tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/carbon-price-457/articlesCarbon price – The Conversation2024-02-16T16:17:37Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2135012024-02-16T16:17:37Z2024-02-16T16:17:37ZState-owned energy companies are among the world’s most polluting – putting a price on carbon could help<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575920/original/file-20240215-30-unjkap.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C6000%2C3997&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/leh-ladakh-india-aug-7-petrol-316059917">Tooykrub/Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Existing measures to cajole companies to decarbonise, with subsidies for renewable energy and carbon taxes, have failed to prevent <a href="https://theconversation.com/fossil-co-emissions-hit-record-high-yet-again-in-2023-216436">global emissions rising</a>. Does state ownership, particularly in the energy sector, make this process easier? </p>
<p>State-owned energy firms that search for, produce and refine fossil fuels are among the most polluting organisations in the world. But because governments have a big say in how they operate, it might be considered easier for their emissions to be rapidly phased out by treating them as extensions of the government, without needing to rely on the incentives, fines or sanctions usually necessary to make private firms act. </p>
<p>So far, however, things have not proved to be so simple.</p>
<h2>A blessing or a curse?</h2>
<p>When it comes to climate change, ownership of a polluting company creates a dilemma for a government. On the one hand, state-owned firms are better equipped to bear the costs of decarbonisation as they can draw from a tax base (a more reliable revenue source) to subsidise green measures.</p>
<p>But ownership of a polluting, state-owned firm also creates conflicting incentives within and across different branches of a government. Some ministries may rely on the income generated from these industries (such as the <a href="https://www.aramco.com/en/sustainability/responsible-business/supporting-communities?gclid=Cj0KCQiAsburBhCIARIsAExmsu43EJVq6WyagPW7-djngYoguvH71aG8vsLPB1LyawZscVYGVnKvTZIaAr5YEALw_wcB">Saudi Arabian Oil Group</a>) to finance public services or <a href="https://www.nbim.no/en/the-fund/about-the-fund/">support pensions</a>. Other ministries, perhaps responsible for environmental protection, will be tasked with curtailing the activities of these firms to cut pollution.</p>
<p>This conflict indicates that state-owned firms are not simply “instruments of the state” that can be easily directed to cut emissions quickly. The ability of governments to use state-owned firms to tackle climate change depends on various governance issues <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/mor.2021.25">within the state bureaucracy</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A yellow oil platform in a fjord with a red ship nearby." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=403&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575922/original/file-20240215-28-7iwhzo.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=506&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Surplus revenue of the Norwegian petroleum sector is invested in a government pension fund.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/oil-platform-tromso-189016517">V. Belov/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Governments attempting to reform state-owned entities can face resistance from various stakeholders – ranging from the workers and managers of these firms to the users of subsidised services, who may object to higher tariffs to fund a transition to renewable energy. </p>
<p>State-owned utilities such as the Federal Electricity Commission in Mexico and Eskom in South Africa have previously defended their energy market monopolies against smaller competitors – in some cases, preventing more decentralised renewable energy generation. State-owned firms can exploit their close contact with policymakers to do this, and may even <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esd.2022.06.006">refuse to sign</a> purchasing agreements with independent power generators.</p>
<h2>State-owned firms and emissions</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090951620300882">Our research</a> showed that for some countries with high CO₂ emissions per capita, the state played a big role in their major polluting industries. Countries such as China, India, Russia, Japan, Iran and Saudi Arabia, where state ownership is extensive in the energy sector, are among the world’s ten biggest emitters.</p>
<p>In countries with established state entities to manage the production of fossil fuel reserves, commitments to cut CO₂ emissions are often overridden by the incentive to generate revenue from oil. Yet, we also found that regulatory measures, such as “cap-and-trade” systems, can complement state ownership and produce positive outcomes by resolving conflicts between different government departments.</p>
<p>Cap-and-trade regulations compel firms to buy carbon emission allowances and pay fines if they exceed them. Under a cap-and-trade system designed to limit the total amount of pollutants a company can emit, firms can also sell unused allowances. Take <a href="https://climate.ec.europa.eu/eu-action/eu-emissions-trading-system-eu-ets_en">the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS)</a>: state-owned companies within it have lower emissions than their equivalents elsewhere that are not covered by such schemes. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="An industrial scene on the banks of a river." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575938/original/file-20240215-18-ob6ko4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Carbon pricing schemes attempt to lower pollution by making emissions expensive.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/ijmuiden-nederland-08-22-2022tata-steel-2199596409">BZ Travel/Shutterstock</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This finding contradicts <a href="https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/inefficiency-carbon-pricing-government-owned-companies">economic literature</a> that has argued state-owned firms are not sensitive to prices on carbon – the thinking being that state ownership shelters them from the same pressures private firms face to stay competitive, as fines from exceeding emissions allowances eat into private profits.</p>
<p>This puzzle can be solved by what we call the legitimacy effect. Governments that publicly commit to cap-and-trade or similar carbon pricing schemes have stronger incentives as a result of public pressure to ensure state-owned firms reduce emissions, compared with governments that opt out. While other obstacles to achieving this goal remain, the government’s commitment goes some way to generating the necessary pressure on state-owned firms – above and beyond the pricing itself.</p>
<p>So, while the <a href="https://www.ineteconomics.org/perspectives/blog/carbon-pricing-isnt-effective-at-reducing-co2-emissions">the effectiveness of carbon pricing schemes</a> is debatable, our research provides one reason to stick with them. Namely, that they constitute a means of tying a government’s reputation to emissions reduction, and so create incentives for that government to get serious about the emissions of its state-owned firms.</p>
<p>Given that these firms are often among the worst polluters, this can make a difference.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="Imagine weekly climate newsletter" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/434988/original/file-20211201-21-13avx6y.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><strong><em>Don’t have time to read about climate change as much as you’d like?</em></strong>
<br><em><a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeTop">Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead.</a> Every Wednesday, The Conversation’s environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/newsletters/imagine-57?utm_source=TCUK&utm_medium=linkback&utm_campaign=Imagine&utm_content=DontHaveTimeBottom">Join the 30,000+ readers who’ve subscribed so far.</a></em></p>
<hr><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/213501/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Aldo Musacchio is affiliated with the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) as a Research Fellow. He also receives funding from the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank for projects associated with state-owned enterprises. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anna Grosman and Gerhard Schnyder do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Governments that publicly commit to carbon pricing are compelled to get their own house in order.Anna Grosman, Reader in Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Loughborough UniversityAldo Musacchio, Professor of Management and Economics, Brandeis UniversityGerhard Schnyder, Professor of International Management & Political Economy, Loughborough UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2189892023-12-19T20:12:54Z2023-12-19T20:12:54ZCarbon pricing alone is not enough — other measures are needed to meet Paris Agreement targets<iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/carbon-pricing-alone-is-not-enough-other-measures-are-needed-to-meet-paris-agreement-targets" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>As the world grapples with the dramatic effects of record temperatures in recent months, the United Nations has issued a dire warning about the potential for average global temperature increases to hit a <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/nov/20/world-facing-hellish-3c-of-climate-heating-un-warns-before-cop28">“hellish” 3 C by the end of the century</a>.</p>
<p>Carbon pricing policies have been a central part of the conversation about avoiding the worst effects of climate change. <a href="https://unfccc.int/about-us/regional-collaboration-centres/the-ciaca/about-carbon-pricing">Carbon pricing</a> is a market-based solution that incentivizes organizations and individuals to emit less greenhouse gases and invest in climate solutions.</p>
<p>Addressing an audience at the COP28 climate summit in Dubai, <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/%20nl/ip_23_6092">European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen made the case</a> for carbon pricing: “If you pollute, you have to pay a price for that. If you want to avoid paying that price, you innovate and invest in clean technologies.” </p>
<p>However, it’s vital to understand both the potential and limitations of these policies. <a href="https://smith.queensu.ca/centres/isf/pdfs/carbon-pricing.pdf">Our recent research</a> shows that global carbon pricing policies must advance much more rapidly, and be combined with other mitigation measures, to avoid harmful warming scenarios. As von der Leyen said in her remarks, “we must go further and faster.”</p>
<h2>Carbon pricing needs to rise</h2>
<p>Carbon pricing can be a powerful tool to combat climate change and reduce emissions, but not on its own. Our research shows that carbon pricing in isolation will not allow us to meet the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement target 1.5 C or 2 C warming scenarios</a>.</p>
<p>If carbon pricing is implemented more aggressively and broadly, it could significantly contribute to meeting these targets. The current global average carbon price, which we estimate in our report at being a meagre US$2.79 per tonne of emissions, needs to increase rapidly. </p>
<p>Our study modelled the effects of a rising global price on carbon, in isolation from other policies, on reducing greenhouse gas emissions across a range of scenarios. </p>
<p>We found that while carbon pricing on its own could limit global warming to 2.4 C, the global price would have to rise dramatically and rapidly to accomplish this. The price would have to start at $223.31 per tonne in 2023 and increase to $435.55 per tonne by 2045.</p>
<p>While such an abrupt global policy change is unlikely, the price would not need to be so high if it was accompanied by other measures, including regulations that provide clarity and stability regarding green investments, clean technology subsidies and financing mechanisms (such as those facilitating transition investing by companies). </p>
<p>For example, if we look at the carbon price needed to stay within 3 C scenario, it’s around US$85 per tonne — not much higher than our <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-pricing-tax-climate-change-1.6798272">current Canadian carbon price of $65 per tonne</a>. With the right other policies working in concert with that carbon price, and potentially funded by greenhouse gas emitters, we could still hit much lower than 3 C by the end of the century.</p>
<h2>The case for carbon pricing</h2>
<p>Our research also looked at the benefits of avoiding higher warming scenarios. The resulting savings from avoiding climate-related damage and economic loss from droughts, wildfires, floods, storms and rising sea levels would be enormous. </p>
<p>Our research estimates that cumulative damages under a 3 C warming scenario of US$480 trillion would be US$213 trillion higher than under a 2 C scenario, and US$326 trillion more than under a 1.5 C scenario. This confirms the importance of hitting the Paris Agreement targets. </p>
<p>Even if lower warming targets are missed, there is a strong case for carbon pricing. For example, keeping global warming to 3 C by 2100 in contrast to the zero-carbon price scenario of 4.2 degrees warming, could prevent cumulative damages of US$284.73 trillion — almost three times the <a href="https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-the-105-trillion-world-economy-in-one-chart/">current global GDP of US$105 trillion</a>.</p>
<p>We are talking about worlds of damage here — and that is just the economic price tag, of course. It doesn’t account for the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-023-01132-6">devastating human cost of climate disasters</a> that we’re already seeing in homes destroyed, livelihoods ruined and lives lost. The message is not to give up, but to intensify efforts and co-ordinate globally.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218989/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Carbon pricing can be a powerful tool to combat climate change and reduce emissions, but it needs to be accompanied by improved regulations, clean technology subsidies and financing mechanisms.Sean Cleary, BMO Professor of Finance, Queen's University, OntarioNeal Willcott, PhD Candidate - Finance, Queen's University, OntarioLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2182392023-11-26T19:20:42Z2023-11-26T19:20:42ZGreen growth or degrowth: what is the right way to tackle climate change?<p>Nearly all the world’s governments and vast numbers of its people are convinced that addressing human-induced climate change is essential if healthy societies are to survive. The two solutions most often proposed go by various names but are widely known as “<a href="https://www.oecd.org/greengrowth/whatisgreengrowthandhowcanithelpdeliversustainabledevelopment.htm#:%7E:text=Green%20growth%20means%20fostering%20economic,which%20our%20well%2Dbeing%20relies.">green growth</a>” and “<a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-04412-x">degrowth</a>”. Can these ideas be reconciled? What do both have to say about the climate challenge?</p>
<p>The crude version of green growth – the solution that dominates the discourse of developed countries – is essentially that technology will save us if we get the incentives right. We can stick with the idea that economic growth is the central determinant of human flourishing, we just need technological fixes for unsustainable industrial practices. These will emerge if we get prices pointing in a green direction, which is first and foremost about carbon taxes.</p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-973" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/973/534c98def812dd41ac56cc750916e2922539729b/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p>Yet this sort of thinking still seems head-in-the-sand. Yes, the <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/what-is-the-difference-between-absolute-emissions-and-emissions-intensity/">emissions intensity</a> of per-capita GDP growth <a href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/co2-intensity?tab=chart&country=USA%7ECHN%7EIND%7EIDN%7EDEU">is generally falling</a>, in part because added economic value increasingly comes from ideas not widgets.</p>
