 1990/2000 levels by 2020 as part of a global effort towards this goal. Leading climate scientists decided to write to the Prime Minister to back this ambition.
With the Treasurer releasing modelling which showed just a “whisker” of economic difference between the 25% and less ambitious and much riskier 15% reduction targets, you’d think there’d be little option. But there has been a carnival of rent seeking and business lobbying whipped into fresh fervour by the GFC.
We’ve attempted to counter many of the polluters arguments in our report Clearing the Air released today which also details we’ll need to invest around $5 billion per year (public and private) to 2020 in the clean energy infrastructure needed to power a low carbon economy. (Using our Australian Emissions Reduction Model where you can play Penny Wong setting your own targets).
On balance the ups have outweighed the downs but December 15 will be the real judgement day for the Rudd Government’s achievements of its first year and a vital marker toward its climate change legacy.
John Connor is CEO of the independent Climate Institute www.climateinstitute.org.au.
Independent? Give me a break John. Your seed money came from such as Bob Carr. Global warming was a wedge on Libs and Nats just like forests was in the NSW election in 1995. The Climate Institute was Clive Hamilton’s baby who was Hawke Govt researcher for RAC. Bob Carr launched his book at NSW Parliament a few years ago.
Your group is independent the same way NSW Nature Conservation Council was independent brokering $300K in grants from the Carr Govt in the late 90ies which then instituted 20 year resource security for the woodchip sector in SE NSW contrary to an express election promise in March 1995 to close the old monster.
This week another YouTube evidence of that disastrous ALP policy here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEdV5jXOeqw
It doesn’t wash. You front up in your wannabe politician’s suit on Meet the Press or wherever spouting bureaucratise, smooth diction, and just obscure the real politik wedge motivation driving the pointy heads in the ALP machine. And Paul Winn has hardly covered himself in glory either when it comes to the green carbon being trashed at Eden, in trade off for NE Forest reserves and no questions asked over the Eden monster in the 1990ies via his home group NEFA.
Careerism doesn’t cut it, especially on the back of the real independent green movement. I want to hear from the Green Party’s Senator Milne because you know she is really trying. The rest is unreliable.
The real problem is the real motivation for a wedge means the Rudd Govt are NOT sincere. Just as Penny Wong worked for the logging minister in 1995 in Sydney.
The big solar energy conference in Sydney last week with global players Suntech and SolarTrina and others present was a case in point of this lame Federal Govt. This is a potentially high employing, very big energy sector but the govt policy settings are tragic. Along with the tragedy of Mumbai swamping any coverage of their conference event.
Garrett was there unlike shadow Hunt or WWF Greg Bourne – both booked to speak – but apart from a $6M solar project in Alice Springs one expert told me the minister’s speech was notable for what the Minister didn’t say – election promises of an Energy Innovation Fund, Renewable Energy Fund gone begging. Nothing about Gross Feed In Tariff which is going gangbusers in most European countries and likely to achieve “grid parity” (same cost as grid energy) within 5 to 10 years.
Garrett didn’t stay for questions and it’s pretty obvious why. He can’t deliver on global warming via such as solar, let alone protection of green carbon. This is a former pop singer who produced a record via solar energy and expressed great pride at the achievement.
……………………..
Regarding my previous comment, I was an elected member of the NCC executive 1998, and 1999 until I resigned over their weak approach to the Carr Govt pro woodchipping policy leading to the best forest in South East Australia being woodchipped.