Climate pressure ‘doomed to fail’, says Angus Taylor
GRAHAM LLOYD 10:30PM DECEMBER 30, 2019
Energy Minister Angus Taylor. Picture: AAP
Energy Minister Angus Taylor has warned that “top-down” pressure from the UN to address climate change will fail and better technologies — not tougher government imposts — are needed to meet emissions-reduction targets.
Defending Australia’s record on cutting carbon dioxide emissions, Mr Taylor said the evidence was that most countries would reject climate change policies that added substantially to the cost of living, destroyed jobs, reduced incomes and impeded growth.
“There are serious limits to pressuring countries into aggressive top-down targets without offering clear pathways to deliver,” Mr Taylor, the minister responsible for emissions reductions writes in The Australian.
“Many countries understandably see that as negative globalism, and a gross infringement on their national sovereignty.’’
Mr Taylor, writing in the wake of stalled UN climate negotiations in Madrid in December, said the focus should be on finding productive technologies and practices that delivered emission abatement while maintaining or strengthening economic growth.
Official notice from the US that it would leave the Paris Agreement in November has dogged recent climate talks.
Australia, Brazil and Saudi Arabia were singled out for blocking progress in Madrid.
Australia was criticised by climate groups for wanting to count extra credits from the Kyoto round two process towards its Paris Agreement goals.
Mr Taylor has defended the policy, saying there was less carbon dioxide in the atmosphere because of the work of Australian households, farmers and businesses.
“Over-delivery (on Kyoto 2) should be recognised by the world in assessing and setting future obligations,’’ he said.
Criticism at the Madrid meeting was not confined to the US, Australia and Brazil. “Other major economies like China, Japan and India seemed content to stay complicit on the sidelines,” the World Resources Institute said.
As a result, the UN climate agenda increasingly was at risk of becoming a EU-led project.
Mr Taylor said Australia’s performance was not a major part of talks in Madrid. Domestic emissions cuts compared favourably with other nations, and Australia was contributing to international savings through the export of cleaner fuels such as liquefied natural gas, he said.
Mr Taylor said Australia was responsible for only 1.3 per cent of global emissions and could not have a meaningful impact without co-operation of the largest emitters such as China and the US.
He said Australia had done better than similar countries such as Canada and New Zealand.
Since 2005, Australia’s emissions had fallen 12.9 per cent compared with 2 per cent in Canada and a rise of 4 per cent in New Zealand.
In that time, China’s emissions had risen 67 per cent and India 77 per cent.
Both countries have insisted on the delivery of a promised $100bn a year in climate funding from the developed world before deciding on any further action.
In addition, as part of negotiations for new rules to govern international carbon-trading markets, developing nations want a percentage of the value of global trade to be collected and put aside for climate programs and mitigation.
Mr Taylor said the main focus of the Madrid meeting had been on how to make international carbon markets work.
This was not directly relevant to Australia because it did not trade international permits.
The meeting closed without progress on the key agenda items. Countries failed to agree on the final elements of the Paris rulebook or guidelines to bring the Paris Agreement into operation.
Little progress was made on support and finance for developing countries.
Ireland was the only country to increase its pledge to the Green Climate Fund to which Australia has said it will make no further contributions.
No agreement could be reached on long-term climate finance that developing nations expect will raise more than $100bn a year from next year. And after a marathon session in Madrid, a decision on the rules for international carbon markets was postponed until 2020.
Australia has been supportive of getting an outcome on a global carbon market, despite currently not having any exposure to the scheme.
Brazil, India, Russia and China have signalled they are not interested in a global scheme unless their historical credits under the Clean Development Mechanism were recognised.
This has led to accusations of double counting.
Under the Paris Agreement, countries have to revisit their climate plans by 2020, but most are not compelled to enhance them.
At the insistence of the US, Brazil and China, the final communique in Madrid simply recalled the Paris Agreement commitment that they “communicate or update” their climate plans by 2020.
Countries were urged to consider the gap between existing commitments and what was needed to limit warming “well below 2C”, with a view to “reflecting their highest possible ambition’’.