<p><a href="https://ourworldindata.org/energy/country/sweden">Sweden, for example</a>, has increased its GDP by 76% but its domestic energy use by only 2.5% since 1995. But we are still <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01702-w#:%7E:text=The%20planet%20is%20on%20track,cross%20the%20line%20much%20sooner.">missing carbon reduction deadlines</a> by wide margins and struggling to enact meaningful carbon pricing.</p>
<h2>Eco-socialism and political suicide: the caricature of degrowth</h2>
<p>The crude version of degrowth is that to ensure sustainability, GDP must contract. Endless growth got us to where we are, and endless growth will kill us. We need to throw out the status quo and make our revolutionary way to eco-socialism. Rich countries need to stop where they are and transfer wealth to poor countries so we can equitably share what we have.</p>
<p>This sort of thinking is <a href="https://www.noahpinion.blog/p/degrowth-we-cant-let-it-happen-here">easily caricatured</a> as political suicide and more likely to undermine enthusiasm for sustainability than achieve it.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/is-nuclear-the-answer-to-australias-climate-crisis-216891">Is nuclear the answer to Australia's climate crisis?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet these caricatures can be easily dismissed. While it’s hard to pin down exactly what each camp stands for, since they represent amorphous agglomerations of ideas in a fast-moving discourse, it’s clear many advocates of both green growth and degrowth are sophisticated in their views and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800919319615">share many points of agreement</a>. </p>
<h2>Where green growth and degrowth agree</h2>
<p>The first is that contemporary industry is too environmentally intensive – it crosses multiple planetary boundaries in its carbon emissions, ocean acidification, nitrogen, phosphorus loading and so on.</p>
<p>Second, to avoid ecological collapse, sectors such as fossil fuels, fast fashion, industrial meat farming, air travel, plastics and many more need to draw down their economic activity.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, other sectors need to grow. These include clean energy, obviously, but also biodegradable materials, green steel and pesticide-free agriculture, on and on. Effecting this structural transition will require <a href="https://www.energypolicy.columbia.edu/publications/green-new-deal-and-carbon-taxes-can-work-together/">both carbon taxes and more muscular</a> industrial policy of the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/21/climate/green-new-deal-questions-answers.html">Green New Deal</a> sort.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/too-hard-basket-why-climate-change-is-defeating-our-political-system-214382">Too hard basket: why climate change is defeating our political system</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Third, environmental damage is both licensed and exacerbated by a narrow policy focus on <a href="https://data.oecd.org/gdp/gross-domestic-product-gdp.htm">gross domestic product</a> (GDP). We need to shift priorities away from GDP and towards frameworks and budgets – such as those used in <a href="https://www.treasury.govt.nz/information-and-services/nz-economy/higher-living-standards/our-living-standards-framework">New Zealand</a>, the <a href="https://www.act.gov.au/wellbeing">Australian Capital Territory</a> and other places – that do a far better job than GDP does of measuring whether we are using our resources effectively to advance human wellbeing.</p>
<p>And many of these wellbeing goals can be achieved using a fraction of the wealth of advanced nations. For example, Cuba, with about <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD?locations=CU">an eighth of the GDP</a> per capita, has similar <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/americans-can-now-expect-live-three-years-less-cubans-1739507">life expectancy</a> and <a href="https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/literacy-rate-by-country">literacy rates</a> to the United States.</p>
<h2>New ways to measure and increase human wellbeing</h2>
<p>A complementary approach is to <a href="https://www.bennettinstitute.cam.ac.uk/research/research-projects/wealth-economy-social-and-natural-capital/">measure comprehensive wealth</a> – financial, natural, human, and social – rather than income. If economic activity substitutes a relatively small amount of financial capital concentrated in few hands for a huge amount of natural capital, then it isn’t sustainable nor does it increase total wealth.</p>
<p>Finally, we need to measure productivity – the extent to which we can do more with less. Economic growth models stress that only <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solow%E2%80%93Swan_model">long-run improvements in productivity</a> lead to sustained increases in wealth. Simply increasing investment, of the kind associated with extractive industries, provides only a transitory boost.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-beat-rollout-rage-the-environment-versus-climate-battle-dividing-regional-australia-213863">How to beat 'rollout rage': the environment-versus-climate battle dividing regional Australia</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Another virtue of productivity growth is <a href="https://www.cmu.edu/epp/irle/irle-blog-pages/schumpeters-theory-of-creative-destruction.html">creative destruction</a>: when innovation clears out outmoded industries, ideas, and ways of working. Today creative destruction is held back by the power of vested interests, <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-to-deal-with-fossil-fuel-lobbying-and-its-growing-influence-in-australian-politics-188515">notably in fossil fuels</a>, to lobby governments to slow the industrial transition required to address climate change.</p>
<p>Quality of life frameworks, wealth accounts, and productivity growth all have problems and present measurement difficulties, but they point us in the right direction. They help us to understand GDP as a means, not an end. Twentieth century statistics cannot measure 21st century progress.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-new-dawn-becoming-a-green-superpower-with-a-big-role-in-cutting-global-emissions-216373">Australia's new dawn: becoming a green superpower with a big role in cutting global emissions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Green growth and degrowth advocates also agree that getting people to practise less carbon intensive lifestyles, especially in rich countries, is politically and culturally difficult. Witness the recent <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/aug/02/spain-puts-limits-on-air-conditioning-and-heating-to-save-energy">outcry in Spain</a> when the government legislated that public and commercial buildings could not be cooled below 27 or heated above 19 degrees respectively.</p>
<p>That’s why sweeteners are fundamental to the political logic of Green New Deals: for example, the proceeds of carbon taxes can be returned to households as compensation.</p>
<h2>Where green growth and degrowth disagree</h2>
<p>What green growth and degrowth advocates disagree most about is how deeply we need to alter our political economy to survive climate change. </p>
<p>Green growth is broadly optimistic about the capacity of liberal democracy’s incremental style to get the green transition done in time. It has faith in markets, and even as it recognises the need for green industrial policy it is cautious about government’s ability to micromanage it.</p>
<p>Degrowth believes something more radical is in order, with equality at its core. We need to understand what is “sufficient” for people to live good lives, and then redistribute from people who have far more than they need to people who have much less.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-australia-urgently-needs-a-climate-plan-and-a-net-zero-national-cabinet-committee-to-implement-it-213866">Why Australia urgently needs a climate plan and a Net Zero National Cabinet Committee to implement it</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This approach would include the provision of energy-efficient social housing, and international aid for green development. Government must adopt the climate transition as its mission in the manner of winning a total war. It must get involved in the economy and society in a big way, including by regulating things like private jets and low emission traffic zones.</p>
<p>The problem for degrowthers is that getting such a radical agenda off the ground requires first and foremost a change in public values. But the movement’s focus on international political economy – its tendency to target its efforts at bureaucrats and quasi-governmental agencies like the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> (IPCC) – undermines cultural change by feeding populist narratives about technocratic overreach.</p>
<p>Spain’s experience illustrates that citizens haven’t internalised the sorts of lifestyle changes degrowth believes are required. Politically hopeless slogans like “degrowth” that don’t even capture the essence of the movement need to be tossed out, and much more attention needs to be given to marketing the experience of living green in sustainable societies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218239/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Fabian does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>One set of ideas runs counter to the mainstream consensus that technology will save us from climate change. Can degrowth ever win enough converts to persuade humanity to change course?Mark Fabian, Assistant professor of public policy, University of WarwickLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2176382023-11-19T13:00:24Z2023-11-19T13:00:24ZAre freeloading premiers undermining Canada’s climate strategy?<iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/are-freeloading-premiers-undermining-canadas-climate-strategy" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>It has been a bad few weeks for the federal government’s plans for climate action.</p>
<p>A little more than five years ago, there was a strong <a href="https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/statements/2016/03/03/communique-canadas-first-ministers">federal-provincial consensus</a> around climate action. That consensus included a national carbon pricing system, with the federal government providing a back-stop system where provinces didn’t price carbon themselves.</p>
<p>Canada is now confronted with a very different federal-provincial landscape on climate change. Ottawa’s decision to respond to concerns about the impact of the federal carbon pricing system on heating costs for households relying on <a href="https://nationalpost.com/news/politics/trudeau-pulls-carbon-tax-from-home-heating-oil">fuel oil</a>, primarily in Atlantic Canada, has devolved into a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/carbon-tax-home-heating-1.7010767">wider debate</a> on the role of carbon pricing in Canadian climate policy. </p>
<p><a href="https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/making-life-less-affordable-smith-among-premiers-pushing-for-halt-of-carbon-tax-1.6633250">Alberta</a>, <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-premier-scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-will-stop-collecting-carbon-tax-on/">Saskatchewan</a> <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/push-justin-trudeau-on-carbon-price-cut-doug-ford-tells-liberal-mps/article_ab5f554d-e82f-583c-aabe-22d134e4744c.html">and Ontario</a> are now demanding the federal carbon price be withdrawn from all types of heating fuels, including fossil natural gas. </p>
<p>Even the government’s <a href="https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2022/03/22/delivering-canadians-now">supply-and-confidence</a> allies in the NDP <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-support-conservative-motion-carbon-tax-1.7016776">voted with the Conservatives</a> in favour of suspending the application of the federal carbon charge to heating fuels altogether. </p>
<p>Adding to the federal government’s difficulties <a href="https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_202311_06_e_44369.html">is a report</a> by the Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainable Development that says Canada is unlikely to meet its 2030 emission reduction targets under the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2021/04/canadas-enhanced-nationally-determined-contribution.html">Paris climate agreement</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/introducing-the-conversations-new-climate-series-getting-to-zero-214563">Introducing The Conversation's new climate series, Getting to Zero</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Liberal fragility</h2>
<p>It wasn’t supposed to be this way.</p>
<p>Five years ago, B.C., Alberta, Ontario and Québec — representing 80 per cent of Canada’s population — had carbon-pricing systems of their own already. It was expected that the federal government’s own role in carbon pricing would be limited. </p>
<p>Most provinces also had comprehensive climate change strategies, with the overall federal-provincial consensus captured in the December 2016 <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/pan-canadian-framework.html">Pan-Canadian Framework on Clean Growth and Climate Change</a> (the PCF). Only Saskatchewan was a major outlier.</p>
<p>Sadly, that consensus was short-lived. It largely collapsed in the aftermath of elections in key provinces from the summer of 2018 onwards, beginning with the arrival of <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/doug-ford-ending-cap-and-trade-1.4731954">Doug Ford’s</a> Progressive Conservative government in Ontario.</p>
<p>Since then, the provinces, with the possible exception of B.C., have become either disengaged or <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2023/09/01/news/dont-test-me-danielle-smith-warns-feds-ahead-climate-peace-talks">openly hostile</a> when it comes to climate action.</p>
<h2>Forced to be active</h2>
<p>The federal government’s initial response to these developments was to carry through on the PCF consensus. It enacted the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency/campaigns/pollution-pricing.html">Greenhouse Gas Pollution Pricing Act</a> to provide authority for a federal back-stop carbon price in its 2018 budget. </p>
<p>The system consisted of <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work.html">two components</a> — a carbon levy on heating and transportation fuels, and an output-based pricing system for industry. But, consistent with the PCF, the federal pricing system would only apply in provinces that didn’t have carbon pricing systems of their own. </p>
<p>When the newly elected governments in Ontario and Alberta dismantled their carbon pricing systems in 2018 and 2019 respectively, this meant the back-stop federal pricing system was implemented in those provinces as well. </p>
<p>The constitutional basis for the federal legislation would <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-ruling-on-national-carbon-pricing-means-for-the-fight-against-climate-change-157675">ultimately be upheld</a> by the Supreme Court of Canada in its March 2021 carbon-pricing reference case.</p>
<p>In deciding to apply its back-stop system in the provinces without carbon pricing systems of their own, the federal government became much more active in implementing carbon pricing than it had ever anticipated when the PCF was adopted.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-ruling-on-national-carbon-pricing-means-for-the-fight-against-climate-change-157675">What the Supreme Court ruling on national carbon pricing means for the fight against climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Ottawa goes it alone</h2>
<p>Beyond carbon pricing, the PCF and a subsequent December 2020 <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/healthy-environment-healthy-economy.html">federal study</a> recognized the need to employ a wider range of instruments than carbon pricing alone to achieve Canada’s climate commitments.</p>
