Antinuclear

JANUARY 16, 2020  Polls suggest that Australians want to take action on climate change, and business leaders have joined the call for emissions cuts. ….. Pressure is growing on the federal government to take more decisive action.But what form would greater climate change action take – and what would it cost?

What does climate action actually mean?

Climate change action takes two forms: mitigation, which means reducing greenhouse gas emissions at a rate fast enough to prevent massive damage to our environment in the future; and adaptation, which means bracing and preparing for the changes that are happening and which will intensify.

Adapting to climate change is essential and there are many ways to do so, such as beefing up emergency services and strengthening farms and infrastructure against fires, storms and rising sea levels.

But the source of the problem is the rising emissions that are trapping heat in the atmosphere and oceans. In Australia, emissions come from electricity, industry, transport and agriculture as well as other sectors.

If we are serious about tackling climate change, we must reduce emissions faster than we are doing now. That’s the view of the world’s leading scientific bodies as well as the key expert bodies in Australia, including the CSIRO and the Australian Academy of Science. Their advice is clear: Australia needs to be close to carbon neutral by the middle of the century.

It would be nice to be able to flick a switch and change to zero emissions next week. In practice, decarbonising the nation will be a long, complex process.

The Garnaut Review, led by senior economist Ross Garnaut almost a decade ago, is still the most comprehensive assessment of Australia’s options for climate change action. It drew on leading Australian research on bushfire impacts to forecast an increase in bushfire danger by 2020. On our current trajectory, we are on track to see catastrophic fire days increase by 300 per cent by the second half of this century. 

The review outlines various types of policy that can help cut emissions, both “carrots” and “sticks”. There are public subsidies, such as government funding for wind and solar farms; or special tariffs to pay householders with solar panels. Then there are systems for making polluters pay, such as a carbon price implemented through a carbon tax or an emissions trading scheme. There are also policies that rely on regulating an industry, such as the now-abandoned National Energy Guarantee policy, under which companies would be required by law to use a mix of different technologies.

Several types of policy can operate at the same time. Australia had a carbon price from 2012 to 2014 before it was repealed after a change of government. Currently, it has some direct subsidies for emissions reduction projects but no mechanism for cutting greenhouse gases at the speed required.

The Garnaut Review found – and other studies, including by the OECD and by the Australian National University, have since agreed – that a carbon price coupled with an emissions trading scheme and a cap on greenhouse gas emissions would be the most effective and efficient way of cutting emissions.

The Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, has ruled out a “carbon tax” or other action that would raise electricity prices or affect polluting industries. In the wake of the fires, Mr Morrison has flagged “resilience” and “adaptation” as the areas he wants to focus on……..

Australia currently has no mechanism for controlling its greenhouse gas emissions and may not meet its Paris commitments……. https://www.smh.com.au/national/what-is-real-action-on-climate-change-20200115-p53rok.html