Towards a climate policy toolkit: special review on Australia’s climate goals and policies, Australian Policy Online Climate Change Authority 31 August 2016 The Climate Change Authority is pleased to release the third and final report of its Special Review into the actions or policies that Australia should take to implement outcomes flowing from the historic Paris climate change agreement……..The emissions reduction policy toolkit needs to take account of Australia’s climate policy history, be suited to the emissions opportunities and challenges in individual sectors and be able to be scaled up in the future to meet the emission reduction challenges in the Paris Agreement…….
That agreement makes it clear that countries’ emissions reductions will need to go beyond their 2025 or 2030 pledges to achieve deeper reductions in the decades ahead, and Australia’s emissions will need to decline much more rapidly in the near future than they have in the past. For the electricity generation sector, the Authority found that a market mechanism in the form of an emissions intensity scheme is the best policy fit.
The Authority is also recommending that an enhanced safeguard mechanism be put in place as an effective, pragmatic and durable way of reducing emissions across a range of industrial, manufacturing and resource sectors. For households, vehicles and buildings, the Authority recommends that energy efficiency standards be put in place or strengthened.
For the land sector, the Authority found that voluntary offsets are the best tool for the task, given the large number of landholders and the differences between farming operations. In this report, as flagged in the Authority’s Special Review final report on targets, the Authority has not sought to provide further advice on emissions reduction targets. Emissions reduction targets are very important parts of the emissions reduction armoury but without effective policy action they will remain aspirational rather than determinative for the way ahead.
The global nuclear lobby’s current favourite lie is the one about climate change
Australia will be greatly impacted by climate change, yet Australia is an international pariah when it comes to acting to stop climate change.
Compounding this problem is the global nuclear lobby’s push to make Australia the key player in a new ‘nuclear renaissance’. The plan is to encourage South Asian nations to set up nuclear power, with South Australia as their toilet for nuclear wastes.
The last thing that we need is to direct money and energy to the nuclear industry, and away from renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Climate sceptic MP appointed chair of environment and energy committee
Liberal Craig Kelly will lead backbench committee that provides advice and feedback on legislation and policies, Guardian, Gabrielle Chan, 29 Aug 16, The climate sceptic Liberal MP Craig Kelly has been appointed chairman of the backbench environment and energy committee, with National party MP Kevin Hogan as secretary.
The committee will provide feedback on legislation and policies relating to the environment and energy, including to the minister, Josh Frydenberg.
Kelly served on the committee during the last parliament and previously invited climate sceptics to “balance” a presentation given by top climate scientists…….https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/aug/29/climate-sceptic-mp-appointed-chair-of-environment-and-energy-committee
Coalition environment committee chairman takes aim at solar subsidies Craig Kelly says he wants wind and solar funding to be redirected to research into ‘technological breakthroughs’ because existing renewables had ‘little effect’, Guardian, Gabrielle Chan, 31 Aug 16, The Liberal chairman of the Coalition’s environment policy committee, Craig Kelly, has questioned solar and wind power subsidies and would like a cost-benefit analysis of future emission reductions policy, due to be reviewed next year.
Kelly was named chairman of the environment and energy committee at the party room meeting on Monday, making him responsible for coordinating backbench feedback to the government on climate and energy policy.
He said he was proud to be a climate sceptic rather than “wallow in groupthink, to be a sheep, or a lemming”. Kelly described himself as in the “Bjorn Lomborg” camp, suggesting wind and solar funding should be channelled into “further research” because those current renewables like wind and solar power had “diminishing returns”………
Kelly said in considering the price of power, the option of nuclear power should be considered……..https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/aug/31/coalition-environment-committee-chairman-takes-aim-at-solar-subsidies
Friends of the Earth has recently released a report called ‘Fuelling the Fire: the chequered history of Underground Coal Gasification and Coal Chemicals around the world’
The report draws together evidence of UCG test projects over the last three decades and highlights how destructive UCG and Coal Chemicals are
Fuelling the fire: New coal technologies like UCG spell disaster for climate https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/fuelling-the-fire-new-coal-technologies-like-ucg-spell-disaster-for-climate-,9393 Cam Walker 26 August 2016, Given UCG’s disastrous history including Linc Energy’s irreversible environmental damage in Queensland, Friends of the Earth is calling for a moratorium on all UCG projects in Australia. Cam Walker fromFriends of the Earth reports.
