Antinuclear

New Matilda explains Abbott’s 3 big lies on climate change

Three Ways Abbott And Hunt Misled The Public Over Their Climate Change ‘Plan’, New Matilda, 12 Aug 15  – From straight up fibs to heinous misrepresentations, you can expect to see these talking points wheeled out again and again. Thom Mitchell takes a hatchet to the half-truths.

Okay, so here’s the rub.

…..1) Tony Abbott: “This [target] is fairly and squarely in the middle of comparable economies”

No. It’s not. It’s just not, and that’s the most important point.

The Climate Institute think tank has crunched the numbers — which is actually so much harder to do than you’d think, and much more so than the government wants you to think — to show how we compare to other economies in real terms.

Check out this graphic: [on original] Essentially it shows that while, under an Abbott government, Australia will reduce its emissions each year at a rate of -1.6 per cent until 2030, many other economies will do so faster. The average across the countries included in the Climate Institute graphic is -2.5 per cent.

The United States will reduce their emissions at an annual rate of -2.3 per cent; the European Union at a rate of -2.6 per cent; and the United Kingdom will be kicking ass out in front, reducing their emissions at an annual rate of -5.1 per cent.

When the Prime Minister framed those numbers, he described Australia’s target as “a little below Europe [and] about the same as the United States”. Looking at the data, “a little below” and “about the same” actually mean Australia’s rate of emissions reduction in the post 2020 period will be only 61 per cent as fast as the EU’s and around 70 per cent as fast as the US’s.

Overall, we’re well and truly at the back of the pack. While for this government that might actually be viewed as a pretty good strike, it’s nowhere near enough.According to the Climate Institute Australia would blow its ‘carbon budget’ — the portion of global emissions it can pump into the atmosphere before avoiding the two degree rise in global temperatures the international community has agreed is ‘dangerous’ — within 14 years.

Abbott did raise a good point, though, when he said our target is “almost the same as New Zealand’s”.

The trick here is that our neighbours across the ditch already draw around 80 per cent of their electricity from renewable sources.

Which brings us to a fudge the government is likely to rely heavily on to muddy the treacherous waters of international climate negotiations.

2) Tony Abbott: “When it comes to emissions per capita our reduction, at at least 50 per cent, will be the highest in at least the developed world…”

This could be true — but it’s not such a good thing. It simply goes to show we have further to go than other developed nations………We have the highest per capita emissions of any nation in the OECD. And, despite Australians making up something like 0.3 per cent of the world’s population, we are the 13th highest-emitting nation………..

This one takes a bit of unpacking, but it’s important, so stick with me.

Hunt is trundling out an old claim that the government’s policy — the Emissions Reduction Fund — is more effective and cheaper than the carbon tax. New Matilda has already called Hunt out for spinning this particular bald-faced lie.

Hunt claims the government’s policy buys carbon abatement at a price more than 90 times cheaper than the carbon tax. As John Connor — the CEO of the Climate Institute — put it when the claim was first made in April, Hunt is “comparing apples and fridges”.

At that time the Australian National University’s Frank Jotzo told New Matilda that, “The most important thing to get straight in terms of misinformation and misleading comments there yesterday was Minister Hunt’s assertion that the carbon price was $1,300 per tonne.”……….The crux of it is that whereas the carbon tax brought in revenue, the Abbott government’s scheme forks out taxpayers’ cash to polluting companies. ……For a range of reasons, the price per tonne of emissions abatement at future reverse auctions is likely to be substantially higher, so it’s hard to see how Hunt’s policy can avoid blowing its budget.

When Hunt said that “we have a mechanism which produces reductions at a fraction of the cost of the carbon tax,” that was just spin.

The government’s policy requires substantial modification to prevent sectors of the economy that choose not to participate in ‘reverse auctions’ – or businesses which are unsuccessful in their bidding – from simply increasing their emissions with reckless abandon. As it stands, there’s basically no cap on carbon in the economy………
https://newmatilda.com/2015/08/12/three-ways-abbott-and-hunt-misled-public-over-their-climate-change-plan#sthash.YWMXbHGF.dpuf

August 14, 2015 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | General News