A fateful choice
Ross Garnaut began his presentation on the recently released draft supplementary report to the Garnaut Review on Targets and Trajectories, which recommends reduction targets for Australia, with these words:
“There are moments in the history of humanity when fateful choices are made. The
decision over the next few years on whether to take strong action to mitigate human–
induced climate change is one such moment. ”
Much of the media chose to focus on the response of the conservation movement to the report with headlines such as Green groups at war with Garnaut, a simple story that misses the complexity of the issues and, as Garnaut reminds us, the significance of the decisions we face as a nation.
It is perhaps tempting to try and analyse the issues of climate change through the lens of simple stereotypes and simplistic positions.
- The Greenie wants radical reductions now — the risks of climate change require urgent reduction now, not Garnaut’s tiny 10% reduction by 2020, and damn the consequences for the economy.
- Big Business wants to wait for a global agreement before any reductions. Australia is only responsible for 1.5% of global emissions so why risk the economy when we can’t address climate change by ourselves.
- The Politician wants to wait a little longer to test the mood of the electorate and is very worried about figures coming out of treasury about the impact on household budgets.
It may be amusing to Garnaut that he is now being characterised as being on the side of Big Business. Earlier this year when he released the original report he was attacked for being alarmist regarding the impacts of climate change for Australia.
So what fateful choice should Australia make now and what is Garnaut advocating?
The first thing to understand is that Garnaut is trying to find a position that will support a global agreement on reductions. If developing countries, notably China, do not accept significant constraints on their carbon emissions, then it won’t be possible to reduce concentrations of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere to safe levels (around 400–450 ppm by 2050).
The reduction target of 10% of 2000 levels by 2020 that Garnaut recommends will require that Australia makes abatement efforts that are comparable with other developed and developing nations. This is important for us to be a strong participant in global negotiations and to prepare Australia for the more significant reductions that will be needed in the period from 2020 to 2050.
The modelling done to date indicates that mitigations required to achieve this reduction level are about 1.1 per cent of GDP. This will require action from business and will impact household budgets, however, as Garnaut says in his report:
“The costs of well-designed mitigation, substantial as they are, do not threaten to derail the long-term growth path of Australia, its developing country neighbours or the global economy. Unmitigated climate change probably would.”
Earlier this year the government released its Greenpaper. Later this year, after receiving Garnaut’s final reports and additional treasury modelling and reviewing submissions on the Greenpaper, the Government will be making the first of many fateful choices on Australia’s response to climate change.
These are choices that as citizens we should take a keen interest in and that businesses should closely review and consider in their own climate change strategies.
Tags: Australia, Climate Change, Garnaut Report
The Climate Institute has published a report advocating 25% reduction by 2020. Surely 10% is too conservative.