IN RECENT years Australia, like many countries around the planet, has seen a major expansion in the development of unconventional oil and gas drilling.
These are oil and gas resources which cannot be produced by conventional processes (that is, through using the natural pressure of the wells to release the resource trapped in a coal or rock seam).
Until the 1990s, production of conventionaloil and gas kept prices relatively stable, so there was limited incentive to develop technologies to explore and produce unconventional oil and gas resources.
In the 2000s, prices started to increase, and with known reserves starting to peak, it was clear that this trend would continue into the future.
As debate increasingly focused on energy independence, a number of countries who consume large volumes of fossil energy such as the USA, Canada and China started to realise they had potentially enormous volumes of unconventional oil and gas. This in turn lead to a major development effort that saw a huge expansion in the use of hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’) to access methane in shale beds to produce gas in the USA and elsewhere.
Australia also has major reserves of oil and gas which could potentially yield through the use of unconventional drilling methods. Here the unconventional gas resource includes coal seam gas (CSG), shale gas and tight gas. Exploration for CSG in Australia began in 1976 in Queensland’s Bowen Basin. The industry took hold, initially in Queensland, where there are currently around 4,000 onshore gas rigs. More than 37% of the Australian landmass is currently under exploration permit or application for coal or gas.
The UCG industry has been strongly resisted by regional communities and environmental groups around the country and the many dangers of fracking are well documented. This has resulted in moratoriums on fracking in states such as Victoria. Continue reading
Coalition climate numbskulls back again flogging CCS at a cost of $209 billion Lachlan Barker, Independent Australia 25 August 2016, The Coalition’s latest brainsnap of flogging Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) as a solution to CO2 emissions from coal-fired power stations will set the taxpayer back an eye-watering $209 billion, says Lachlan Barker. “…… the utterly ludicrous notion of Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), as a solution to CO2 emissions from coal fired power stations has raised its idiot head once more.
The CCS process involves capturing the CO2 emitted from the burner chamber, compressing it, and sequestering it underground.
Resources Minister Matt Canavan recently handed out $23.7 million to various bodies around the country to (once more) discover CCS can never work. So I can tell you right here, right now, CCS is not feasible in any way — financially, ecologically or in an engineering sense.
However since Canavan has done this thing, once more we are all forced to go through the mill of showing why CCS is an utterly fallacious idea.
The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has an excellent reference page for CCS, so I’ve distilled the Power Plants CCS Projects page down for you here: [excellent charts and graphs on original]……..https://independentaustralia.net/politics/politics-display/coalition-climate-numbskulls-back-again-flogging-ccs-at-a-cost-of-209-billion,9394
National Climate Adaptation Conference 2016, Day Three – Sean Kidney
SOUTH AUSTRALIA: LEADING ON CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTATION The Climate group, August 2016. Sandy Pitcher, Chief Executive of South Australia’s Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, reflects on the achievements of Australia’s preeminent climate change forum, the Climate Adaptation 2016 conference, which took place in Adelaide in July.
The Climate Adaptation 2016 conference provided an unprecedented opportunity for South Australia to highlight the important progress being made on climate change adaptation in our state, and learn from others in Australia and around the world.
The conference was presented by the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, with the South Australian Government – a member of The Climate Group’s States & Regions Alliance, the platinum sponsor. It attracted around 490 policy makers, researchers and practitioners and the debate focused on the challenges and opportunities presented by climate change adaptation.
The innovation that we’re seeing mainly happens at the local level, and can be shared at conferences like this. It is a crucial way, for us in South Australia and beyond, to share ideas, catalyze local action, and bring key influencers together.
ADAPTATION IS A VERY KEY TENANT TO ANY FUTURE STRATEGY – THERE ARE MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED BY A CHANGING CLIMATE
Tim Jarvis, Australian adventurer ADAPTATION CENTRAL TO CLIMATE EFFORTS
South Australia has long been recognized as a global leader on climate action, and our work in climate change adaptation is central to our efforts.
Our award-winning adaptation framework is based on a collaborative, regional approach involving partnerships between local government, regional development committees and natural resources management boards, who are working together to develop well-informed adaptation solutions for their communities.
