Politics and Climate change In Australia
Is the power of the carbon lobby an insurmountable political barrier to effective climate change policy in Australia?
Politics and Climate change
In the early 2000s, climate change has become a major concern in Australia (Harvey, Clarke, and Nursey-Bray, 2011). The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) confirmed in 2013 that Australia is getting warmer, and will face increasingly intense temperatures and longer fire periods due to climate change. In 2014, the Bureau of Meteorology published a study on the status of Australia’s environment, detailing some important points such as the rise of Australia’s temperatures and the growing incidence of wildfires, periods of drought and flooding, all related to variations in climate (Harvey, Clarke and Nursey-Bray, 2011). As a consequence, rainfall is likely to decline in the southeast of Australia and rise in the northwestern part of the state (CSIRO, 2013). Australia’s coastal areas are predicted to face increase in sea level of around 9 to 89 cm which could result in coastal flooding and erosion (CSIRO, 2013). Such changes are projected to have adverse economic , financial, and public health effects on Australia. Yet the primary source of global warming is energy-absorbing gasses such as carbon dioxide released by natural processes such as respiration and volcanic activity, and by human activities such as burning, land-use changes and fossil fuel combustion. Since the Industrial Revolution began humans have increased ambient Co2 levels by more than a quarter. This is the climate change’s powerful force. Methane is a hydrocarbon gas generated by both natural and human factors, such as the decay of waste products, agriculture especially rice, as well as the management of mammal manure. Similarly, CFCs (Chlorofluorocarbons) are synthetic chemicals of mostly industrial origin used in a variety of applications but they are considered very harmful for their ability to lead to the depletion of the ozone layer.
Keeping in mind the projections made by (Garnaut 2011), reducing carbon emissions has become an significant subject. In 2007, the Australian Government signed the Kyoto Protocol (KP) as a commitment to tackle climate change. Subsequently, the government proposed a regional emissions compensation program, known as the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), to fulfill KP obligations, and more. The CPRS is an alternative to climate change reduction guided by a ‘price and export’ strategy. The agreement signed by 107 countries in Copenhagen provides for restricting the increase in global temperature increases by 2100 to no more than 2 degrees above pre-industrial times. Under the AgreementTwo main consuming countries – China, India – vowed to cut their carbon emissions by 25-50 percent by 2020, while the USA, the 2nd biggest generating emitter in 2008, committed to curb GHG emissions by 20 percent by 2020 (Burnell, 2012). These goals are purely interest-free and inadequate to achieve the Agreement ‘s aim of rising the global surface temperature rise to 3 degrees Celsius after 80 years from 2020. Although Australia’s per capita GHG emissions are the highest among developed nations (Garnaut 2011), the total pollution effect the country gives is relatively low in the international scale. Australia emitted a total of around 590 to 600 million tons of comparable CO2 into the earth system in 2007 (Climate Change and Energy Efficiency Department 2010). It is less than 2 percent of all pollution from the planet. Despite this comparatively small rate of global GHG emissions, Australia’s involvement in the global climate shift mitigation campaign can be seen as a means of indicating that the country is looking for taking measures for the betterment of the environment.
In 2012, a carbon tax scheme was implemented in Australia by the Labor governing party as the 2011 Clean Energy Act which came into effect July 2012. At the time of its launch, pollution from businesses exposed to the scheme fell by 7 percent. As a result of being in a position for such a brief period, Australia’s 28th Prime Minister indicated that he intended to abolish “the carbon tax,” regulated organizations responded quite weakly, with very few funds being earmarked in emission reductions (Garnaut 2011). The plan was repealed in 2014, in its position later the same year, the Government set up as fund to decrease emissions. The carbon tax was part of an ambitious climate policy program also known as the Renewable Energy Futures Program(Garnaut 2011),. The future planned out to attain these targets by motivating Australia’s largest emitters to improve the energy efficiency and engage in renewable power. The system was regulated by Renewable energy commissioner. Industry and household insurance is given by revenue created from the fee. (Burnell, 2012). The system required industries that create more than twenty thousand tons of greenhouse gasses equivalent to greenhouse gases every year and that were not approved to earn pollution permits in the shipping or food sector, named carbon units (Jotzo and Hatfield – Dodds, 2013). Carbon units were either bought from the government or released free as part of business sector aid procedures.. As part of the plan, the federal income tax was lowered from $6,000 to $18,200 for those making less than $80,000 a year (Palutikof, 2010The SMH announced in 2012 that Renewable Energy Future ‘s carbon price system has not deterred new investments in the coal industry as expenditure on discovery increased by 60 to 65 percent in late 2010, more than any other mining product. The government department Geoscience Australia announced expenditures in coal prospecting reached five hundred million dollars over the same time period. (Beeson and Stone, 2013). Following the introduction of this strategy, declines in carbon emissions were observed. Emissions from sectors subject to the pricing program were estimated to be 2 percent lower, and nearly after the introduction of the pricing scheme, Australia’s carbon dioxide emissions from power generation plummeted to a low of all time, with coal usage declining around 10 percent from the previous year 2008. Demand for energy had plummeted, and was at the lowest point in the National Power Sector since 2006 in 2012 (CSIRO 2007).
