Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
Large, long-term, state-planned and funded national infrastructural development
was once common in Australia. This approach is largely unfashionable these days.
Nation-building modernization, of the sort epitomized by the construction of the
Snowy Mountains Hydro Scheme in the 1950s, is now believed to be an inefficient
extension of state responsibility and that such infrastructural development is best
conducted through public-private partnerships if it is to occur. Nevertheless, the
scope and importance of some projects are such that they still attract substantial
government involvement, as evidenced by the proposed National Broadband
Network. The same should be said of a national energy transition programme, and
climate adaptation works, of the scale and urgency required for Australia.
Such an ambitious transition programme - including the acquisition of inter-
national carbon credits - could be funded in several ways. While a proportion of
investment could come from the private sector, public investment will be required.
Funding sources could include, either individually or in combination, using revenue
raised through a national emissions trading scheme; funds from consolidated revenue;
a direct levy on the public; issuing government bonds specific to this purpose and
Funds could also be derived from savings associated with the elimination of perverse
subsidies to the fossil fuel sector, which serve to inhibit the transition to renewable
energy by distorting energy prices in favour of fossil fuels and undermining the
impact of a carbon price. The IEA (2012) estimates that global subsidies to fossil
fuels exceeded US$520 billion in 2011, compared to roughly US$90 billion in policy
support for renewable energy. Such subsidies in Australia were projected to cost over
AUD$10 billion per annum (in 2012/13) (EV, 2012; see also Riedy, 2007).
Conclusion
This topic is a wake-up call to Australian policy makers. It examines the likely
consequences of current policy settings. It presents a story about where we might
go and describes a destination that is not yet inevitable. To have a reasonable
chance of holding global warming below 2°C and avoiding a Four Degree future,
the international community must first bridge the 'ambition gap' between
existing national abatement pledges for 2020 and the collective mitigation effort
necessary to contribute to that goal and, second, also restrain total international
emissions to a safe global carbon budget. If Australia is to contribute meaning-
fully to these goals, it is necessary to decarbonize Australia's economy, with a
large part of this effort occurring within the critical next decade (CC, 2011).
A 2020 abatement target of no less than
2
45 per cent from a 2000 emissions
baseline fairly reflects Australia's national wealth and capacities in the context
of broader scientific argument for increased international mitigation effort. By
contrast, Australia's present unconditional 2020 target of
2
5 per cent below
2000 emissions levels is unjustifiably low. The current target fails to contribute
sufficiently to the goal of holding average global warming to 2°C or less, and is
also profoundly inequitable. (The same holds for Australia's conditional targets
of
2
10 per cent and
2
25 per cent.)