Currently, in each of the State’s regions, five climate adaptation plans have been completed with the remainder due to be finalized by the end of the year….https://www.theclimategroup.org/news/south-australia-leading-climate-change-adaptation
154 Australian scientists demand climate policy that matches the science https://theconversation.com/154-australian-scientists-demand-climate-policy-that-matches-the-science-64359
- Andrew Glikson Earth and paleo-climate scientist, Australian National University
- Andrew Blakers Professor of Engineering, Australian National University
- Lesley Hughes Professor, Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University
August 25, 2016 154 Australian experts have signed on open letter to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull demanding urgent action on climate change that matches the dire warnings coming from climate scientists.
The letter, organised by Australian National University climatologist Andrew Glikson, calls on the federal government to make “meaningful reductions of Australia’s peak carbon emissions and coal exports, while there is still time”.
Signatories include leading climate and environmental scientists such as the Climate Council’s Tim Flannery, Will Steffen, and Lesley Hughes, as well as reef scientists Ove Hoegh-Guldberg and Charlie Veron.
They point out that July 2016 was the hottest month ever recorded, and followed a nine-month streak of record-breaking months. Average carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere reached 400 parts per million (ppm) in 2015, and are rising at a rate of nearly 3 ppm each year.
The world is already witnessing the effects of climate change, the letter argues, including an increase in extreme weather events, melting of the polar ice sheets, and ocean acidification.
Australia, along with 179 other nations, has signed the climate treatybrokered in Paris last year, aiming to limit average global warming to “well below 2℃ above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5℃”.
However Glikson warned that “the Paris Agreement, being non-binding, is in danger of not being fulfilled by many of the signatories”. The deal will not enter into force until it is ratified by 55 nations accounting for at least 55% of the world’s greenhouse emissions.
Glikson called for action to “transition from carbon-emitting technologies to alternative clean energy as fast as possible, and focus technology on draw-down (sequestration) of greenhouse gases from the atmosphere”.
Australia’s current greenhouse gas target, which it took to December’s Paris climate summit, calls for emissions to be reduced by 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030. It has been widely criticised by experts as not ambitious enough.
Andrew Blakers, professor of engineering at the Australian National University, said Australia could reduce emissions by two-thirds by 2030 “at negligible cost”.
He said the falling cost of renewable energy, particularly solar and wind, the replacement of gas with electricity for heating, and the advent of electric vehicles would eliminate most emissions. Solar and wind installation, currently at 1 gigawatt each year, would need to be increased to 2.5 gigawatts each year to reach 100% renewable energy by 2030.
Remaining emissions, from shipping, aviation, and industry, could be eliminated after 2030 at slightly higher costs.
Lesley Hughes, a member of the Climate Council and professor at Macquarie University, said there were a number of factors causing the gap between science and policy, including vested interests, perception of economic downsides of climate action, ideological biases, and inertia in the system from current investment in fossil fuels. But she said the “most important issue” was the difficulty in convincing people to act to reduce risk decades in the future.
The Climate Change Authority, which advises the government on climate policy, in 2014 recommended Australia adopt a target of 40-60% below 2000 levels by 2030.
In a report released yesterday, The Climate Institute highlighted that aiming for 1.5℃ instead of 2℃ would avoid longer heatwaves and droughts, and give the Great Barrier Reef a better chance of survival.
The institute recommended that Australia adopt an emissions reduction target of 65% below 2005 levels by 2030 and phase out coal power by 2035.
Keeping global warming to 1.5C, not 2C, will make a crucial difference to Australia, report says, The Conversation, James Whitmore, August 24, 2016 , Australia could avoid punishingly long heatwaves and boost the Great Barrier Reef’s chances of survival by helping to limit global warming to 1.5℃ rather than 2℃, according to a report released by the Climate Institute today.
Australia, along with 179 other countries, has formally signed the Paris climate agreement. The deal, which has not yet come into force, commits nations to limit Earth’s warming to “well below 2℃” and to aim for 1.5℃ beyond pre-industrial temperatures.
