The Safeguard Mechanism deal between Labor and the Greens has been criticised for falling short of what the world’s climate scientists, the United Nations, and the International Energy Agency say is required to limit global temperature rise to 1.5°C.
While the package places a cap on emissions by facilities covered under the scheme, it still allows new fossil fuel projects to proceed, albeit fewer of them. The package also includes improved integrity measures around carbon offsets and requires real emissions cuts.
The Australia Institute’s recent Climate of the Nation report shows that there is record support for action on climate change in Australia, with a majority of Australians supporting a ban on new gas, coal, or oil projects. The report also reveals that three-quarters of Australians think the Australian government should plan to phase out coal mining and transition into other industries.
The Australia Institute research shows there are currently 116 fossil fuel projects in the pipeline, which would contribute 4.8 billion tonnes of pollution until 2030 – 24 times the claimed safeguard emissions cuts.
The package will allow new fossil fuel projects to commence. Importantly, however, it places a cap on emissions by facilities covered under the scheme that will ensure a large portion of coal and gas proposals in Australia cannot proceed.
Further legislative reform will be required to reduce Australia’s emissions as the impacts of climate change continue to intensify.
Key points in new Safeguard Package:
- Package will still allow new coal, oil and gas projects to proceed – albeit fewer of them
- Includes a cap on emissions that ratchets down over time and requires real (not net) emissions cuts
- Beetaloo gas project will need to be 100 per cent carbon offset from day one
- New gas projects will need to be 100 per cent CO2 offset from day one
- Improved integrity measures around carbon offsets, in line with expert concerns
Executive Director of the Australia Institute, Dr Richard Denniss, said, “It is the job of political parties to negotiate with each other but unfortunately we can’t negotiate with the atmosphere.
“While this deal will mean less pollution and less major fossil fuel projects, the world’s scientists have made it clear that the climate crisis requires an end to fossil fuel expansion and subsidies.
“The hard cap on actual emissions from actual polluters created by the announcement is a significant step away from the government’s sole focus on carbon offsets and support for unlimited fossil fuel expansion.”
Mr Denniss said the new hard cap on pollution will force hard choices about whether to use Australia’s new emissions budget on new coal and gas projects, or for refining critical minerals like lithium as the world moves towards a clean economy.
“Allowing new coal and gas projects to be built in Australia is not in line with science, or indeed the majority of voters, 57 per cent of which support a ban on new coal and gas projects,” Mr Denniss said.
“While Australia can still open up new gas and coal, remains the third largest exporter of fossil fuels, and spends $11.6 billion on subsidies, this package is not enough.
“The work to bring integrity to Australia’s climate policy remains urgent for this Parliament and the next.”
Industry opinions
Mineral Council of Australia (MCA), Chief Executive Officer, Tania Constable, said the MCA will be checking every detail of the amendments to the Safeguard Mechanism legislation carefully.
Ms Constable said it will continue to work with stakeholders to reduce emissions and play a part in climate objectives, including developing resources needed for critical minerals and metals.
“Australian mining companies have been charting their own paths towards net zero, investing billions of dollars annually in the technology required to meet their ambitions and reducing their carbon footprint.”
“If we are not careful, some facilities in Australia will close.
“Not only would that damage our economy and slash tens of thousands of regional jobs and billions in investment, it also would push the emissions reduction burden on to other nations that are less able or less willing to decarbonise,” Ms Constable said.
