The Climate Council is calling on the Federal Government to massively ramp up its climate ambition to try and avoid the worst impacts of warming on an already vulnerable Australia.
In a new report, Mission Zero, the council says Australia must set a new target to slash emissions by 75 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030, and achieve net zero emissions above pre-industrial levels by 2035.
That’s a marked difference from the Federal Government’s current target to cut emissions by 43 per cent by 2030, and reach net zero by 2050.
“It’s obviously a gargantuan challenge, but at this point we really need to give it everything we’ve got,” says Dr Simon Bradshaw, the research director at the Climate Council and a co-author on the report.
Since 1750, humans have generated around 1.5 trillion tonnes of CO2, more than half of which was added post-1990. The planet is now about 1.2°C warmer than pre-industrial levels.
The UN recommends limiting average global warming to 1.5°C to try and prevent the most harmful impacts of climate change.
But the Climate Council report says Australia’s current target, in combination with the thrust of global climate policy, will result in a temperature rise that exceeds 2°C, and spell disaster for a nation that is particularly vulnerable to rising seas, increasing patterns of drought, and violent bushfires.
That accords with the evidence: according to the latest assessments, current global policy has Earth on track to see 2.7°C of warming. It also comes as the country Bureau of Meteorology declares that it will face an El Niñoperiod that will deliver even hotter and drier and fire prone weather to much of the country.
The Climate Council says some of the impacts of warming well over 2°C on Australia would include the collapse of marine ecosystems, up to 250,000 Australian properties at risk from coastal inundation, and the doubling of extreme fire days.
Bradshaw says Australia also has an ethical duty to go harder on emissions reductions, both as a precautionary measure and to account for its weighty responsibility for the current crisis.
“[Net zero by 2035] is still consistent with our obligations under the Paris Agreement,” Bradshaw tells RenewEconomy.
“The Paris Agreement recognises that countries like Australia should be leading the charge, we need to be cutting our emissions much faster than the required global average and achieving net zero emissions earlier.
“That’s because of our historic responsibility for climate change – we’ve been responsible for a hefty share of the emissions now in the atmosphere, we’ve built a lot of our wealth off the back of fossil fuels, and we have more capital to be able to invest in the solutions.”
In the report, Bradshaw and his co-authors argue for a more conservative carbon budget than is generally reflected in policy.
“We’ve taken the budgets from the IPCC’s sixth assessment report, and we’ve adjusted them to account for the emissions produced since that was published,” he says.
“And then we’ve advocated for a budget that is a little bit smaller to take further account of the risks from carbon cycle feedbacks, and also the effects of non-CO2 gases and aerosols.”
“Even without those adjustments, it’s clear that the remaining carbon budget for any chance of limiting warming to 1.5°C by the end of the century is now very, very small.
“We need to be seeing reductions at a scale and pace far greater than what we’re currently seeing.”
The report also reiterates the importance of genuine emission reductions, rather than patching the problem with land-use solutions like carbon offsets.
“We need to be focused on genuine emissions reductions from electricity, from transport, from industry,” says Bradshaw. “yes we need to restore ecosystems and draw more carbon into the land and end deforestation, but that’s not a substitute for stopping the burning of fossil fuels.”
In fact, once land use and forestry are discounted, Australia’s national emissions have fallen a measly 0.2 per cent since 2005.
“A lot of the gains in our emissions profile since 2005 are through changes in land use,” Bradshaw says. “Yes, in recent years we have seen emissions from electricity decline, but a lot of that has been balanced out by increases in industry and in transport in particular.”
Bradshaw says approving new coal and gas projects is “utterly inconsistent” with tackling the climate crisis.
As of March 2023, there were 116 new fossil fuel projects in the pipeline in Australia, a number that has since been reduced to 114. Labor’s Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek has approved four new coal projects since May 2022.
Analysis by The Australia Institute suggests the projects and expansions approved this year alone will add nearly 150 million tonnes of CO2 to the atmosphere over their lifetimes – that’s equivalent to about a third of Australia’s annual emissions.
Bradshaw says the government should adjust the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPCB Act) – which the Labor Government has committed to reforming – to reflect the current situation, by including reference to the impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on Australia’s ecosystems.
“We need that done as soon as possible so that it stops the reckless approval of new coal and gas projects.”
Amalyah Hart is a science journalist based in Melbourne.