The new research, compiled by the international agency Climate Analytics, suggests that limiting global warming to 1.5℃ rather than letting it reach 2℃ could make a significant difference to the severity of extreme weather events in Australia. Heatwaves in southern Australia would be an average of five days shorter, and the hottest days a degree cooler. In the north, hot spells would be 20-30 days shorter than the 60-day heatwaves potentially in store if warming hits 2℃……..
University of Melbourne researcher Andrew King, who studies climate extremes, said the report “paints a grim picture for the future”, given that Australia is already experiencing climate-driven events such as this year’sunprecedented bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef.
“There are many benefits if warming could be limited to 1.5℃, with less frequent and intense extreme weather. On the other hand, we are entering the unknown if we allow warming to surpass 2℃, as tipping points in the Earth’s climate system make accurate predictions difficult to make,” Dr King said.
The report predicts that half of the world’s identified tipping points – such as the collapse of polar ice sheets and the drying out of the Amazon rainforest – would be crossed under 2℃ warming, compared with 20% of them at 1.5℃………
In a separate report, the Climate Institute recommends that Australia adopt greenhouse gas targets of 45% below 2005 levels by 2025, and 65% by 2030, if it is to do its fair share in achieving the Paris Agreement’s goals.
The institute also recommended that Australia phase out coal-fired electricity generation by 2025, increase renewable generation to 50% by 2030, and double energy productivity by 2030.
It argues for a carbon price, and urges politicians to factor the costs and benefits of climate change and climate action formally into all policy decisions.
Australia’s current climate target under the Paris Agreement is 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2030. Labor has proposed a 45% target, and the Greens zero or negative emissions within a generation.
Australia will review its climate policies in 2017, ahead of the first global stocktake of nations’ Paris Agreement targets in 2018…….https://theconversation.com/keeping-global-warming-to-1-5c-not-2c-will-make-a-crucial-difference-to-australia-report-says-64287
“Campaign of intimidation” One of the academics on the receiving end of Roberts complaints, John Cook, of the University of Queensland, told DeSmog:
Beneath the public attacks on climate science, scientists are also subject to a more insidious campaign of intimidation, otherwise known as the subterranean war on science. This takes the form of complaints to universities to get scientists fired, complaints to journals to get papers retracted and FOIrequests to pick through scientists’ emails.
Sen. Malcolm Roberts: Climate denier, conspiracy nut and serial pest, Independent Australia DeSmog Blog 15 August 2016 One Nation’s Senator Malcolm Roberts has spent countless hours harassing scientists, researchers and politicians with rantings about climate change conspiracy theories. DeSmogBlog‘s Graham Readfearnreports.
MALCOLM ROBERTS is a former Australian mining consultant who thinks the United Nations is using the “scam” of human-caused climate change as a cover story while it builds an all-powerful world government.
He’s also just been elected as an Australian Senator.
Roberts will sit in Australia’s upper house as a member of the far-right One Nation party that wants to ban Muslim immigration and investigate climate scientists for “fraud and corruption”.
Since his election, Roberts has been given blanket coverage in the Australian media, with high profile interviews on flagship shows on the publicly funded ABC. Continue reading
One Nation’s Malcolm Roberts is in denial about the facts of climate change http://www.skepticalscience.com/One-Nation-Malcolm-Roberts-denial-about-facts-climate-change.html 5 August 2016 by John Cook
This article was originally published on The Conversation
. Read the original article
The notion that climate science denial is no longer a part of Australian politics was swept away yesterday by One Nation Senator-Elect Malcolm Roberts.
In his inaugural press conference, Roberts claimed that “[t]here’s not one piece of empirical evidence anywhere, anywhere, showing that humans cause, through CO₂ production, climate change”.
He also promoted conspiracy theories that the CSIRO and Bureau of Meteorology are corrupt accomplices in climate conspiracy driven by the United Nations.
His claims conflict with many independent lines of evidence for human-caused global warming. Coincidentally, the University of Queensland is releasing a free online coursethis month examining the psychology and techniques of climate science denial. The very first video lecture addresses Roberts’ central claim, summarising the empirical evidence that humans are causing climate change.
UQx DENIAL101x 126.96.36.199 Consensus of Evidence
Scientists have observed various human fingerprints in recent climate change, documented in many peer-reviewed scientific papers.