Brief History
Before the final national election in 2007, both the federal government and the opposition agreed to introduce an carbon compensation system called (ETS) Until 2060, the government asked for a 50 per cent cut in greenhouse gas emissions. The Government promised to incorporate an ETS in June 2007 after the final report was released (Burnell, 2012). By pledging a, labor distinguished itself from government. ETS with an early launch date of 2010, instead of the 2012 time frame proposed by Howard. Australia ratified the Kyoto Protocol at the United Nations Conference on Climate Change in 2007. In revising the guidelines, Australia committed to limit pollution at no higher than 108 per cent of the 1990 emission level. Others also criticized the CPRS, which simultaneously supported and rejected measures to counter climate change. The Opposition appealed for a postponement of the ETS decision until after the UN climate change meeting in Copenhagen in 2009. The plan became the highest annual cut of greenhouse gas emissions of 24 years of records in 2013 as the carbon tax enabled force a substantial decrease in energy-sector emissions. The Abbott Government introduced into the Senate reform bills to eliminate the carbon pricing scheme. The government has launched the Emission Reduction Fund as a replacement, therefore.
In July 2012, the carbon price came into effect. The scheme extended only to facilities that emit more than 25,000 tons of CO2-e per annum (Jotzo and Hatfield–Dodds, 2013). It did not refer to forestry or the transportation of fuels. Houses and industrial use of light-duty vehicles did not pay a carbon tax. Forms to the fuel tax system is suggested as from 1 July 2014 to essentially impose a carbon tax on liquid and gaseous fuel emissions from enterprises. It was estimated that the market system would absorb 60 percent of Australia’s carbon emissions (The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change, 2012).
Effect of the carbon tax policy
Decrease of greenhouse-gas pollution: The Australian carbon tax does not adhere to all forms of fossil fuels. Emissions for all emitters it extended to, were noticeably smaller after the tax was imposed.
Continued greenhouse-emissions rise: Net greenhouse gas emissions from Australia rose by 0.3 percent in the first 6 months of the Carbon Tax to 276.5 Mt CO2 equivalent in December 2012 (Hamilton, 2012). There is a five-year trend towards reducing emissions from the power generation sector. Energy pollution stood at 38 percent of the national estimate in 2008. Electricity emissions were just 33 percent of total emissions in 2012. The fall is partly due to a roughly 6 percent drop in demand for energy in the National Power sector since 2008. In July 2013, the Australian Government said the carbon tax was a driver in lowering the concentration of pollution on the regional energy sector (Hamilton, 2012).
Important developments: In 2012 Adelaide purchased the Loy Yang brown coal-fired power station. It is one of Australia’s greatest single CO2 emitters. Experts believes the effect of the carbon tax to be greatly mitigated in the next 5 years by:
- Lowering dependence on domestic production.
- Stepping up the use of renewable energies (Hamilton, 2012).
Reaction by diplomats and business
The implementation of a carbon tax has been controversial in Australia. The opposition accused the government of breaking a manifesto pledge that a carbon tax will not be imposed (McDonald, 2012). The government has suggested an innovative plan for lowering greenhouse emissions through “direct action.” This scheme has been criticized because there is no discouragement from continuing to pollute at the same pace. Founded as part of the Sustainable Energy Program, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) began operations in July 2012 (Hamilton, 2012). It offers funding to promote research, development, demonstration, implementation, and commercialization of clean energy technologies. As of July 2013, the independent Clean Finance Energy Company (CEFC) started investment operations focusing on developments in green energies, low carbon, and energy conservation technologies. It has funding to support Australia’s clean energy infrastructure research, growth and commercialization, and associated technologies. It is not entitled to the same regulatory provisions as the Australian Energy Market Act. Many major emitters in Australia were backing a carbon tax as of 2012(Jotzo and Hatfield–Dodds, 2013Industry representatives and other significant emitters, especially in the mining industry, resisted the pricing system.Another point of contention has been the starting level of $23 a ton. 60 percent of economists felt the idea for carbon taxes was a good economic strategy. In the run-up to its launch, there were mass demonstrations both in favor of and against the carbon price. Qantas is raising its ticket prices on a one way trip between $1.50 and $5.50. In 2012, Virgin Australia imposed a surcharge of between £ 1.00 and £5.00 per flight. Due to the recent carbon tax, the power generating industry is liable to pay about $3.9 billion (McDonald, 2012). The Department of Climate Change and Energy Conservation says Australia will be one of about 50 countries globally that will introduce similar strategies (Jotzo and Hatfield–Dodds, 2013)
Results and repercussions
The carbon pricing policy was aimed at increasing energy production, transforming power supply from coal into substitutes, and moving industrial development to a low carbon environment. Its economic effect was estimated to be 0.1 to 0.2 percent smaller than the average market scenario (Crowley, 2017). The goal of the step was to prevent CO2 from entering the atmosphere at 160 million tons by 2020 (Beeson and Stone, 2013). The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) announced in 2012 that it was reviewing about 100 cases in which consumers may have been tricked into charging unfair price hikes wrongly believed to be due to the carbon tax (McDonald, 2012). The carbon price was projected to greatly affect the home construction industry. The average rise in household bills was estimated to be around $5 every week (Beeson and Stone, 2013). The Institute of Public Affairs predicted that the Australian coal industry would lose employment to rivals abroad and the mines would be shut down. The effect on Australia’s LNG industry was projected to be moderate or minor. Upon the implementation of the scheme, no major programs were anticipated to be postponed. The subsidies, named the Clean Energy Advance, is aimed at families with low and medium incomes. Any companies provided direct payments for coal-fired generators, such as a $1 billion (Hjerpe and Nasiritousi, 2015). Study by the Grattan Institute indicated that no coal mines or liquefied natural gas plants will be canceled as a consequence of climate policy, irrespective of the industry incentives. Six months after the start of carbon pricing, the Department of Climate Change and Clean Energy announced a around 10 percent reduction in environmental damage from energy plants. Because of the power supply, Australia’s carbon dioxide emissions fell around 5 percent from the previous year (Jotzo and Hatfield – Dodds), 2013).