<p>Again, however, implementation of these measures has been almost entirely left to Ottawa. They include <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/managing-pollution/energy-production/fuel-regulations/clean-fuel-regulations/about.html">clean fuel</a> <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/clean-electricity-regulation.html">and electricity</a> standards, zero-emission vehicle <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2022/12/proposed-regulated-sales-targets-for-zero-emission-vehicles.html">sales mandates</a>, an <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/oil-gas-emissions-cap.html">emission cap</a> on the oil and gas sector and a <a href="https://www.budget.canada.ca/2023/report-rapport/chap3-en.html">growing range</a> of subsidies and expenditures.</p>
<p>In the end, Ottawa is carrying the overwhelming load of substantive climate policy implementation through carbon pricing, regulations and subsidies. The federal-provincial sharing of the political risks and costs associated with these types of climate policies, implicit in the 2016 PCF, has vanished.</p>
<p>Instead, the federal Liberals are almost solely bearing the political costs of implementing meaningful climate policies.</p>
<p>Despite this, Ottawa has attempted to advance constructive engagement with increasingly recalcitrant, if not combative, provinces. </p>
<h2>Encouraging climate action</h2>
<p>A central focus of this effort has been the use of federal subsidies and expenditures around themes the provinces regard as important to their own economic health to try to encourage climate action.</p>
<p>Measures in the 2021-2023 federal budgets have included support for <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/department-finance/programs/consultations/2021/investment-tax-credit-carbon-capture-utilization-storage.html">carbon capture, utilization and storage</a>, the <a href="https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2019/06/18/trans-mountain-expansion-will-fund-canadas-future-clean-economy">Trans Mountain</a> pipeline, <a href="https://natural-resources.canada.ca/climate-change-adapting-impacts-and-reducing-emissions/canadas-green-future/the-hydrogen-strategy/23080">hydrogen</a>, <a href="https://natural-resources.canada.ca/our-natural-resources/energy-sources-distribution/nuclear-energy-uranium/canadas-small-nuclear-reactor-action-plan/21183">nuclear energy</a>, <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/campaign/critical-minerals-in-canada/canadian-critical-minerals-strategy.html">critical minerals</a> and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/canada-quebec-ev-battery-1.6982613">EV and battery manufacturing</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://sei.info.yorku.ca/files/2023/03/Hard-Paths-to-Decarbonization-December-20223.pdf?x60126">It’s questionable</a> whether many of this initiatives will have an actual impact on reducing GHG emissions.</p>
<p>The provinces have been happy to receive federal funding. But they have not reciprocated with support for the more politically challenging aspects of climate action; quite the opposite. Most have continued to respond <a href="https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en21/ENV_FU_ClimateChange_en21.pdf">with indifference</a> at best and <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-premier-scott-moe-says-saskatchewan-will-stop-collecting-carbon-tax-on/">increased hostility</a> at worst.</p>
<p>The federal Conservatives, who are currently polling <a href="https://nanos.co/poilievre-hits-high-while-trudeau-hits-low-in-preferred-prime-minister-tracking-nanos/">well ahead</a> of the Liberals, <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-pierre-poilievres-conservatives-still-dont-have-a-viable-climate-plan/">oppose carbon pricing</a> and other substantive climate policy measures, except for subsidies to industry for technology development. </p>
<p>Outside of British Columbia, there are no obvious provincial champions who might provide <a href="https://sei.info.yorku.ca/files/2019/10/July-19-Winfield-Macdonald-Working.pdf?x60126">climate policy leaderhip</a> if the current federal government is replaced by one less interested in climate action.</p>
<p>This summer’s <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/radio/ideas/world-on-fire-canada-s-worst-wildfire-season-on-record-1.6946472">record wildfire season</a> and flooding in eastern Canada highlighted again the impacts of a changing climate. The time frame for effective action continues to shrink.</p>
<h2>Reducing conflict is costly</h2>
<p>The provincial antagonism towards carbon pricing and the federal government’s climate strategy regulations would seem to leave only one short-term path to federal-provincial harmony: abandoning these measures. </p>
<p>But Ottawa’s efforts <a href="https://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_202311_06_e_44369.html">are widely seen as essential</a> to achieving Canada’s GHG emissions reduction commitments. </p>
<p>A better model would be for the federal government to continue to refine and carry through on its climate policies. At the same time, Ottawa could tie the support for the clean industrial strategies the provinces have welcomed to expectations of constructive provincial engagement on climate change. </p>
<p>Whether that happens remains an open question.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/217638/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Winfield receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. He is the author of the chapter on Federalism and Climate Change in the upcoming 5th Edition of Canadian Federalism (UTP)</span></em></p>A little more than five years ago, there was a strong federal-provincial consensus around climate action. With the election of several Conservative premiers since then, that consensus has vanished.Mark Winfield, Professor, Environmental and Urban Change, York University, CanadaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2164282023-10-29T01:51:39Z2023-10-29T01:51:39ZWorried economists call for a carbon price, a tax on coal exports, and ‘green tariffs’ to get Australia on the path to net zero<p>Australia’s top economists have overwhelmingly backed the reintroduction of the carbon price that helped cut Australia’s emissions between 2012 and 2014.</p>
<p>The government concedes that achieving its legislated emissions reduction target of <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2022A00037">43% below 2005 levels</a> by 2030 and net zero by 2050 will be <a href="https://minister.dcceew.gov.au/bowen/speeches/speech-afr-climate-and-energy-summit">difficult</a>. With official forecasts showing Australia <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/australias-emissions-projections-2022">falling short</a>, the Economic Society of Australia asked 50 leading Australian economists what should be done to speed things up.</p>
<p>Offered a choice that included nuclear energy, accelerated investment in large-scale batteries, and a rapid phase-out of traditionally fuelled vehicles, 30 of the 50 picked a <a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/Infohub/CPM/Pages/About-the-mechanism.aspx">carbon price</a> of the kind introduced by the Gillard Labor government in 2012 and abolished by the Abbott Coalition government in 2014.</p>
<p>Another five said they supported an economy-wide carbon price, but wouldn’t nominate it in the survey because it would face “significant political hurdles” and would not be “politically feasible”. </p>
<hr>
<p><iframe id="fcXSW" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/fcXSW/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<hr>
<p>The Department of Climate Change told the government in December it was on track to fall short of its 2030 target of a 43% cut on 2005 levels, but that with “additional measures” it could <a href="https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/publications/australias-emissions-projections-2022">get to 40%</a>.</p>
<p>In October this year, Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen described the 43% target as “ambitious” and a “<a href="https://minister.dcceew.gov.au/bowen/speeches/speech-afr-climate-and-energy-summit">difficult task</a>”.</p>
<p>The scheme the economists were asked about was a “<a href="https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/cap-and-trade.asp">cap and trade</a>” scheme, of the type common in <a href="https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/a1abead2-de91-5992-bb7a-73d8aaaf767f/full">much of the world</a>. In these schemes, the government sets a cap on the total number of emission permits produced each year and allows users to trade them with one another to set a price.</p>
<h2>A carbon price by another name</h2>
<p>The Gillard government’s scheme was initially a <a href="https://webarchive.nla.gov.au/awa/20130418163201/https://www.cleanenergyfuture.gov.au/clean-energy-future/an-overview-of-the-clean-energy-legislative-package/">fixed charge</a> per tonne of carbon emitted by big polluters. It was set to switch to a cap and trade scheme after three years, but ended up being abolished after two.</p>
<p>In its place, the Abbott government created a “<a href="https://www.cleanenergyregulator.gov.au/NGER/The-safeguard-mechanism">safeguard mechanism</a>” that currently applies only to the 219 biggest polluting facilities in Australia. It requires each to keep emissions below a government-set baseline, and allows them to trade emissions reductions with one another.</p>
<p>The economists were asked about expanding the mechanism to make it mimic an economy-wide carbon price. In response, 42% said they wanted to boost the number of facilities it covered, and 26% wanted to tighten the baselines to push up the price.</p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/15496853/embed" title="Interactive or visual content" class="flourish-embed-iframe" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;height:600px;" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<div style="width:100%!;margin-top:4px!important;text-align:right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/15496853/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/15496853" target="_top"><img alt="Made with Flourish" src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg"></a></div>
<hr>
<p>All but seven of the 50 economists wanted either an economy-wide carbon price or an expanded safeguard mechanism that would act as one.</p>
<p>Independent economist Hugh Sibly said it might well be that nuclear, hydrogen or other sources of energy were the most efficient ways of decarbonising the economy, but it would be impossible to know until Australia started charging for emitting carbon and allowed the market to work out the cheapest way of coping.</p>
<p>Half of those surveyed wanted to expedite the building of new transmission lines to link places where electricity was being produced with places where it would be needed. One-third wanted expedited investment in large battery storage.</p>
<div class="flourish-embed flourish-chart"></div>
<p>Economists including Macquarie University’s Lisa Magnani justified this by saying it was necessary for the government to move in ahead of the private sector to provide the infrastructure the private sector would need in order to decarbonise “within the time left to act seriously”.</p>
<h2>No new mines, taxes on exports from existing mines</h2>
<p>Many experts surveyed wanted bolder measures than those proposed by the Economic Society of Australia.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=966&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1214&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1214&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/556099/original/file-20231026-21-xp740a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1214&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Former OECD official Adrian Blundell-Wignall wants metallurgical coal exports taxed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.oecd.org/finance/financial-markets/adrianblundell-wignall.htm">OECD</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/">CC BY-NC-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Former OECD official Adrian Blundell-Wignall said Australia’s coal exports create almost two and a half times the emissions Australians produce domestically. </p>
<p>“What is the point of moving to net zero on the latter while we do nothing on coal exports?” he asked. </p>
<p>His proposal, aired in the <a href="https://www.afr.com/policy/economy/how-an-australian-coal-tax-can-help-save-the-world-20231015-p5ecba">Australian Financial Review</a>, is for Australia to tax exports of the metallurgical coal used to make steel, forcing up the price and reducing global demand. Australia has 55% of the market.</p>
<p>If higher prices brought in more tax and resulted in less burning of metallurgical coal, it would be a win-win for Australia and the world.</p>
<p>Mark Cully, a former chief economist at the Australian industry department, said Australia should follow the lead of France, Denmark and Sweden and ban new fossil fuel projects.</p>
<p>The supply restriction would push up the relative price of fossil fuels and encourage a faster global take-up of renewable energy. </p>
<h2>Impose green tariffs on dirty imports</h2>
<p>Australia should also join the European Union in implementing a green tariff, the so-called <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2022/12/cbam-the-new-eu-decarbonization-incentive-and-what-you-need-to-know/">Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism</a> that imposed an emissions tax on imported goods whose emissions were not taxed in the country in which they were produced.</p>
<p>Cully said too much of Australia’s concern was directed to energy, a sector where emissions are genuinely beginning to fall. In other sectors, emissions have plateaued or are even rising, making it “inconceivable that Australia can meet its 43% reduction target by 2030, let alone net zero by 2050, without other high-volume emissions sectors contributing”.</p>
<p>Frank Jotzo, director of the Centre for Climate Economics at the Australian National University, said carbon pricing has to be complemented by targeted measures aimed at industries such as transport, building, agriculture and reforestation.</p>
<p>He said Australia will soon need to back measures that suck carbon dioxide back out of the atmosphere, acknowledging that many emissions will continue and will therefore need to be offset in order to get to net zero.</p>
<h2>Critical opportunity, but critical challenge</h2>
<p>University of Tasmania economist Joaquin Vespignani said state and federal governments should “invest” in the production of the so-called <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/publications/critical-minerals-strategy-2023-2030/strategy-glance">critical minerals</a> that will be needed for decarbonisation via tax deductions.</p>
<p>Australia has more than 20% of the proven global reserves of minerals such as <a href="https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/king/media-releases/australias-lithium-powering-global-energy-transition">lithium</a> that are essential for clean energy production and storage.</p>
<p>Michael Knox of Morgans Financial noted the International Agency believed the world would need to ramp up its production of critical minerals to <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050">three times</a> its present level by 2030. </p>
<p>Energy investment would need to <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050">double</a>, and electricity transmission grids would need to roll out an extra two million kilometres of wire per year.</p>
<p>The Agency described the task as <a href="https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/herculean">Herculean</a>. Knox said it was far from certain to be achieved. </p>
<hr>
<p><em>Individual responses. Click to open:</em></p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-958" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/958/3f303543efff570b151656f7eb86fe0ec2e6846b/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/216428/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Martin is Economics Editor of The Conversation.</span></em></p>30 of the 50 economists surveyed want a carbon price of the kind introduced by Julia Gillard in 2012 and abolished by Tony Abbott in 2014. Several say there’s little “time left to act seriously”.Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2124012023-09-05T17:02:15Z2023-09-05T17:02:15ZWhy we won’t be able to prevent climate breakdown without changing our relationship to the rest of the living world<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/545041/original/file-20230828-17-ropd8p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C22%2C1899%2C1253&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Not only is deforestation unsightly. Fewer trees also mean less precious carbon sinks to absorb anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.rawpixel.com/image/3326154/free-photo-image-garden-reforestation-asheville-field-office">Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Because of its growing impact on society, global warming has taken centre stage in the public debate. While most of us have not read the reports by the <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/">Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change</a> (IPCC), heat waves, intensifying storms and the multiplication of extreme events remind us of the scale of climate disruption and the urgency of action.</p>