Satellites measure less heat escaping to space at the exact wavelengths at which CO₂ absorbs energy. The upper atmosphere is cooling at the same time that the loweratmosphere is warming – a distinct pattern unique to greenhouse warming. Human activity is also changing the very structure of the atmosphere.
Not only do these unique fingerprints confirm humanity’s role in recent climate change, they also rule out other potential natural contributors. If the Sun caused global warming, we would expect to see days warming faster than nights, and summers warming faster than winters.
Instead we observe the opposite: nights are warming faster than days, and winters are warming faster than summers, which is a greenhouse pattern predicted by John Tyndallas long ago as 1859.
Similarly, if global warming were caused by internal variability, we would expect to seeheat shuffling around the climate system with no net build-up. Instead, scientists observe our climate system accumulating heat at a rate of more than four atomic bombs per second.
Our scientific understanding grows stronger when many independent lines of evidence all point to a single, consistent conclusion. In the case of climate change, the “consensus of evidence” has led 97% of climate scientists to agree that humans are causing global warming.
The scientific consensus on climate change has also been endorsed by many scientific organisations all over the world, including the national science academies of 80 countries
Is it a conspiracy?
How does one dismiss a global scientific consensus built on a robust body of empirical evidence?
There are five characteristics of science denial. These common traits are seen when people reject climate science, the benefits of vaccination, or the research linking smoking to cancer.
The techniques of denial are: fake experts; logical fallacies; impossible expectations; cherrypicking; and conspiracy theories. This is summarised in the acronym FLICC.
UQx DENIAL101x 188.8.131.52 Five Characteristics of Science Denial
Climate science denial and conspiratorial thinking are often found together. A well-known example is that of Donald Trump, who has dismissed climate change by blaming it on a Chinese conspiracy
Several studies have linked climate science denial and conspiratorial thinking. If a person disagrees with a global scientific consensus, they’ll typically believe that the scientists are all engaging in a conspiracy to deceive them.
Malcolm Roberts’ conspiracy theories have been well documented and were once again on offer in yesterday’s speech. He espouses a conspiracy that encompasses the CSIRO, Bureau of Meteorology, international banking families, the United Nations and Al Gore.
Unfortunately, I am not optimistic that the evidence for human-caused global warming will persuade Malcolm Roberts. The scientific evidence from psychology tells us that scientific evidence is largely ineffective on those who dismiss climate science with conspiracy theories.
My own research found that communicating the science of climate change to those who exhibit conspiratorial thinking can even be counterproductive, activating their distrust of scientists and strengthening their denial of the evidence.
Furthermore, conspiratorial thinking is self-sealing. When conspiracy theorists are presented evidence that there is no conspiracy, they often respond by broadening the conspiracy to include that evidence. In other words, they interpret evidence against a conspiracy as evidence for the conspiracy.
Our course on climate science denial will be much more useful to those who are open to scientific evidence and curious about the research into the causes and impacts of climate change and the psychology of climate science denial.
By Anna Vidot Farmers have welcomed a partial backtrack on CSIRO cuts, but have called on the Government to invest more in climate change adaptation research for agriculture……..http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/farmers-welcome-partial-csiro-backtrack-on-climate/7691088
Carteret climate refugees seek home A grassroots group in Bougainville is scrambling to relocate the Carteret Islanders before rising sea levels swallow their land forever. ABC News 7 Aug 16 By Lauren Beldi for Pacific Beat At only 1.5 metres above sea level at their highest point, the Carteret Islands are some of the first to succumb to the rising ocean tides.
The grassroots Tulele Peisa group, which means “sailing the waves on our own” in the local Halia language, is hoping to relocate more than half of the population by 2020. They have secured land for new homes on the main island of the Autonomous Region of Bougainville, to the east of mainland Papua New Guinea.
Tulele Peisa formed in late 2006 after the Council of Elders on the islands decided to establish their own relocation program. The group’s chief executive, Ursula Rakova, says the encroaching tides on the islands have a major impact on people’s health. “We’re beginning to get more requests for people wanting to move because of the situation and the dire need for food,” she says.
The storm surges not only wash away houses, but also vegetable gardens, which are critical for the islanders’ survival.
