Abbott versus Climate Change

Prime Minister Tony Abbott has allowed himself a rare display of good science-related sense and agreed to allow climate change to be included on the agenda for the G20 meetings in Brisbane next week. It’s not a major victory though. Climate change will only be discussed as part of a broader conversation about energy efficiency, and it’s unlikely to tiptoe beyond the tightly governed scope of such meetings. 

The decision now is how to participate in these discussions about energy efficiency, given Australia’s new status as international environmental laughingstock. There is literally no obvious choice in the Abbott government: there is no Minister for Energy, or for Climate Change or 

Science or Innovation. It’s as though, in structuring his government, the Prime Minister chose to ignore the future, expecting that such practicalities as the climate and energy production would continue to tick over without governmental oversight or funding. Like a toilet roll that’s been completely used, someone else will look after it.

The current Industry portfolio includes reference to such areas as science, energy and resources, yet it is wrapped up so tightly with the fossil fuel industry that its inclusion could be difficult. Where traditional energy sources sits logically with resources, innovation – which must surely be the point of any discussion about the future of energy efficiency – is a natural fit with science.

Industry Minister Ian McFarlane, a former farmer, is not considered to be a leading voice on any of these areas other than resources. His announcement last week highlighted a material reduction in the RenewableEnergy Target was brief to the point of ignorance. 

The following day, Portland's Keppel Prince Engineering announced that it was cutting its workforce by 100 as a result of uncertainty over large-scale renewables. 

To be fair, the Keppel Prince Engineering decision to downsize would have been made well before Minister McFarlane’s announcement. Having said that, the government’s failure to support publicly the renewable energy industry would have been a factor in the decision to liberate 100 full time workers from their jobs. Treasurer Joe Hockey’s opinion of wind farms didn’t win fans anywhere, and Maurice Newman’s vehement opposition to wind farms must be considered, given that he is the Prime Minister’s senior business advisor.

When the Prime Minister chose not to appear at the UN Climate Summit in New York in September, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop delivered Australia’s presentation to a near empty room and a savageinternational response. 

On Tuesday the Pulitzer Prize-winning climate change news website Inside Climate News published a story about the "Canada-Australia axis of carbon". It suggested that not only were the two nations not willing to pull their weight, but that they were seeking to derail the binding agreement on emissions reductions at next year's talks in Paris that many view as the world's last best hope to prevent catastrophic climate change.

"Neither the prime ministers of Canada nor Australia will speak at the summit, and the subordinates they have sent will not be offering the kind of "bold" new steps that UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon is seeking on the way to a treaty in Paris late next year," it reported.

"Instead, these two governments, with their energy-rich domains sprawling across opposite ends of the earth, will present strikingly similar defences against what much of the rest of the world is offering. And their stance is earning them opprobrium among advocates of strong and immediate action."

Australia’s reputation as a leader in action on climate change has been shredded, so anyone representing Australia’s position on climate change, including renewables, will have to have a solid understanding of the issues wrapped up in the diplomatic demeanour of The Dalai Lama. That rules out Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey and the obvious choice, Environment Minister Greg Hunt.

Unfortunately, Mr Hunt’s understanding of the issues in his portfolio is unconvincing. He has repealed the Carbon Tax, defunded the Climate Commission and scaled back the RET…and has regularly and publicly tripped over his message:

Press Release: "Emissions figures released today show the Carbon Tax is still inflicting plenty of gain,with no environmental pain". 

Environment Minister Greg Hunt has hosed down suggestions of a link between climate change and increased bushfire intensity, saying he had ''looked up what Wikipedia'' said and it was clear that bushfires in Australia were frequent events that had occurred during hotter months since before European settlement. 

Greg Hunt on ABC’s 7:30: At a time when the Government is asking Australians to pay more for petrol and doctors visits because of a budget shortfall, you're spending money on a review intoemissions trading schemes when you've said that you will never implement anemissions trading scheme. 

Despite these blunders, Greg Hunt has some experience in pro-environmental policy. His final year thesis as a law student was entitled “A Tax to Make the Polluter Pay.” Now that he’s in a position to drive such reforms, he’s ignoring his own history. From attempting to close down the Climate Commission, which was subsequently saved by a triumphant crowdfunding crusade, to the decision to dredge Abbot Point, a substantial risk to the survival of the Great Barrier Reef, his actions in government have decreased rather than increased Australia’s reputation as an environmental leader. The 2013-14 Department of the Environment Annual Report and current website indicate a wishy-washy approach at best.

In keeping with the reluctant inclusion of energy efficiency in the G20 Agenda, Australia will in all likelihood be represented quietly. The Renewable Energy Target is under the direction of Mr David Parker, whose experience is primarily in public sector finance. More likely, the Department of Industry will send along someone from their Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics, or possibly Australia’s Chief Scientist, Ian Chubb.

Alternately, a representative from South Australia would provide a useful contribution, given their hughly successful implementation of an RET. http://reneweconomy.com.au/2014/south-australia-hits-100-renewables-for-a-whole-working-day-86069

Whoever has the honour of representing Australia’s position on energy efficiency and climate change should be ready for a challenge. It won’t be easy when your strongest allies in the room are Canada and Russia in a battle for the future.