<p>Despite being documented by the <a href="https://www.ipbes.net/about">Intergovernmental Sciences Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services</a> (IPBES), the equivalent of the IPCC for biodiversity, we know little about how biodiversity erosion might affect us and the rest of the planet. Its links and interactions with climate change are underestimated, and any policy to address either in isolation will miss the mark. It’s impossible to take effective action against global warming without addressing our impact on the rest of the living world, and vice versa.</p>
<h2>Fossil carbon, living carbon</h2>
<p>IPCC scientists have been explaining since their <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/05/ipcc_90_92_assessments_far_full_report_fr.pdf">first assessment report</a> (1990) that climate change is a stock problem. To halt global warming, it is not enough to slash greenhouse gas emissions. We need to stabilise their stock in the atmosphere. To achieve <a href="https://christiandeperthuis.fr/n-comme-neutralite-climatique/">reach net zero</a> we must reduce emissions – the inflow into the stock – to the level of the outflow, which is made up of CO<sub>2</sub> absorption by carbon sinks (forests and oceans) and the elimination of non-CO<sub>2</sub> greenhouse gases at the end of their life cycle.</p>
<p>This requires that we adopt a two-pronged plan, aimed both at cutting down our reliance on both fossil <em>and</em> living carbon. The former feeds the vast majority of the world’s pollution, with coal, oil and natural gas accounting for <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg3/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_Chapter02.pdf">70% of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions</a>. Tackling it will require that we take on the so-called <a href="https://www.iea.org/topics/global-energy-transitions-stocktake">energy transition</a>.</p>
<p>On the other hand, a quarter of greenhouse gas emissions come from “living carbon”, mainly as a result of specific agricultural emissions (unrelated to fossil fuel use) and tropical deforestation and other land use changes that erode carbon sinks. There is no way to achieve carbon neutrality without a profound transformation in the use of living resources, to ensure the reflux of agricultural emissions and better protection of carbon sinks. This is the challenge of what we might call the <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fsufs.2021.709401/full">agroclimatic transition</a>.</p>
<p>One of the major difficulties of the ecological transition is to carry out these two transformations simultaneously, as they involve distinct economic mechanisms. For fossil carbon, we need to introduce scarcity by reducing the use of coal, oil and natural gas to the absolute minimum. For living carbon, we need to reinvest in the diversity of ecosystems to reduce agricultural emissions and protect carbon sinks as part of a bioeconomy.</p>
<h2>From adding to subtracting</h2>
<p>Since the start of the Industrial Revolution, energy transitions have followed one another. They have all involved adding new energy sources to a system initially based on the use of biomass. The result has been a massive increase in the amount of energy used worldwide.</p>
<p>The climate is forcing us to break with this logic. Lowering emissions is not a matter of adding decarbonised sources to the energy system. It’s about removing fossil fuels. We need to switch from a logic of addition to one of subtraction.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Russian tractor in a field in Ethiopia" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/544215/original/file-20230823-27-kbjahm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Deforestation and agriculture are the source of ‘living’ carbon emissions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/ifpri/14328252948">Ifpri/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>From an economic viewpoint, this means massively reconverting brown assets linked to the production or use of fossil fuels, through a double movement of investment in green and disinvestment in brown. The heaviest cost for the economic system is not the hundreds of billions invested in wind or solar farms, battery gigafactories or hydrogen electrolysers. It’s the cost of disinvestment that forces us to downgrade or reconvert brown assets: financial assets, of course, but also physical assets and, above all, the human assets on which the energy transition depends.</p>
<p>Multiple instruments will have to be called upon to bring about such a transformation. Pricing carbon from fossil fuel use is a key way to reflect the increasing scarcity of the atmospheric capacity to store carbon. Whether obtained through taxation or emission trading schemes, such taxation raises the cost of using fossil fuels, without returning the resulting rents to producers, as happens, for example, when oil prices soar on energy markets. On the demand side, it is a powerful stimulus to energy efficiency and sufficiency; on the supply side, it encourages a shift away from carbon assets.</p>
<p>The main difficulty with fossil carbon taxation lies in controlling its distributive impact. As the <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/topics/gilets-jaunes-movement-63133">“gilets jaunes” protests in France showed</a>, fossil carbon taxation without redistribution to the most vulnerable poses more problems than it solves. Only a <a href="https://theconversation.com/comment-reconcilier-taxe-carbone-et-pouvoir-dachat-111019">redistributive carbon tax</a> will be socially acceptable. Similarly, if carbon pricing is to be extended on an international scale, the proceeds must be returned on a massive scale to the countries of the South.</p>
<p>The distributional impacts of regulated carbon markets should also not be underestimated. Within the European Union, the extension of the emission trading scheme to the transport and buildings sector will increase household energy bills. This is why the proceeds from allowances sales at auction must be redistributed to the most vulnerable households via a <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_22_7796">“social fund”</a> which will be the pillar of the regulation to be put in place.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Yellow vests’ protest in Paris in January 2019" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/543741/original/file-20230821-17-rfxvjq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Yellow vests’ protest in Paris in January 2019.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/34/Paris%2C_Gilets_Jaunes_-_Acte_IX_%2846724068321%29.jpg/1024px-Paris%2C_Gilets_Jaunes_-_Acte_IX_%2846724068321%29.jpg">Wikimedia</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While fossil carbon taxation accelerates the energy transition, negative carbon taxes – in other words, <a href="https://www.iea.org/reports/fossil-fuels-consumption-subsidies-2022">fossil fuel subsidies</a> – delay it. Following the outbreak of war in Ukraine, these subsidies reached unprecedented levels in the European Union, with the multiplication of “tariff shields” erected as a matter of urgency to protect Europeans from the worst of the cost of living crisis.</p>
<p>Another pernicious form of subsidy to fossil fuels is the free allocation of CO<sub>2</sub> allowances in the European trading scheme, which <a href="https://sandbag.be/2021/12/17/why-free-allocation-in-the-eu-ets-must-stop-urgently/">hampers the emergence of a green industry</a>, a lever for the competitiveness of tomorrow’s Europe.</p>
<h2>Investing in the diversity of living beings</h2>
<p>Let’s imagine for a moment that the world has eradicated all use of fossil fuels in 2050. Would we automatically be in a situation of climate neutrality? Everything depends on what has been achieved on the second front of the transition, that of living carbon, the source of a quarter of the world’s greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p>Pricing fossil carbon is hardly useful for the agroclimatic transition. Worse, it could even prove counterproductive: using a CO<sub>2</sub> price based on energy criteria, it would become profitable to transform the Amazon rainforest (or the centuries-old oaks of the French Tronçay forest) into short rotation coppice to produce energy! The reason is simple. Agro-climatic transformation means finding ways to reinvest in biological diversity, in other words, in the abundance of living things. But the price of CO<sub>2</sub> does not reflect the value of this diversity. We therefore need to use other instruments, which are more complex to implement.</p>
<p>On land, forests are the main carbon sink. Their capacity to soak up atmospheric CO<sub>2</sub> is weakened by a combination of climatic and anthropogenic factors. In <a href="https://www.citepa.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/secten/2023/Citepa_Secten_ed2023_v1.pdf">France</a>, for example, the CO<sub>2</sub> storage capacity of forests has been divided by three since 2005, mainly due to climatic factors. There is therefore an urgent need to adapt forest management methods in anticipation of the severity of tomorrow’s climates. Worldwide, the main anthropogenic impact on forests is tropical deforestation. Its main cause is the expansion of land for crops and livestock. This is why the key to halting deforestation lies in changing agricultural practices.</p>
<h2>The key issues of agriculture and food</h2>
<p>The impact of farming systems on the net balance of greenhouse gas emissions is not limited to deforestation. Depending on the techniques used, farming systems may themselves release carbon into the atmosphere (deep ploughing, draining of wet soils, etc.) or, on the contrary, store it in living soils (conservation agriculture, agroforestry, etc.). The former erode biodiversity by specialising farmers according to industrial-type logics. The latter use living diversity to intensify production and regenerate the natural environment.</p>
<p>These agroecological techniques also make it possible to better withstand tougher climatic conditions, while reducing methane and nitrous oxide emissions from agricultural sources. In economic terms, their promotion requires investment in innovation, research and development, the establishment of dedicated farm advisory networks and, above all, incentivisation to reward farmers for the ecosystem services they provide to society. This is not something that happens spontaneously on the market. It requires public intervention and dedicated funding.</p>
<p>As in the case of energy, the agroclimatic transition implies, on the demand side, that we consume smarter and less. The foods we eat have contrasting climate footprints. There can be no successful agroclimatic transition without finding ways to dramatically reduce emissions associated with the most polluting ingredients, including industrially processed foods and animal products, especially those from ruminant breeding. The use of food rations might be one way of achieving this, according to the recommendations of the <a href="https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-diet">world’s health authorities</a>.</p>
<h2>Remembering the ocean</h2>
<p>Last but not least, the agroclimatic transition will have to take into account the management of the oceans and marine biodiversity, which are currently the blind spots of climate policies. Global warming and certain human practices (overfishing, pollutant runoff, etc.) are altering marine biodiversity, a crucial component in the storage of CO<sub>2</sub> by the oceans. Protecting the ocean sink is vital to stabilise tomorrow’s climate: it is estimated that the continental biosphere contains <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter05.pdf">four times more carbon</a> than the atmosphere. For the oceans, it’s 47 times.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>The authors thank Frank Convery for his insightful review</em></p>
<hr>
<p><em>The Climate Economics Chair of Paris Dauphine-PSL University is organising, in partnership with the Toulouse School of Economics and the National Museum of Natural History, the 24th Global Conference on Environmental Taxation, which will take place from September 6 to 8, 2023 and will have as its theme “Climate & Biodiversity: Tackling global footprints”.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212401/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Les auteurs ne travaillent pas, ne conseillent pas, ne possèdent pas de parts, ne reçoivent pas de fonds d'une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n'ont déclaré aucune autre affiliation que leur organisme de recherche.</span></em></p>Any smart climate strategy will need to simultaneously move away from fossil fuels and protect biodiversity, including through carbon sink preservation and a shift toward sustainable agriculture.Christian de Perthuis, Professeur d’économie, fondateur de la chaire « Économie du climat », Université Paris Dauphine – PSLÉdouard Civel, Chercheur au Square Research Center et à la Chaire Economie du Climat, Université Paris Dauphine – PSLLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2114852023-08-17T18:00:56Z2023-08-17T18:00:56ZA carbon tax on investment income could be more fair and make it less profitable to pollute – a new analysis shows why<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/543299/original/file-20230817-15-9p8mxz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=1575%2C0%2C2161%2C1402&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Investor pressure could drive down greenhouse gas emissions.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/businessman-partnership-making-handshake-agreement-royalty-free-image/1548518397">Tippapatt/iStock/Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>About 10 years ago, a very thick book written by a French economist became a surprising bestseller. It was called <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capital_in_the_Twenty-First_Century">“Capital in the 21st Century</a>.” In it, Thomas Piketty traces the history of income and wealth inequality over the past couple of hundred years.</p>
<p>The book’s insights struck a chord with people who felt a growing sense of economic inequality but didn’t have the data to back it up. I was one of them. It made me wonder, how much carbon pollution is being generated to create wealth for a small group of extremely rich households? Two kids, 10 years and a Ph.D. later, I finally have some answers.</p>
<p>In a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pclm.0000190">new study</a>, colleagues and I investigated U.S. households’ personal responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions from 1990 to 2019. We previously studied emissions tied to consumption – <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800922003597">the stuff people buy</a>. This time, we looked at emissions used in generating people’s incomes, including investment income.</p>
<p>If you’ve ever thought about how oil company CEOs and shareholders get rich at the expense of the climate, then you’ve been thinking in an “income-responsibility” way.</p>
<p>While it may seem intuitive that those getting rich from fossil fuels bear responsibility for the emissions, very little research has been done to quantify this. Recent efforts have started to look at emissions related to household <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13383">wages in France</a>, <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41893-022-00955-z">global consumption and investments of different income groups</a> and <a href="https://policy-practice.oxfam.org/resources/carbon-billionaires-the-investment-emissions-of-the-worlds-richest-people-621446/">billionaires’ investments</a>. But no one has analyzed households across a whole country based on the emissions used to generate their full range of income, including wages, investments and retirement income, until now.</p>
