Climate scientists had a savage verdict for Australia’s target, but the government is standing firm

2 hours ago 1

The response from climate scientists to the government’s announcement of a new emission reduction target of 62 to 70 per cent on 2005 levels by 2035 was immediate and savage.

“It’s worse than I feared,” said Bill Hare, one of the founders of the non-governmental policy institute, Climate Analytics, adding that a 2035 target of 76 per cent is necessary for Australia to align with the goal of holding warming to close to 1.5 degrees.

Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen has acknowledged that some global warming is inevitable, but the hotter it gets, the worse it will be.

“It’s baffling that in the same week the government could release a terrifying document warning Australians of a grim future if global warming continues … and then turn around and agree to a target that if all others followed, would lead to warming of at least 2 degrees.”

At 1.5 degrees of warming, the Great Barrier Reef would shrink and continue to be battered by coral bleaching events, according to the government’s own National Climate Risk Assessment. At 2 degrees, it is expected to die.

“No climate scientist on the planet would say this target aligns with limiting warming [to] 1.5 degrees,” said Dr Simon Bradshaw, a climate researcher with environmental activist group Greenpeace.

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen was unrepentant. He said at the press conference, as he has many times before, that Australia’s target must be at once ambitious and achievable.

“A target over 70 is not achievable,” Bowen said, repeating it for emphasis. “That advice is very clear. We have gone for the maximum level of ambition that’s achievable.”

The tragedy for Australia is that Bowen and his critics may both be right. As the Climate Council’s Amanda McKenzie told this masthead earlier this week, “the tension between what is necessary and what is possible” is growing because so much warming is now inevitable.

On Monday, when the government released its National Climate Risk Assessment, Bowen was careful to emphasise that the higher the temperature went, the more severe the impacts.

“As this report makes clear, the difference in terms of impact between 1.5 and 2 degrees of warming, let alone 3, is very real for Australia,” said Bowen.

Heat would have a dire effect on human health, with deaths in Melbourne surging from 66 per year at 1.5 degrees, to 125 at 2 degrees and 259 at 3 degrees. In Sydney, they would jump from 102 to 190 and 444.

“The future of Australia’s reefs, like the Great Barrier Reef and Ningaloo, is in our hands. A baseline target of 62 per cent is letting these natural wonders slip through our fingers,” Australian Marine Conservation Society chief Paul Gamblin said after the announcement.

“Today’s 2035 target is on track with global warming of over 2 degrees, which will likely lead to the loss of 99 per cent of the world’s coral reefs.”

For Australians, the news might be even worse than the risk assessment and target suggest.

When the 250 scientists and experts involved in the risk assessment began their work, it was generally accepted that the world had already warmed on average by 1.2 degrees. But since the large land masses heat faster than the global average because oceans lower temperatures, Australia is warming faster than the global average.

While the lower Paris target is 1.5 degrees, Australia has already hit that level. Should the world warm to 2 degrees, the Australian land mass would hit 3 degrees, Hare said.

This is why it is so often said that Australia has more to lose from runaway climate change, and more to gain from ambitious action.

Speaking after the announcement, Richie Merzian, a former climate negotiator for Australia who now serves as chief executive of the Clean Energy Investor Group, said the government’s target range would be enough to reassure investors to keep ploughing ahead with the transition of the energy sector.

It is also probably enough for Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Bowen to signal to their counterparts at upcoming climate talks at the United Nations General Assembly in New York and then at COP negotiations in Brazil that Australia is still engaged in the effort.

“It is right in the middle of the pack for an OECD economy,” Merzian said.