[ad_1]
“>
The Australian Climate Roundtable, which comprises top-tier business groups such as the Business Council of Australia and the Australian Industry Group, as well as agricultural organizations, trade unions and environmentalists, has called on the government to commit to the net zero target now being adopted by more than 100 countries. worldwide. They have pleaded with governments to use the Covid-19 recovery to accelerate change, warning that inaction will lead to unprecedented economic and environmental damage.
But federal policy seems more concerned with the impact of short-term electricity price increases on a small number of energy-intensive manufacturers, businesses the Grattan Institute estimated employ about 1,000 people.
As energy analyst Tristan Edis recently wrote in Guardian Australia, this government used to argue against the carbon price because renewable technologies were too expensive. Now that solar and wind are clearly the cheapest means of new generation of electricity, they say we don’t need a price because renewables are too cheap. Instead, they insist that we need government-funded research on other technologies, which could reduce emissions from continued use of fossil fuels, to some extent, one day.
Meanwhile, we try to disguise our inaction with accounting gimmicks to claim that we are meeting our greenhouse gas emissions targets for 2020 and that we are on track to meet the clearly inadequate targets we have set for ourselves by 2030, in the hope That this may disguise our failure to make the real economic changes those goals are supposed to drive.
We were once told that Australia’s carbon price was the equivalent of “exporting jobs” to China, which was allowed to increase its emissions under international agreements, albeit at a decreasing rate. We now oppose the pledge to reach net zero emissions by 2050, while China claims to target net zero emissions by 2060.
Our delayed transition could be less disastrous internationally if President Trump is reelected in November and follows through on his intention to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate pact, but it is unlikely that he will feel good if Joe Biden becomes president, with his promise to a “Clean Energy Revolution”.
These issues are complex and some in the media are content to report on them as a “he said, she said” story, to make no connection between climate science and climate policy, or to play the political game of ask if a party is “for” or “against” coal or gas, rather than whether they have an affordable and reliable energy plan with net zero emissions.
Guardian Australia has prioritized climate journalism since its launch in 2013. We analyze and scrutinize what is being done. We write about how things could be. We hold policy makers accountable. When the government suggested that the wildfires were nothing out of the ordinary, we verified the claims and found them to be false. When conservative politicians suggested the fires were due to “green” opposition to the reprimand, we also checked.
We have documented how global warming is changing the lives of Australians from all walks of life in our Frontline series. We have explored what could be done in a series on green recovery.
Now, The Guardian renews a commitment made to all of our readers around the world, promising to put the environment first, not only in our editorial decisions, but also in our business decisions.
Guardian Australia is proud of these commitments. We seek to reflect them in our reports every day. We understand that the situation is urgent. We know that the worst consequences could still be avoided.
Readers’ support helps us produce quality, independent environmental journalism at a time when it has never been more vital. It allows us to keep our reports open and free, so everyone can read them. If you can, show your support for our work today by making a contribution or subscribing.