<p>We linked a <a href="https://worldmrio.com/">global data set</a> of financial transactions and emissions <a href="https://cps.ipums.org/cps/">to microdata</a> from the U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics’ monthly labor force survey, which includes respondents’ job, demographics and income from 35 categories, including wages and investments. People’s wages we connected to the emission intensity of the industries that employ them, and we based the emissions intensity of investment income on a portfolio that mirrors the overall economy.</p>
<p>The results of our analysis were eye-opening, and they could have profound implications for producing more effective and fair climate policies in the future.</p>
<p><iframe id="I5sZ8" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/I5sZ8/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>A view from the top 1%</h2>
<p>Both our consumption- and income-based approaches reveal that the highest-earning households are responsible for much more than an equitable share of carbon emissions. What’s more surprising is how different the level of responsibility is depending on whether you look at consumption or income.</p>
<p>In the income-based approach, the share of national emissions coming from the top 1% of households is 15% to 17% of national emissions. That’s about 2.5 times higher than their consumer-related emissions, which is about 6%.</p>
<p>In the bottom 50% of households, however, the trend is the exact opposite: Their share of consumption-based national emissions is 31%, about two times larger than their income-based emissions of 14%.</p>
<p>Why is that?</p>
<p>A couple things are going on here. First, the lowest earning 50% of U.S. households spend all that they earn, and often more via social assistance or debt. The top income groups, on the other hand, are able to save and reinvest more of their income. </p>
<p>Second, while high-income households have very high overall spending and emissions, the carbon intensity – tons of carbon dioxide emitted per dollar – of their purchases is actually lower than that of low-income households. This is because low-income households spend a large share of their income on carbon-intensive basic necessities, like home heating and transportation. High-income households spend more of their income on less-carbon-intensive services, like financial services or higher education.</p>
<p><iframe id="OS218" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/OS218/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<p><iframe id="20VBh" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/20VBh/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Implications for a carbon tax</h2>
<p>Our detailed comparison could help change how governments think about carbon taxes.</p>
<p>Typically, a carbon tax is applied to fossil fuels when they enter the economy. Coal, oil and gas producers then pass this tax on to consumers. <a href="https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/58f2a409-9bb7-4ee6-899d-be47835c838f">More than two dozen countries</a> have a carbon tax, and U.S. policymakers have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/24/us/politics/carbon-tax-democrats.html">proposed adding one in recent years</a>. The idea is that raising the price of these products by taxing them will get consumers to shift to cheaper and presumably less carbon-intensive alternatives.</p>
<p>But our studies show that this kind of tax would disproportionately fall on poorer Americans. Even if a <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092180091731580X?casa_token=jTRcE1-pQhoAAAAA:p1QyeAg1SrXIVSJUre9vaNV2DCbVPp7RlC2UGWQN59aQwCRXq-eieRkX5alAlzyvPL7xRBRB7A">universal dividend check</a> was adopted, consumer-facing carbon taxes have no impact on saved income. Generating that income likely contributed to greenhouse gas emissions, but as long as the money is used to buy stocks rather than consumables, it is excluded from carbon taxes. So, this kind of carbon tax disproportionately affects people whose income goes primarily toward consumption.</p>
<h2>A profit-focused carbon tax</h2>
<p>What if, instead of focusing on consumption, carbon taxes addressed greenhouse gases as an outcome of profit generation?</p>
<p>The vast majority of American corporations operate under the principle of “<a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/08/22/so-long-to-shareholder-primacy/">shareholder primacy</a>,” where they see a fiduciary duty to maximize profit for <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2019/02/11/towards-accountable-capitalism-remaking-corporate-law-through-stakeholder-governance/">their investors</a>. Products – and the greenhouse gases used to make them – are not created for the benefit of the consumer, but because the sale of those products will benefit the shareholders.</p>
<p>If carbon taxes were focused on shareholder income linked to greenhouse gas emissions rather than consumption, they could target those receiving the most economic benefits resulting from these emissions.</p>
<p><iframe id="jRvUY" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/jRvUY/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>The impact</h2>
<p>A couple of interesting things might result, particularly if the tax was set based on the carbon intensity of the company.</p>
<p>Corporate executives and boards would have incentive to reduce emissions to lower taxes for shareholders. Shareholders would have incentive, out of self-interest, to pressure companies to do so. </p>
<p>Investors would also have incentive to shift their portfolios to less-polluting companies to avoid the tax. Pension and private wealth fund managers would have incentive to divest from carbon-polluting investments out of a fiduciary duty to their clients. To keep the tax focused on large shareholders, I could see retirement accounts being excluded from the tax, or a minimum asset threshold before the tax applies.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CgA0UgSEDjI?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Jared Starr explains the new study’s findings and the implications.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Revenue generated from the carbon tax could help fund <a href="https://www.unep.org/resources/adaptation-gap-report-2022?gclid=CjwKCAjw5_GmBhBIEiwA5QSMxFUxJNkRuBfUZTRp8JK00-u1lzHYGnuW9xeCHlS-sr6d5-FknWIScRoCawcQAvD_BwE">adaptation</a> and the transition to clean energy.</p>
<p>Instead of putting the responsibility for cutting emissions on consumers, maybe policies should more directly tie that responsibility to corporate executives, board members and investors who have the most knowledge and power over their industries. Based on our analysis of the consumption and income benefits produced by greenhouse gas emissions, I believe a shareholder-based carbon tax is worth exploring.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/211485/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jared Starr does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Taxing consumption that contributes to climate change hits the poor the hardest, while overlooking the huge profits tied to greenhouse gas emissions.Jared Starr, Sustainability Scientist, UMass AmherstLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2082832023-06-25T20:04:24Z2023-06-25T20:04:24ZBetween nostalgia and amnesia: the legacy of Julia Gillard as PM, 10 years after her ousting<p>On June 26 2013, as she fronted the press gallery in Canberra after her removal as leader of the Labor Party, Julia Gillard was determined not to cry. In her prime ministerial <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0uhHuEw8LY">resignation speech</a>, she asked not for pity, but rather for a meaningful national conversation about gender and politics, specifically the politics of her demise.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It doesn’t explain everything; it doesn’t explain nothing. It explains some things. And it is for the nation to think in a sophisticated way about those shades of grey.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Ten years after the fact, that conversation is ongoing. At times, it has been a progressive and sophisticated one. The events of recent weeks, including the puerile debate about Katy Gallagher’s <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/gallagher-faces-censure-motion-20230622-p5dirm.html">prior knowledge</a> of Brittany Higgins’ sexual assault allegations, and the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-06-15/peter-dutton-dumps-senator-david-van-from-liberal-party-room/102481814">allegations</a> against Senator David Van, remind us there is still a long way to go. </p>
<p>However, it is worth pausing to reflect on what has happened to Gillard’s reputation over the decade. Why has it thrived? Is it all about gender? And if we have forgotten key aspects of the Gillard years, what does that partial amnesia say about us?</p>
<h2>From ‘Juliar’ to feminist icon</h2>
<p>For much of her premiership, Gillard was singularly unpopular among Australian voters. Her efforts to put a price on carbon (damned by critics as a broken promise not to introduce a carbon tax) proved electorally damaging, as did her failure to end the deadlock over asylum-seeker policy. <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/a-line-has-been-crossed-gillard-acts-on-thomson-and-slipper-20120429-1xsiz.html">Controversies</a> surrounding Labor MP Craig Thompson and Speaker Peter Slipper (selected for the role by Gillard) further undermined her standing.</p>
<p>There was much sexism at play. Her critics incessantly argued this was a woman not to be trusted. Critics of carbon pricing infamously dubbed her “Juliar” on their angry placards. Her body was objectified in the public domain, and the shock jocks of commercial radio questioned the sexuality of her then partner. </p>
<p>One commentator, the irascible Alan Jones, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hsaVpepMyA8">even suggested</a> the prime minister ought to be “put in a chaff bag” and drowned at sea. The shocking thing is not that these things were said, but rather that they were accepted as legitimate contributions to public debate by the community at large.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/533611/original/file-20230623-24-4cz05p.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The language used to criticised Gillard was often deeply sexist, and opposition politicians often did little to discourage it.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alan Porritt/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Stories about Gillard’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2014/oct/31/julia-gillard-did-not-commit-any-inquirys-counsel-assisting-says">alleged corruption</a> as a lawyer in Perth in the early 1990s also proved a distraction from the government’s agenda. Not until 2014 – in the witness box of a royal commission, no less – was Gillard finally able to clear her name.</p>
<h2>The misogyny speech</h2>
<p>The passage of time can make things seem as if they always were as they are now. But Gillard’s renowned <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihd7ofrwQX0">misogyny speech</a> was not an instant sensation in Australia. The context – a censure motion on the disgraced speaker Peter Slipper – was unpropitious, and when Gillard made her speech, the conservative press called her a hypocrite who now played the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/gillard-reveals-true-nature-in-playing-gender-card-20121010-27cnq.html">“gender card”</a> for political expediency. </p>
<p>The speech’s global impact was immediate, but only after Gillard’s removal from power did it capture the hearts and minds of some Australians. New developments – the sexist attacks on US presidential candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016, the #MeToo movement beginning in 2017, and latterly the backlash against gendered discrimination and abuse in parliament house – gave it further acuity in the following years.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ihd7ofrwQX0?wmode=transparent&start=30" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>A decade after its muted reception in Canberra, the speech is circulated on TikTok, featured in stage productions, and in 2020 it was even voted Australia’s most <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2020/feb/07/julia-gillard-misogyny-speech-voted-most-unforgettable-moment-in-australian-tv-history">“unforgettable” television moment</a>.</p>
<p>Though not always enamoured with the way it dominated her political legacy, Gillard ultimately leaned in to it, as the saying goes. She started a podcast called A Podcast of One’s Own (a clear nod to Virginia Woolf), published two books about women and leadership, and established the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at King’s College London, and latterly the Australian National University.</p>
<h2>Star status</h2>
<p>As prime minister, Gillard was regularly criticised for her “wooden” media appearances and her cautious approach to public engagement. It is ironic, then, that her transformation from untrustworthy politician to venerable feminist advocate depended on the media and celebrity industries.</p>
<p>It began with a series of ticketed <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoCpHkPr8lE">public talks</a> in venues such as the Sydney Opera House with longstanding feminist advocate, author and historian Anne Summers. Gillard’s memoir, <a href="https://www.penguin.com.au/books/my-story-9781760893330">My Story</a>, and a high-profile book tour followed in 2014. </p>
<p>In her advocacy work as chair of the Global Partnership for Education she also rubbed shoulders with celebrities such as <a href="https://www.vogue.com.au/celebrity/interviews/rihanna-and-julia-gillard-the-unlikely-friendship-between-a-global-superstar-and-our-former-prime-minister/news-story/3263d3e95e6d9780c0535b8cfea8840d">Rihanna</a>.</p>
<h2>The policy legacy</h2>
<p>Several of the Rudd-Gillard government’s policy initiatives were unravelled by their successors. The <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-10/gillard-reveals-carbon-price-scheme/2788842">$23-per-tonne carbon price</a> was repealed by Tony Abbott’s government, as was the (clearly deficient) <a href="https://treasury.gov.au/sites/default/files/2019-03/FOI_2247.pdf">Minerals Resource Rent Tax</a>. The National Broadband Network, the rollout of which began under Gillard, was dramatically reimagined by Malcolm Turnbull as communications minister and then as prime minister.</p>
<p>Some of the less-savoury aspects of Gillard policy legacy have been forgotten for more convenient reasons. Gillard herself has not often discussed her government’s revival of mandatory offshore processing for asylum seekers in Australia. The cutting of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-julia-gillard-forever-changed-australian-politics-especially-for-women-138528">single parents’ benefit</a>, on the very same day as Gillard’s misogyny speech, has earned perhaps not enough discussion. It is her <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2023-05-16/julia-gillard-same-sex-marriage-feminism-debate/102290962">failure to support</a> same-sex marriage as prime minister that now draws the most condemnation from pundits.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ZbiffRb_DIM?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>But policy legacies have also played a huge part in the revival of Gillard’s public standing. The Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse in Institutional Settings was a hugely important initiative. It earned Gillard significant credit across the political spectrum when its findings proved so damning. </p>
<p>The NDIS, largely overlooked in media coverage in favour of “carbon tax” and “deficit”, has become a sacred element in Australian social and welfare policy. The subsequent policy debate has not hinged on the design of the scheme, but rather how best to fund it.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-julia-gillard-forever-changed-australian-politics-especially-for-women-138528">How Julia Gillard forever changed Australian politics - especially for women</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Between nostalgia and amnesia</h2>
<p>There is a dissonance in the way Australians talk about Gillard today. Her magnanimity is respected, her embrace of a life after politics admired. Above all else, Gillard’s status as Australia’s first woman prime minister and now a global women’s ambassador prevails. As a rule, she does not parade her views on contemporary politics before the public, except at a conceptual level. (Her memoir was perhaps the exception.) </p>
