Dear Scomo 3: I Got a Reply!

So, I finally got a reply to my previous letters to the Prime Minister (you can read them here and here).  At least, I got a letter from the Prime Minister which was apparently prompted by my letters.  It's essentially a piece of spin, assuring me what a great job the government is doing on climate change.  If only that were true!

Of course I didn't have high expectations and I have decided to discipline myself to be persistent in this correspondence, so unlike the PM's staff, who ignored everything I said and just spun their own lines, I decided to reply point by point.  Here it is for your enjoyment!

Dear Prime Minister

Thank you for your letter of 13 November in response to my letters to you on climate change.

It is heartening to me that you have not followed the lead of some of your colleagues and tried to cast shade on the science of climate change – it’s a relief not to have that discussion.

It’s possible I would have been more reassured by your letter if it was not for the fact that it arrived during a week in which Brisbane was shrouded in smoke from the bushfires in southern Queensland and northern NSW.  I have never experienced this in my 50 years of living in Brisbane.  This spring it has happened twice.  If there was ever a time to re-evaluate our approach to climate change, this is it.

This also makes it somewhat disturbing that your letter does not make any mention of adaptation.  These fires are a clear indication that the climate has already changed and it will not go back to how it used to be – in fact, whatever happens we will experience some level of further change.  We are now in the business of damage limitation not prevention.  The clock is ticking.

With this in mind, I thought it would be a good exercise to comment in detail on the contents of your letter.  I am well aware that this letter is not a specific reply to mine, but is a carefully crafted message which you will have sent to many others like me.  You may be interested in how it comes across.  Your words are in italics, my comments in plain type.

Australia is taking climate action as part of a coordinated global effort.  We are committed to the Paris Agreement and have a proud history of meeting and beating our international climate change commitments – we are on track to beat our 2020 target by 367 million tonnes.

Our Paris Target, reducing emissions by 26 to 28 percent on 2005 levels by 2030, is a responsible one that makes a significant contribution to global climate action.  It represents a halving of emissions per person in Australia, or a two thirds reduction in emissions per unit of GDP.  This is no mean feat, given Australia is in its 29^th year of uninterrupted economic growth, while emissions per person are at their lowest levels in 29 years.

As is well known, the Paris Agreement consists of an overall agreement to limit global warming to between 1.5 and 2 degrees Celsius, along with a mechanism by which each nation nominates its own emissions reduction targets to contribute to this.  As was highlighted in this year’s New York summit, the total global commitments are far from being sufficient to achieve the overall goal.  Australia’s 26-28% commitment is relatively modest compared to other developed nations.  For instance the US, prior to its change of policy under President Trump, pledged to reach the same target five years earlier, while the EU committed to a 40% reduction on 1990 levels.  Even these commitments are not proportionate to the goal.  It is clear that all nations, including us, need to do more.

It is also hard to accept your assurances about meeting these rather modest targets when official government data shows that our emissions reductions have been stalled since 2013 and emissions have risen slightly over this period.  It is clear – and implicitly confirmed in your letter – that part of the government’s claim to reach the target rests on claiming carryover credits from meeting our Kyoto commitments.  This ironic considering our commitment under the Kyoto Protocol was to increase our emissions by 8%, so we are claiming to have met our emissions reduction targets by achieving a target that involved increasing them.  This may be a neat accounting trick but it would be infinitely preferable for us to actually reduce our emissions.

Although Australia is a comparatively small nation and hence has only a small impact on the overall problem, it is important as an advanced nation, a high per capita emitter and a major exporter of fossil fuels that we are seen to lead the way.  The Paris Agreement requires momentum and every country that commits to deep emissions cuts is more encouragement for others to follow suit.  This is why our resistance at the Pacific Forum, our half-hearted attitude to the recent New York summit and our failure to contribute to the Green Climate Fund are so concerning.

The Australian Government has a suite of practical policies in place to meet our emissions reduction targets while maintaining a strong and prosperous economy.

We have heard much in the past decade about climate action and emissions reduction as drags on the economy – economy and environment as competing objectives.  Now of all times we should be aware how much this is a false dichotomy and all our leaders need to stop talking this way.  The more frequent droughts that result from climate change, as we can see right now, reduce our agricultural productivity, while the bushfires stemming from them destroy life and property and cost in both lost productivity and increased resources for emergency responses.  Increased damage from extreme weather events is pushing up everyone’s insurance premiums.  And this is before we get to the adjustments that will be required as sea levels rise, and the economic loss caused by damage to our coral reefs.

On the other hand, as you note later in your letter there are huge economic opportunities in decarbonising our economy, through the development of renewable energy, the development of the electric car market and the development of new exports.  We should be going all out to get the most out of these opportunities.