Most countries are under no obligation to revisit their ambition to cut greenhouse gas emissions levels until 2025.
Most countries are under no obligation to revisit their ambition to cut greenhouse gas emissions levels until 2025.
Mr Taylor said Australia was already ahead of its 2030 targets without taking account of any technology improvement or action by state governments.
He said Australia would increase its emissions-reductions targets only if it was sure the new targets could be met.
He said there was enormous potential in established and emerging technologies such as hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, biofuels, lithium production and waste to energy.
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation ... e15f304791
And what does the man in the street think ?
Alison 23 MINUTES AGO
Climate change is/has replaced Christianity. The new Gospel is "The Science" and we must repent our wicked ways by denouncing Capitalism. The more you study the climate change cult the more similarities with old religion become apparent. Lucky I am an atheist and can continue to enjoy the fruits of Capitalism.
Alex 1 HOUR AGO
When will our politicians have the honesty to admit that CO2 is essentially a plant food. The more CO2 in the air the greener our planet becomes. This means crops grow better, forrests grow better, more food is produced for our ever increasing world population. It is so so wrong that CO2 is put in the dangerous and unwanted basket. Its about time this minister and the government as a whole do a complete 180 on this and start telling the truth in regards to the overall benifits of an increasing level of CO2. There are a lot more urgent discussion to be had in making this world a better place, but CO2 aint one of them. Alex WA
Terry D 1 HOUR AGO
Energy Minister Angus Taylor has warned that […] better technologies […] are needed to meet emissions-reduction targets.
And I have not seen any proof/evidence that realising the so-called emissions-reduction targets will have any tangible benefits.
Dean 2 HOURS AGO
There's something that most overlook here . Our biggest and never to be solved problem is the electricity market. Once capital is paid for solar and wind power are free . What's wrong with that .
Understandably no 'for profit company' will keep a coal fired station sitting around on standby nor give away free power.
This whole thing is profit driven because we are only customers ,mainly, to private companies legally bound to maximise profit .
When you stand back and look at it , it's laughable that such an essential service is out of our control.
So whatever new wiz bang technology comes along , not just talked about , it will be poison to the status quo.
Bean 1 HOUR AGO
If your claim of free power from renewables is valid then there is no need to provide any subsidies!
Mikhail 2 HOURS AGO
A good start. Perhaps sometime soon we will recognize that climate change is perpetual and unrelated to human activities. Not yet, though
Joan 4 HOURS AGO
Only 1.3% of the emissions, currently 100% of the bushfire deaths.
Ruth 3 HOURS AGO
A baseless accusation- climate change does not start fires and does not provide the fuel. 85% of bush fires are started by humans both deliberate and accidental. These fires are not unprecedented please refer to historical fire disasters. The term ‘catastrophic’ is a recently introduced category and not relevant when comparing with previous disasters. Even if we concede that the fires are a result of climate change what policies can an Australian Federal government introduce to change the climate - zero. Immediate and practical solutions include harsher penalties for arsonists and a radical reduction in fuel load. Those conflating climate change and the bush fires should hang their heads in shame - political opportunist!!!
Martin or the better half 2 HOURS AGO
No Joan , the IPCC , the so called scientists everyone refers to says in their AR5 report that climate change is not convincingly linked to drought . The ENSO is, as are the solar sun spot activity/ cycles.
This drought was predicted on solar cycles back in 2010 by a long range Oz weather forecaster . He says it will stretch to 2028
We will always have drought, we had it long before the Co2 furphy came along .
Lance 4 HOURS AGO
the UN climate agenda increasingly was at risk of becoming a EU-led project
Sounds good to me. Let's leave it all the to EU, and we and the rest of the world can just get on with life.
Ann 4 HOURS AGO
He said there was enormous potential in established and emerging technologies such as hydrogen. Hydrogen cars are already operating in many countries very satisfactorily. They can be quickly refueled and travel long distances. The emissions from these cars is water. Australia has the potential to export hydrogen to all countries as ammonia and convert the ammonia very safely to hydrogen using the CSIRO membrane that they have developed. Australia can contribute to reducing emissions in all those countries.