<p>But when commentators refer to the decade of egos, ambitions and failed leaders, they are increasingly likely to elide her name entirely. It is a disservice to the historical record, and to Gillard herself. She was a fierce combatant in parliament, and endured a period of intense conflict within the Labor Party. Her victory over Kevin Rudd in February 2012 – one of their many spills and shadow contests – was larger than any ballot that Rudd, Abbott or Turnbull ever contested.</p>
<p>People have been quick to wipe their hands clean of yesterday’s sexism in order to make Gillard yesterday’s heroine. But they ought to be careful that, in the process, they do not erase her from other political histories. </p>
<p>To segregate her story as one of women’s leadership while neglecting it in wider histories of Australian politics and policy would, in its own way, be an act of sexism.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/who-were-australias-best-prime-ministers-we-asked-the-experts-165302">Who were Australia's best prime ministers? We asked the experts</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/208283/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Joshua Black does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Gillard’s legacy - a mixed one on policy - was more than just the misogyny speech.Joshua Black, PhD Candidate, School of History, National Centre of Biography, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1981342023-01-24T21:23:30Z2023-01-24T21:23:30ZTargeted policies can help decarbonize Canada one home at a time<p>Be it through the food we eat, vehicle we use or way we live, <a href="https://www.visualcapitalist.com/a-global-breakdown-of-greenhouse-gas-emissions-by-sector/">we use fossil fuels and emit greenhouse gases</a> in various activities in our daily lives. We need to reduce emissions across sectors, starting with our homes. This requires <a href="https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/climate-action/">ambitious and quick action</a>.</p>
<p>As we face more and more climate change-induced weather extremes, we heavily rely on the use of home heating and cooling infrastructure. The emissions from space heating and cooling in homes represent almost one-fifth of <a href="https://wedocs.unep.org/handle/20.500.11822/34572;jsessionid=50402C37879DE297641075CEE7FB3BA4">global greenhouse gas emissions</a>. </p>
<p>In Canada, home emissions account for around <a href="http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2019/eccc/En81-4-2017-1-eng.pdf">six per cent of emissions</a>, largely because most <a href="https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/energy-commodities/natural-gas/report/canadian-residential-natural-gasbill/index.html">homes rely on natural gas-fired</a> or oil-powered furnaces and boilers, although additional emissions are associated with air conditioning. </p>
<p>Canada should decrease emissions from residential buildings by 50 per cent by 2030 and achieve a net-zero emissions building stock by 2050 <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/net-zero-emissions-2050.html">to meet its climate targets</a>. Our <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102926">recent study</a> found that the first step towards this goal is using targeted policies that encourage the use of low-carbon technology in our homes, like heat pumps. </p>
<h2>Some provinces take the lead on decarbonization policy</h2>
<p>Across levels of Canadian governments, many types of policies have been designed to encourage switching from fossil fuel-based to low-carbon technologies. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1514012983449509892"}"></div></p>
<p>These include subsidies or loans for switching to low-carbon technologies, educational programs and adopting economy-wide policies such as <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work.html">carbon pricing</a>, regulations for building emissions and renewable natural gas mandates.</p>
<p>For example, the province of British Columbia offers its residents subsidies for <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/science/bans-fossil-fuel-heating-homes-1.6327113">switching away from fossil fuel-based heating systems</a>. It also offers bonuses for performing additional <a href="https://www.betterhomesbc.ca/rebates/cleanbc-better-homes-and-home-renovation-rebate-programs/">low-carbon retrofits</a>.</p>
<p>Prince Edward Island offers an <a href="https://www.princeedwardisland.ca/en/service/residential-home-heating-loan-program">interest-free loan for up to $30,000</a> to residents who upgrade the current heating system in their homes to a cleaner, more efficient low-carbon system that reduces their carbon footprint.</p>
<p>Canada recently updated the carbon price, in line with its planned yearly increases in stringency.</p>
<p>While such efforts to decarbonize buildings are increasing, current policies seem to be insufficient for Canada to meet its <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2018.03.064">greenhouse gas reduction commitments</a>. </p>
<h2>Five factors that influence Canadians to decarbonize</h2>
<p>Heat pumps can significantly <a href="https://www.cleanenergytransition.org/post/why-heat-pumps-are-key-to-building-decarbonization#:%7E:text=An%20Energy%20Policy%20study%20published,resources%20used%20for%20electricity%20production.">decarbonize Canada’s homes</a> because they are powered by electricity, and not fossil fuels. They also provide similarly efficient space cooling with the same system, and may be able to reduce consumer energy costs.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/m3qgftmaeS8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Replacing boilers that burn natural gas with electricity-dependent heat pumps to heat and cool homes can help reduce emissions.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But despite many policies that incentivize their adoption, these heat pumps are used in only around <a href="https://oee.nrcan.gc.ca/corporate/statistics/neud/dpa/showTable.cfm?type=CP&sector=res&juris=ca&rn=27&page=0">five per cent of home heating systems in Canada</a>. Why is adoption so low?</p>
<p>Using data from a nationally representative sample of 3,138 Canadian homeowners, we explored the main motivators for heat pump adoption in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2022.102926">our study</a>.</p>
<p>We found that while one-third of Canadian homeowners express willingness to adopt heat pumps, they are generally unaware of existing government efforts or policies in place to support its adoption. Only five per cent of our respondents were able to name such policies from memory. This policy awareness was higher in British Columbia, and for heat pump subsidies and carbon taxes. </p>
<p>However, policy awareness, we found, is a weak positive predictor of willingness to adopt heat pumps. We found that homeowners are more willing to adopt a heat pump if they </p>
<p>1) believe it can effectively heat and cool their home,</p>
<p>2) think it can improve air quality and help fight climate change,</p>
<p>3) are interested in technology, </p>
<p>4) support policies that encourage heat pump adoption, and </p>
<p>5) don’t perceive heat pumps as being too expensive or inconvenient to install. </p>
<h2>The top-down approach</h2>
<p>So, instead of focusing their efforts on educating homeowners about existing policies, our research suggests that policymakers should aim to increase homeowners’ confidence in low-carbon infrastructure like heat pumps. They must highlight the effectiveness and environmental benefits of these technologies. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1504925891691958275"}"></div></p>
<p>Policies can also be designed to help remove barriers of high financial and inconvenience costs during heat pump installation. For example, subsidy amounts could cover inconvenience costs and more funding could be directed towards training contractors in such installations.</p>
<p>Considering these drivers and barriers while tailoring policy design and structure will help augment the adoption of such low-carbon technologies, and by extension home decarbonization. </p>
<p>While this holds true in Canada, at both the national and provincial levels, it can also be replicated in other jurisdictions with similar climates or policy regimes such as Scandinavia, the United Kingdom and the northern United States.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/198134/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ekaterina Rhodes receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Insight Development Grant # 430-2020-00214.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Meghan Corbett received funding from from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council Insight Development Grant # 430-2020-00214.</span></em></p>Policies that encourage the use of low-carbon technology like heat pumps can help motivate residents to decarbonize their homes.Ekaterina Rhodes, Assistant Professor, School of Public Administration, University of VictoriaMeghan Corbett, Master's student, Public Administration, University of VictoriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1959282023-01-23T19:19:11Z2023-01-23T19:19:11ZThe world’s carbon price is a fraction of what we need – because only a fifth of global emissions are priced<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505769/original/file-20230123-38981-rfuj6n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=41%2C53%2C3952%2C2191&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the end of last year, the world’s average price to emit one tonne of greenhouse gases was around US$5.29 (AU$7.77). For pricing to work as we want – to wean us off fossil fuels – it needs to be around $75 by the end of the decade, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/business/cop/exclusive-cop27-imf-chief-says-75ton-carbon-price-needed-by-2030-2022-11-07/#:%7E:text=a%20month%20ago-,EXCLUSIVE%20COP27%3A%20IMF%20chief%20says%20%2475%2Fton,carbon%20price%20needed%20by%202030&text=SHARM%20EL-SHEIKH%2C%20Egypt%2C,International%20Monetary%20Fund%20told%20Reuters">according to</a> the International Monetary Fund. </p>
<p>Why is the price still so low? Because even in 2023, close to 80% of the world’s emissions from land clearing, power plants, cars and industry are pumped into the atmosphere without any cost to the polluter. </p>
<p>Carbon prices have long been favoured by economists and experts as a way to drive faster change. If you want to discourage something, the easiest way is to make it cost more. Pricing the three main greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide – is an elegant and effective way to force polluters to find alternative ways of producing power or creating forms of transport. (Carbon price refers to pricing a tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent, CO₂-e, which covers all three gases).</p>
<p>There’s long been a strange disconnect between the minute-by-minute updates on financial asset prices and the the lack of information on carbon prices. In 2023, as extreme weather, droughts and floods propel climate change to the front of our minds, it’s far easier to access streams of data on share markets, commodities, foreign exchange than it is to find data on the measure most critical to global survival – the price of carbon. That’s why our research team worked to produce the first <a href="https://www.realcarbonindex.org/indices">global carbon price index</a> as a way to easily track changes in pricing globally – and see change over time. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="coal and solar" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=320&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505774/original/file-20230123-26-gt2ri9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=402&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Carbon pricing can help us go from fossil fuels to clean electricity.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>How did we determine the true price of carbon?</h2>
<p>To nail down the global price of carbon, we took into account every national or supranational scheme as well as the price of carbon traded through emissions trading schemes. We did not use carbon credits or offsets, as these tend to lack transparency, be rubbery and often questionable. </p>
<p>Different countries and jurisdictions have come at the problem of atmospheric pollution from different directions. </p>
<p>The simplest is to simply tax the pollutants you don’t want. This works if the price is set at the right level – not too low or too high at first – and increased as necessary. </p>
<p>Another common approach is to create a market for pollution through an emissions trading scheme, where high emitters have to purchase allowances. Over time, the new market will set the price on polluting as emitters and others compete for this finite pool of allowances. Regulators progressively cut the number of allowances, driving up the price of each allowance. The end result is to nudge large polluters to cut more and more of their emissions. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">Carbon pricing works: the largest-ever study puts it beyond doubt</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We didn’t include carbon credits or offsets in our indices, as their use is largely voluntary, they tend to be unregulated or loosely regulated, their supply is uncapped, and their impact varies widely. Whistleblowers <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-blew-the-whistle-on-australias-central-climate-policy-heres-what-a-new-federal-government-probe-must-fix-185894">have claimed</a> Australia’s main carbon offset scheme is largely useless, for instance. </p>
<h2>So what changes have we seen?</h2>
<p>We first calculated this index a decade ago, when it became possible to pull together reliable price and scope information. When the index began, the global carbon price was just $0.67 per tonne of CO₂-e (or carbon dioxide equivalents). Back in 2013, only 20 jurisdictions had a price on carbon, covering just 8% of global emissions. At the time, Australia was one of them, before the so-called “climate wars” <a href="https://theconversation.com/3-lessons-from-australias-climate-wars-and-how-we-can-finally-achieve-better-climate-policy-187000">took over</a> national politics. </p>
<p>Over the last decade, however, we’ve seen significant progress. The current price of around $7.77 per tonne of CO₂-e is almost eight times higher than 2013. From 20 countries or jurisdictions, we now have 58, accounting for 22.5% of global emissions. That includes the European Union’s emission trading scheme and China’s new national scheme, which respectively account for around 3% and 9% of emissions globally. The schemes don’t cover their whole economies. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=334&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505771/original/file-20230123-61764-p1udn4.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=420&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This chart shows the evolution of the carbon price index since 2013.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That’s the good news. The bad news is there’s still a way to go. More than three-quarters of emissions go unpriced – costing the polluter nothing. That’s why the global carbon price is still so low. Nations like India, Iran, Russia, Indonesia and Australia have no carbon price or trading scheme. </p>
<h2>Australia still bringing up the rear</h2>
<p>Australia’s domestic emissions account for 1.27% of global greenhouse gas emissions. When you include our staggering fossil fuel exports as the world’s top LNG exporter and major coal exporter, our impact on the world climate <a href="https://climateanalytics.org/media/australia_carbon_footprint_report_july2019.pdf">almost quadruples</a> to 5%. That’s depressingly high, given our population is just 0.3% of the world’s total. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/3-lessons-from-australias-climate-wars-and-how-we-can-finally-achieve-better-climate-policy-187000">3 lessons from Australia's ‘climate wars’ and how we can finally achieve better climate policy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Despite our vastly outsized carbon footprint, Australia still doesn’t have a mandated carbon price. We do have a safeguard mechanism – a baseline above which its big polluters need to pay. At present, the baseline is too high, meaning only a small number of polluters participate. The mechanism is currently <a href="https://consult.dcceew.gov.au/safeguard-mechanism-reform-consultation">under review</a>. </p>