At the centre of our policies is the $3.5b Climate Solutions Package, including a new $2b Climate Solutions Fund.  This builds on our previous $2.55b Emissions Reductions Fund and will help businesses, communities and landholders to reduce emissions.  So far we have secured more than $190 million tonnes of emissions reductions, or which over 80 per cent will be delivered by the agricultural and land sectors.  The Fund supports a range of practical projects, including capturing methane from landfill and storing carbon in forests and soils.

This fund certainly has some possibilities and it is good to hear that there are some successes here.  However, this strategy is limited.  What happens when the funds are all spent?  Do we plan to keep spending these amounts continually?  It seems to me that we need a mechanism to incentivise business to keep improving its performance without any limits.  I know a carbon price is toxic in your party but economists have consistently told us that it is the most effective way to incentivise ongoing emission reductions as businesses receive an ongoing payoff for their emissions reductions.

Australia is also on track for around one third of our electricity needs to be met by renewables in the early 2020s.  Right now, an unprecedented wave of clean energy investment is underway in Australia and new records are being set.  We have the world’s highest uptake of rooftop solar – one in five homes have solar on their roofs.

To support the transition to renewable energy, the Government is investing in the storage and infrastructure of the future.  This includes a $1.38 billion equity investment in the snowy 2.0 project, which will be the biggest battery in the Southern Hemisphere, and the $50.4 million Regional and Remote Communities Reliability Fund, which will investigate whether off-grid and standalone power supply systems such as microgrids are a reliable, cost effective alternative to diesel generated power in remote and regional communities.

The growth of renewable energy in Australia is one of the hopeful signs in our climate action.  Thirty percent should be, and can be, just the beginning.  AEMO has already modelled a pathway through which we can increase this to between 50 and 60% by 2030, and ultimately to 100% by 2050 or earlier.  We need to support them to get on with it.  I note that State governments and industry players have expressed ongoing frustration at your government’s struggles to develop a national energy policy.  It’s time to get over that hurdle and put a mechanism in place which facilitates a rapid and orderly transition to renewables.

I also note that not long ago the CEO of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency talked about Australia’s capacity to produce 700% of our domestic energy requirements from renewables.  This would guarantee cheap, reliable electricity at home and fuel massive export possibilities in areas such as selling electricity to South-East Asia, production of liquid hydrogen and powering metals production.  We need to not be limited by small thinking here.  Australia urgently needs to move past the promotion of coal and LNG as our biggest exports and develop alternatives that are responsible and sustainable.

Australia is also making progress towards increasing our overall energy efficiency by 40 percent by 2030.  The Climate Solutions Package, announced in February 2019, provides measures to improve energy efficiency, such as $18 million to improve energy efficiency in homes and buildings and lower energy bills.

It’s great that we are focusing on energy efficiency which is an important part of the puzzle.

I am proud to say that Australia has one of the highest rates of per capita investment in renewable energy technologies in the world.  The Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the world’s most successful green bank, has mobilised over $20 billion in new investments in our economy.

This is another great success story and a key driver of change.  It’s heartening that your government continues to support its work.

Our resources are supporting the transition to lower emissions around the world.  We are among the world’s largest exporters of Liquified Natural Gas and hold among the largest reserves of lithium and cobalt for batteries.

It is disingenuous to try to claim LNG exports as a contribution to emissions reduction.  LNG is a fossil fuel, and emissions are created in its production, its transport and its use.  The fact that these are lower than coal is cold comfort, particularly when your government also continues to support the expansion of coal mining in this country.  These two exports are Australia’s biggest contribution to global emissions, dwarfing our domestic emissions by a long way, and our best contribution to tackling climate change will be to rapidly phase out these industries and replace them with sustainable, renewables-based industries.  It is not sufficient to our current situation to move to an alternative that is a little less bad, when we have the opportunity to do so much better.

Looking ahead, we are developing a National Electric Vehicle Strategy to ensure a planned and managed transition to new vehicle technology.  We are investigating cleaner fuels for the future and will deliver a National Hydrogen Strategy by the end of the year.

I look forward to seeing these strategies in the coming year, and trust they will be ambitious and promote rapid transition!

By 2020 we will also develop a long-term strategy to reduce emissions, like other parties to the Paris Agreement.

It will hardly surprise you if I close this response by urging you to go to the 2020 conference with a far more ambitious emissions reduction target than the one we are currently working towards.  We need a clear pathway to zero net emissions by 2050 or sooner.  This is very much doable, it just takes courage and determination on our part to commit and act.

Caring for God’s creation is a sacred trust, given to our species from the very beginning.  We need to do this both for the love of God who created it, and for our own sakes because we are part of this creation and can’t divorce ourselves from it.  The smoke drifting across our cities, the mass fish kills, the progress of species extinction and so many other occurrences are clear signs that we are currently falling short on this task.  This calls for repentance and a change of course.

I will continue to pray for you as you plot your course through this issue and the other difficult problems that you face every day as our elected leader. 

Yours sincerely

Jon