Unlock insights into combating air pollution with Assignmentstudio. Our analysis of the Causes, Effects, and Solutions for Air Pollution equips you with actionable knowledge, empowering individuals and communities to mitigate environmental harm effectively.
Gain insights into the critical issue of climate change and its effects on our planet with Assignmentstudio. Our exploration of how Climate Change Drastically Affects Our Planet equips stakeholders with understanding and strategies for meaningful change.
Conclusion
Australia alone cannot fix the climate change crisis (Roberts, 2011). Positive intervention is impossible without a corresponding contribution from other nations, claims Cass. Australia is more “fair” morally about free ride than about contributing to foreign efforts. The ruling party of the age has been unwilling to take a leadership position in the response to climate change, despite USA president’s new commitment to introduce ambitious climate action, Cass argues: “The world must shape our political systems through the creation of democratic mechanisms, institutions that support sustainable environmental policies.” Therefore it can be concluded that the power of the carbon lobby is an insurmountable political barrier to effective climate change policy in Australia unless it gets support from all around the globe.
References
Beeson, M. and Stone, D., 2013. The Changing Fortunes of a Policy Entrepreneur: The Case of Ross Garnaut. Australian Journal of Political Science, 48(1), pp.1-14.
Burnell, P., 2012. Democracy, democratization and climate change: complex relationships. Democratization, 19(5), pp.813-842.
Choice Reviews Online, 2012. The Garnaut review 2011: Australia in the global response to climate change. 49(06), pp.49-3271-49-3271.
Crowley, K., 2017. Up and down with climate politics 2013-2016: the repeal of carbon pricing in Australia. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 8(3), p.e458.
CSIRO (2013) Regional temperature projections in Australia to 2100 for three climate cases, data prepared for the Garnaut climate change review. CSIRO, Aspendale
Garnaut R (2011) The Garnaut climate change review: final report, Commonwealth of Australia. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne
Hamilton, C., 2012. Theories of Climate Change. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(4), pp.721-729.
Harvey, N., Clarke, B. And Nursey-Bray, M., 2011. Australian Coastal Management and Climate Change. Geographical Research, 50(4), pp.356-367.
Hjerpe, M. and Nasiritousi, N., 2015. Views on alternative forums for effectively tackling climate change. Nature Climate Change,
Jotzo, F. and Hatfield–Dodds, S., 2013. The impact of the Garnaut Review on Australian climate policy: A comment. Australian Journal of Political Science, 48(4), pp.495-498.
Liu, D. and Zuo, H., 2012. Statistical downscaling of daily climate variables for climate change impact assessment over New South Wales, Australia. Climatic Change, 115(3-4), pp.629-666.
Palutikof, J., 2010. The view from the front line: Adapting Australia to climate change. Global Environmental Change, 20(2), pp.218-219.
McDonald, M., 2012. The Failed Securitization of Climate Change in Australia. Australian Journal of Political Science, 47(4), pp.579-592.
Nolan JM (2010) “An Inconvenient Truth” increases knowledge, concern, and willingness to reduce greenhouse gases. Environ Behave. Doi: 10.1177/0013916509357696
Roberts, J., 2011. Multipolarity and the new world (dis)order: US hegemonic decline and the fragmentation of the global climate regime. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), pp.776-784.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2008) GHG data from UNFCCC. http://unfccc.int/ghg_data/ghg_data_unfccc/time_series_annex_i/items/3814.php
Roberts, J., 2011. Multipolarity and the new world (dis)order: US hegemonic decline and the fragmentation of the global climate regime. Global Environmental Change, 21(3), pp.776-784.