<p>Until the baselines are set lower and penalties enforced, Australia will remain a laggard in the fight against climate change. Labor’s pledge to cut emissions 43% by 2030 came without mention of a price on carbon. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="LNG exports" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=225&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=225&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=225&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/505775/original/file-20230123-53755-x4nvwy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australia’s gas and coal exports vastly increase our broader emissions impact.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Will the rest of the world embrace carbon pricing?</h2>
<p>Political pushback killed Australia’s first effort at pricing carbon in 2012. Similarly, political gridlock in America has made carbon pricing a non-starter at the national level. In response, left of centre governments have turned to different approaches, such as spending heavily on newly cheap clean energy. </p>
<p>Does this mean we’ll never see the global carbon price hit the point where it will be effective? It’s hard to say, but at present, it seems unlikely every major nation will price carbon. </p>
<p>That doesn’t mean it’s a waste of time for the nations and jurisdictions like the European Union which are embracing it. Far from it. It’s well established we can drive behaviour change by measuring it against a benchmark or expectation. That’s where we hope the real carbon price index can play a role. After all, this is one of the numbers that really matters. </p>
<p>Almost all of the trillion tonnes of carbon dioxide we’ve emitted since the Industrial Revolution were emitted for “free”. As global heating intensifies, the true cost is becoming ever more apparent. </p>
<p><em>The authors would like to thank Roger Cohen from C2Zero who was part of the index team and provided support for this article.</em></p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/taxes-out-subsidies-in-australia-and-the-us-are-passing-major-climate-bills-without-taxing-carbon-189555">Taxes out, subsidies in: Australia and the US are passing major climate bills – without taxing carbon</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/195928/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nga Pham is also the co-chair of the Financial Capital Committee of the International Corporate Governance Network.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Bei Cui and Ummul Ruthbah do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s far easier to see how the stock market is doing than it is to find out the global price of carbon. That has to change.Bei Cui, Research fellow, Monash UniversityNga Pham. CFA, Senior Research Fellow, Monash UniversityUmmul Ruthbah, Senior Research FellowLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1895552022-09-05T20:04:28Z2022-09-05T20:04:28ZTaxes out, subsidies in: Australia and the US are passing major climate bills – without taxing carbon<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/482677/original/file-20220905-24-7ck41d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C4%2C2986%2C1967&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At last, there’s action on climate change. The United States <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-finally-passed-a-huge-climate-bill-australia-needs-to-keep-up-188525">recently passed</a> its largest climate bill ever. And Australia is <a href="https://theconversation.com/government-set-to-legislate-its-43-emissions-reduction-target-after-greens-announce-support-188153">set to usher</a> a 43% emissions target into law this week, although the Greens will try to <a href="https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/the-greens-to-introduce-climate-trigger-bill-to-parliament-in-a-bid-to-further-cut-greenhouse-emissions/news-story/507a14a3228268ab661a3c032ec22eb8">amend</a> the bill so the climate impacts of new gas and coal projects are considered. </p>
<p>Good news, right? There’s one issue – these laws, packages and amendments conspicuously avoid the “T” word. Economists have long argued the best option to cut emissions is a tax or, failing that, a type of carbon market known as “<a href="https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/how-do-emissions-trading-systems-work/">cap-and-trade</a>”. But nowhere do the Australian or US bills mention taxing carbon dioxide to discourage dumping it into the atmosphere. </p>
<p>Why? The answer is basically politics. The Gillard Labor government introduced a carbon tax that, although it worked, turned out to be political kryptonite. So Labor’s climate policies now rely not on a tax, but on incentives for clean energy, carbon farming and electric transport.</p>
<p>This is not ideal. For decades, economists have pointed out carbon taxes and pollution allowance markets are the <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">simplest and best way</a> to reduce emissions at the lowest possible cost. But it seems taxes are out and stimulus is in. </p>
<h2>A long history of tax avoidance</h2>
<p>This isn’t new, of course. For decades, politicians – particularly in Anglophone countries – have avoided carbon taxes or market-based ways of cutting planet-heating pollutants. </p>
<p>Every attempt to price carbon on a national level in the US <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/15/will-us-ever-put-a-price-on-carbon-as-part-of-climate-change-policy.html">has failed</a>. The first was in 1990. Presidential candidate turned climate campaigner Al Gore <a href="https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/gores-carbon-tax-shift-beats-cap-and-trade">called for a carbon tax</a> in his influential 1992 book, Earth in the Balance. But it was <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2009/09/gores-carbon-tax-makes-good-sense-027451">politically unappealing</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-finally-passed-a-huge-climate-bill-australia-needs-to-keep-up-188525">The US has finally passed a huge climate bill. Australia needs to keep up</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Why? Concerns over “federal overreach”, increasing cost of power, and, of course, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2011.05.002">lobbying</a> from fossil fuel industries.</p>
<p>Australia has the sad title of the first country in the world to introduce and remove a price on carbon – a sign of <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-10/carbon-tax-timeline/5569118">how fraught the idea</a> has been. Labor’s Rudd-Gillard government lost the 2013 election with the “carbon tax” issue front-and-centre <a href="https://theconversation.com/obituary-australias-carbon-price-29217">in the campaign</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="electric car" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/482680/original/file-20220905-20-egagse.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Subsidies for electric vehicles and green energy are set to grow strongly.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Policy and politics has evolved</h2>
<p>Since Australia repealed its carbon tax, we’ve seen significant change in climate policies towards what is politically possible. </p>
<p>In the US, federal inaction on climate change spawned stronger environmental regulation by some states. Coalitions of American states now operate some of the world’s best pollution markets, such as that covering <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeem.2022.102620">12 eastern states</a> and California’s <a href="https://www.c2es.org/content/california-cap-and-trade/">own market</a>.</p>
<p>The EU avoided taxes in favour of a cannier approach. They created a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10640-009-9275-7">pollution market</a> but allowed each state to determine how many allowances domestic firms could obtain. This made the policy more politically appetising and the EU carbon market has since <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/climate-change-carbonpricing-europe-idUKL8N2I61AY">expanded substantially</a>. </p>
<p>The world’s largest emitter, China, last year followed suit and launched the <a href="https://chinadialogue.net/en/climate/the-first-year-of-chinas-national-carbon-market-reviewed/">world’s largest</a> carbon trading scheme. </p>
<p>But Australia didn’t follow the emissions trading model pursued by the EU and many US states. Instead, the Abbott Coalition government brought in an <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-emissions-reduction-fund-is-almost-empty-it-shouldnt-be-refilled-92283">emissions reduction fund</a> to subsidise pollution reduction. </p>
<p>Companies can use pollution reduction to gain carbon credits, which can be sold to government or on the private market. The policy has proven thoroughly <a href="https://theconversation.com/we-blew-the-whistle-on-australias-central-climate-policy-heres-what-a-new-federal-government-probe-must-fix-185894">underwhelming</a>. </p>
<h2>What trends are we seeing?</h2>
<p>So tax and markets seem to be off the table when it comes to climate bills. </p>
<p>Last month, the US passed a sweeping <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-has-finally-passed-a-huge-climate-bill-australia-needs-to-keep-up-188525">A$530 billion bill</a> aimed at boosting health care funding and tackling climate change.</p>
<p>It’s aimed at speeding up the shift to clean energy and electric transport, through rebates and tax credits for electric cars, efficient appliances and rooftop solar. Conspicuously absent was any mention of a carbon tax or pollution allowance market. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1558864379176697861"}"></div></p>
<p>Australia’s climate bill requires us to reduce emissions by 43% by 2030 – but there’s very little information on the crucial question of how. </p>
<p>Labor’s bill <a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-may-be-heading-for-emissions-trading-between-big-polluters-188799">envisages</a> a type of market, regulating large polluters by allowing them to trade credits created by emissions reduction.</p>
<p>But both Australia and the US have shied away from the principle of “polluter pays”. </p>
<p>This is disappointing. Yes, subsiding pollution reduction can create incentives for behaviour change. But subsidies are <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/politics/victoria/competing-solar-and-fast-rail-schemes-economically-wasteful-report-20181028-p50chy.html">often wasteful</a> and inefficient. Taxes and markets are better options. We now know countries with a price on carbon have emissions growth rates <a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">around 2% lower</a> than those without. Longer term, this is often enough to see overall emissions begin to fall.</p>
<p>While the direct costs of subsidies are not immediately seen by citizens and companies, these subsidies have to be paid for through increases in general taxation. Carbon taxes, by contrast, are more explicit. A polluter will clearly notice having to pay the tax and be motivated to avoid it. </p>
<h2>We’ll still need taxes and market approaches, even with the subsidies</h2>
<p>Instead of splashing out on subsidies, governments could still <a href="https://theconversation.com/economists-back-carbon-price-say-benefits-of-net-zero-outweigh-costs-169939">introduce a carbon tax</a> to raise much-needed revenue while offering assistance to low-income households, cutting taxes elsewhere, or even reduce the deficit. </p>
<p>In Australia, there’s surprising support for a <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/technology/majority-want-carbon-tax-back/news-story/de67bf2831809123d2e227788704ecb0">return of the carbon tax</a>. But Labor may well be wary, given how their last carbon tax was easily defeated with a political scare campaign. One alternative could be to follow the EU and China and begin <a href="https://doi.org/10.1086/717898">auctioning</a> off pollution permits. </p>
<p>We could also borrow from America’s approach. Deep in the bill is a <a href="https://subscriber.politicopro.com/article/eenews/2022/08/11/climate-bills-methane-fee-could-pave-the-way-to-a-carbon-tax-00050941">fee on methane emissions</a>. This, some environmentalists believe, could be the crucial first step towards wider pricing of pollution. </p>
<p>Even though subsidies and rebates are politically popular, by themselves they cannot end greenhouse gas emissions. While carrots are popular, we will still need a stick – taxes or markets – to actually encourage polluters to cut emissions. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/carbon-pricing-works-the-largest-ever-study-puts-it-beyond-doubt-142034">Carbon pricing works: the largest-ever study puts it beyond doubt</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/189555/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ian A. MacKenzie does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Climate bills in Australia and the US promise progress without carbon taxes or markets. Here’s why.Ian A. MacKenzie, Associate Professor in Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1844712022-06-09T20:10:46Z2022-06-09T20:10:46ZIf the opposition wants a mature discussion about nuclear energy, start with a carbon price. Without that, nuclear is wildly uncompetitive<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467921/original/file-20220609-24-bfsenj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=7%2C14%2C4786%2C2334&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The idea of nuclear power in Australia has been hotly debated for decades. Most of this discussion has been unproductive, focusing on symbolism and identity politics rather than the realities of energy policy. For that reason alone, we should welcome the commitment by opposition party leaders David Littleproud and Peter Dutton to a <a href="https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/politics/nationals-leader-david-littleproud-to-write-to-anthony-albanese-calling-for-action-on-nuclear-power-in-australia/news-story/707c0e461d7316e852d59cdecacc0160">mature conversation</a> about nuclear power, free of political taboos.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1534317069692436488"}"></div></p>
<p>Far and away the most important such taboo is the unwillingness of either Labor or the LNP to consider an effective price on carbon. A string of inquiries into nuclear power such as the 2006 Switkowski Review and the 2016 South Australian Royal Commission concluded nuclear power will never be commercially viable without a high price on carbon dioxide emissions.</p>
<p>The reasoning behind this conclusion is simple. Nuclear power directly competes with coal-fired electricity as a source of continuous 24-hour generation. But building nuclear plants is much more expensive than new coal-fired plants. In Australia, nuclear power would compete with existing coal plants, the construction costs of which were recovered long ago.</p>
<p>So nuclear power could only replace our ageing coal plants if its operating costs are lower. But as long as coal generators are permitted to dump their waste (carbon dioxide and particulate matter) into the atmosphere at no cost, nuclear power can’t compete, except in rare periods of ultra-high coal prices. As energy minister Chris Bowen <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-news-live-police-probe-chinese-criminal-syndicate-money-in-vic-nsw-bowen-energy-ministers-agree-new-plan-20220609-p5asd8.html">pointed out yesterday</a>, nuclear is “the most expensive form of energy.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="turbine and nuclear power" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467914/original/file-20220609-13-38bcqi.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Without a carbon price, nuclear will struggle to find a place complementing renewables.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Why is a carbon price fundamental to nuclear being able to compete?</h2>
<p>Take the example of the most recent nuclear plant under construction in the developed world, the UK’s Hinkley Point C plant. In 2012, the plant’s owners <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/dec/21/hinkley-point-c-dreadful-deal-behind-worlds-most-expensive-power-plant">negotiated</a> a guaranteed price for power of around $A160 per megawatt hour, pegged to inflation. That’s extraordinarily expensive. </p>