With no cash economy on the Carterets, the only source of food is what people are able to grow for themselves……
Tulele Peisa has also provided thousands of mangrove seedlings to prevent the erosion of the coastline, and helped to build raised garden beds. But this will only stave off the inevitable for so long.
“Those are adaptation strategies, they aren’t really long-term solutions to containing the islands, because we know the islands are going, but we are looking at supporting our families,” Ms Rakova says.
She says the islanders want to maintain their independent way of living but that the international community should provide more support.
“The islanders on the Carterets are victims of what other people have caused and the international community needs to aid and support the work that we are doing,” she says.
“We have found our way forward [and] we would like to share the way forward with other people, but we need this process to be funded financially so that we can continue to sustain ourselves.” http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-07/carteret-climate-refugees-new-home/7693950?section=environment
CSIRO’s renewed climate change focus will not reverse damage done by job cuts: scientists, ABC News, PM , 4 Aug 16 By Felicity Ogilvie and staff Some of Australia’s top climate scientists say new instructions given to the CSIRO to renew its focus on climate science will not be enough to reverse the damage done by previous jobs cuts.
The Federal Government’s new Science Minister Greg Hunt has instructed the CSIRO to renew its focus on climate science.
Climate scientists from around the country, meeting in Hobart to discuss how climate change will affect Australia’s future, say they are having a hard time keeping up with the changes in how climate science at the CSIRO is being run.
CSIRO Fellow Dr John Church, an expert in estimating and understanding global and regional sea-level rise, is one of the 275 CSIRO scientists who are losing their jobs.
“This is only a step in the right direction, it certainly doesn’t recover all the positions that have been lost,” Dr Church told PM.
University of Tasmania polar scientist Matt King said Dr Church was irreplaceable, and said he was finding it hard to digest the directive given by Mr Hunt…….
Dr Rintoul said damage had been done to Australia’s international reputation as a result of the CSIRO job cuts…….he also agreed that CSIRO staff losses would have a major negative impact on Australian research.
“In short, John Church is irreplaceable and some of our staff are similarly irreplaceable. So there are areas of science that Australia used to be strong in that we will no longer be as strong in and we’ll need to rebuild,” he said…….http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-04/csiro-climate-focus-wont-reverse-job-cut-damages-say-scientists/7691928
One of their [climate denialists] cheerleaders is Frydenberg’s successor in the resources portfolio, Queensland senator Matt Canavan.
Canavan has form as a climate science doubter. A fortnight ago he told Sky News that the impact of carbon emissions had been “overhyped” by “certain interest groups” — in line with an earlier newspaper article in which he advocated funding “scientists who take a different view”.
New minister’s political comments on science raise concerns, PETER BOYER, Mercury
August 2, 2016
“……..Malcolm Turnbull’s Cabinet reshuffle saw climate and energy combined for the first time in the one portfolio, which I think was a good decision. Putting coal-power champion Josh Frydenberg in the job may not be, but in this new regime I am prepared to keep an open mind.If he is to understand the perils of burning coal, Frydenberg first has to come to grips with the science of climate change. His performance on ABC’s Lateline last week shows he has work to do.
“I absolutely accept that man is contributing to climate change,” he declared. But that is not really how it is. Saying we are contributing to climate change is like saying the sun contributes to a warm day, or Hawthorn contributed to winning last year’s AFL premiership.
In the cautious words of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there’s a 95 to 100 per cent chance that human activities have been the dominant cause of observed warming since the mid-20th century. We have not just contributed to climate change — we have caused it.
In the same Lateline interview, Frydenberg said Australia’s 2030 target — emissions 26 to 28 per cent lower than in 2005 — was “very ambitious” and among the highest in the world on a per-capita basis.
We have already heard the same from Abbott, Hunt and Turnbull.
All have failed to acknowledge our unhappy record of long being the G20’s highest per-capita emitter, skated over much tougher European targets, and ignored completely the all-important target of zero emissions.
Frydenberg is taking the classic conservative halfway position, allowing the established scientific truth that human emissions affect the climate but dodging the further truth, reinforced by every IPCC report, that their impact is both potent and increasingly dangerous.
He is playing to the many holdouts in the Coalition who still do not accept the real and present danger of climate change and the rising urgency to address it. Continue reading