<p>In Australia, the typical wholesale price for coal power in our National Electricity Market is typically $A40 to $A60, though it fluctuates and is currently very high. Even if the costs of nuclear power fall substantially, and the market price of coal remains high, there will still be a gap which won’t be bridged without a carbon price.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/everything-you-need-to-know-about-mini-nuclear-reactors-56647">Everything you need to know about mini nuclear reactors</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Despite their calls for a mature discussion, none of Australia’s prominent advocates of nuclear power have suggested accepting a carbon price in return for removing the Howard government’s ban on nuclear power. Indeed, when I proposed this <a href="https://theconversation.com/nuclear-power-should-be-allowed-in-australia-but-only-with-a-carbon-price-123170">grand bargain</a> with the support of a number of conservative economists, the idea was <a href="https://johnquiggin.com/2019/12/14/no-takers-for-a-nuclear-grand-bargain/">ignored or dismissed</a> out of hand by LNP members sitting on parliamentary inquiries. </p>
<p>Where does that leave us? Just as the ban had no practical effect, the current calls for its removal are purely symbolic given we have no carbon price to make the economics stack up. Rather, the Coalition’s sudden nuclear push represents just another round in the endless culture wars bedevilling Australian politics for decades.</p>
<h2>If we had a carbon price, large scale nuclear would still not stack up</h2>
<p>Let’s assume our leaders reach agreement on a carbon price. Would nuclear stack up then? </p>
<p>Certainly not in its traditional form. Large, centralised power plants based on 20th century designs are dead, as most pro- and anti-nuclear advocates would agree. That’s due to cost and difficulty of construction. For many years, the most promising candidate for a large 21st century nuclear plant has been the <a href="https://www.westinghousenuclear.com/new-plants/ap1000-pwr">AP1000 reactor</a> built by US company Westinghouse. Massive cost and schedule over-runs on two US projects <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-toshiba-accounting-westinghouse-nucle-idUSKBN17Y0CQ">sent Westinghouse broke</a>, almost taking parent company Toshiba with it.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="hinkley point c nuclear station" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467917/original/file-20220609-18-ncvtac.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The UK’s Hinkley Point C nuclear power station is built to the European Power Reactor design.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Getty</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>There are also the European Power Reactor and the <a href="https://home.kepco.co.kr/kepco/EN/G/htmlView/ENGBHP00102.do?menuCd=EN07030102">APR1400</a> designed by Korean company KEPCO. The EPR, as it is now known, is the massively expensive design under construction at Hinkley Point. The same design has had disastrous cost overruns in other projects in France and Finland. Cost details on the APR1400 are harder to find, but there have been no new orders for a decade. </p>
<p>That leaves Chinese and Russian designs. Any prospect of Australia opting for one of these was almost certainly scotched by the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Finland, which unwisely went with Russian company Rosatom for its fifth nuclear plant, has <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/finnish-group-ditches-russian-built-nuclear-plant-plan-2022-05-02/">pulled the plug</a>, while the UK is <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-25/u-k-eyes-removing-china-s-cgn-in-energy-plans-as-ties-fray">trying to cut</a> China out of its role in its new reactors. </p>
<h2>What about the small reactors touted as the future?</h2>
<p>The great hope for the future is “small modular reactors”. Here, small reactors of less than 100-megawatt capacity are built in factories and shipped to sites as needed (this is the “modular” bit). While many small reactor outfits have tried to latch on to the idea, <a href="https://www.nuscalepower.com/projects/carbon-free-power-project">US company NuScale</a> is the only one worth considering. </p>
<p>Even given the smaller size, NuScale has hit major delays. In 2014, the company <a href="https://atomicinsights.com/nuscale-doe-finalize-agreement-announced-six-months-ago/">predicted</a> the first project would be operating by 2023. That date has now been pushed out to 2030, though it hopes the first unit will be in place just before the end of this decade. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="nuscale small reactor" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=900&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467918/original/file-20220609-22-qhuwdk.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1131&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Small modular reactors like this mock-up from NuScale are much smaller than traditional nuclear plants.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:NuScale-Upper-One-Third-Mockup.jpg">Wikimedia Commons</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Let’s suppose, though, that everything goes right for nuclear. Imagine NuScale reactors can arrive on time and on budget, that Australia has a carbon tax high enough to make nuclear competitive with coal, and cheaper alternatives of firmed renewables (battery-backed solar and wind) run into issues. How long would it take before we could actually generate nuclear power in Australia?</p>
<p>Work on the legislative framework and the regulatory authority could be done in advance. But it would be silly to spend large amounts if the design isn’t proven. That means that we couldn’t start design approvals, site selections – which would be controversial – and impact assessment until the early 2030s. </p>
<p>With a determined push and broad social consensus, construction might start in the late 2030s and start producing electricity some time in the 2040s. That could be worthwhile as a backup to our energy system, which by then will be based mainly on solar and wind. </p>
<p>But to get to this point two decades away, the very first requirement for a mature discussion of nuclear energy is accepting a carbon price. </p>
<p>Until we see that, the opposition is offering a fantasy, not an energy policy.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/yes-australia-is-buying-a-fleet-of-nuclear-submarines-but-nuclear-powered-electricity-must-not-come-next-168110">Yes, Australia is buying a fleet of nuclear submarines. But nuclear-powered electricity must not come next</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/184471/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John Quiggin has appeared before numerous public inquiries into nuclear power in Australia</span></em></p>Renewed interest in nuclear energy will go nowhere unless we talk about carbon pricing. As energy minister Chris Bowen points out, nuclear is extremely expensive.John Quiggin, Professor, School of Economics, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1820212022-05-03T19:15:13Z2022-05-03T19:15:13ZOntario election: Doug Ford’s poor record on the environment and climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461050/original/file-20220503-31706-j7zim4.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=98%2C73%2C5348%2C3557&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Since he was elected in 2018, Doug Ford and the Progressive Conservatives have made big changes to the province’s environmental policy, which some say are are harmful to endangered species and aren't aligned with the fight against climate change.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/ Geoff Robins</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>With Ontarians heading to the polls on June 2, Premier Doug Ford government’s <a href="https://www.ontario.ca/page/ontario-getting-stronger">advertising campaigns</a> are ramping up. </p>
<p>The government’s environmental credentials, notably its recent investments in “greening” the steel sector and in electric vehicle manufacturing, have figured prominently in its messages. </p>
<p>This focus comes as something of a surprise to those familiar with the Ford government’s record on environmental issues, which has moved the province’s approach to environmental problems backwards by half a century or more. </p>
<p>The major features of the Ford government’s performance on the environment are well known. </p>
<p>It has: </p>
<ul>
<li><p><a href="https://www.thespec.com/opinion/contributors/2021/10/30/ontario-is-nowhere-to-be-found-at-glasgow-climate-summit.html">Dismantled</a> the previous government’s relatively comprehensive climate change strategy immediately following the June 2018 election.</p></li>
<li><p>Lost a battle on carbon pricing with the federal government before the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-ruling-on-national-carbon-pricing-means-for-the-fight-against-climate-change-157675">Supreme Court of Canada</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>Cancelled more than 700 <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/doug-ford-green-energy-wind-turbines-cancelled-230-million-1.5364815">renewable energy projects</a> at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars and terminated the province’s largely successful strategy on <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/ford-government-cancels-energy-electricity-efficient-programs-centralizing-1.5069318">energy efficiency</a>. </p></li>
<li><p>Rewritten the <a href="https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2019/01/ontarios-growth-plan-changes-end-smart-growth">planning rules</a> at provincial and local levels to favour developers.</p></li>
<li><p>Aggressively pushed for proposals for <a href="https://www.thespec.com/opinion/contributors/2021/03/09/ontario-back-in-the-business-of-building-roads-to-sprawl.html">sprawl-inducing</a> highways through the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (GTHA) Greenbelt and tried to open parts of the greenbelt to developers. </p></li>
<li><p>Undermined the authority of <a href="https://trca.ca/news/trca-calls-for-immediate-removal-of-schedule-6-from-bill-229/">conservation authorities</a> with respect to areas prone to flooding.</p></li>
<li><p>Weakened protections for <a href="https://ontarionature.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/ERO-013-5033-ESA-May-18-2019.pdf">endangered species</a>, particularly with respect to resource development.</p></li>
<li><p>Repealed the province’s <a href="https://www.toronto.com/news/ontarios-decision-to-repeal-ineffective-toxics-reduction-act-kills-voluntary-reduction-program/article_d0d982d3-dabe-5b02-9e2e-bc245818769c.html">toxics use reduction legislation</a>.</p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-ontario-planning-to-scrap-environmental-standards-for-some-large-water/">Dismantled the province’s regulatory framework</a> for controlling industrial water pollution.</p></li>
<li><p>Folded the province’s previously independent <a href="https://theconversation.com/scrapping-environmental-watchdog-is-like-shooting-the-messenger-107345">environmental commissioner</a> into the office of the auditor general.</p></li>
</ul>
<h2>Dismantled environmental assessment process</h2>
<p>This agenda has continued, and in many ways accelerated, under the cover of “pandemic recovery.” </p>
<p>The province’s <a href="https://www.thelawyersdaily.ca/articles/20592/concerns-raised-about-ontario-s-environmental-assessment-changes">environmental assessment</a> process, first established in 1975, was largely dismantled. Broad powers have been given to provincial agencies, most notably the provincial transit agency <a href="https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/20b12">Metrolinx</a> to build what are often <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2021/08/25/there-is-still-time-to-stop-the-ontario-line.html">poorly conceived</a> and <a href="https://tspace.library.utoronto.ca/bitstream/1807/96710/1/Perspectives-26-Siemiatycki-Fagan-Transit-GTA-October-2019.pdf">politically motivated</a> transit projects. The province’s <a href="https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/bills/parliament-42/session-2/bill-109">most recent moves</a> have sought to <a href="https://www.thespec.com/news/hamilton-region/2022/04/09/ontario-hamilton-housing-legislation.html">marginalize</a> the roles of local governments in planning matters and to eliminate public consultation requirements as “red tape.” </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/doug-ford-is-clear-cutting-ontarios-environmental-laws-119624">Doug Ford is clear-cutting Ontario's environmental laws</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The province did release a <a href="https://www.ontario.ca/page/made-in-ontario-environment-plan">Made in Ontario Plan for the Environment</a> in 2018 and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-climate-change-carbon-emissions-2030-targets-1.6419671">updated</a> it this spring. But it has done <a href="https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en21/ENV_FU_ClimateChange_en21.pdf">virtually nothing</a> to implement the plan. The Ontario auditor general concluded that even if the plan were implemented, the province would fall short of its stated targets. </p>
<p>The province’s greenhouse gas emissions have been relatively stable following a big drop with the 2013 phase-out of coal-fired electricity. But it is now on track to see major increases in emissions, particularly from the <a href="https://www.thespec.com/opinion/contributors/2021/12/19/ontario-on-track-to-see-major-increases-in-greenhouse-gas-emissions.html">electricity sector</a>, a development that is not accounted for in the province’s plan. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Bar graph showing that Ontarios greenhouse gas emissions have remained relatively stable since 2015, after coal-fired power plants were shut down, and will remain stable under a business as usual scenario." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=387&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461035/original/file-20220503-19-znk8p6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=486&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Greenhouse gas emissions dropped in Ontario after the 2013 phase-out of coal-fired electricity and have stayed level. Electricity-related emissions are expected to increase by 2030, as natural gas-fired plants ramp up production to replace nuclear power.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Angela Dittrich)</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In the process, the province has <a href="https://www.auditor.on.ca/en/content/annualreports/arreports/en21/AR_LandUse_en21.pdf">moved away</a> from rules and evidence-based decision-making to approaches based on access, <a href="https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2021/04/03/ford-friends-with-benefits-an-inside-look-at-the-money-power-and-influence-behind-the-push-to-build-highway-413.html">connections</a> and <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2021/03/08/fords-change-to-development-rules-is-a-massive-overreach.html">political whim</a>. The resulting governance model is one more rooted in the political norms of the 19th century than the 21st. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/doug-fords-ontario-whos-winning-and-what-it-means-for-the-provinces-future-112127">big winners</a> so far have been clear: developers; the mining and aggregate industries; and nuclear and natural gas based incumbents in the energy sector</p>
<p>The province’s new interest in <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-climate-change-steel-co2-greenhouse-gas-emissions-1.6353814">greening</a> the steel sector and <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/03/16/news/ontario-invest-1316-million-electric-vehicle-manufacturing-vague-how">electric vehicle manufacturing</a> suggests an awakening. But these developments don’t flow from a concern for the environment. Rather they reflect a recognition, at some level, that global economic shifts in the direction of decarbonization are taking place and that Ontario risks loosing what remains of its manufacturing sector if it doesn’t respond.</p>
<p>So far, these developments have been sporadic and reactive. In sectors like <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/03/18/news/ontario-wants-boost-mining-exploration-development-5-year-plan">mining</a> and <a href="https://www.theenergymix.com/2022/04/13/weak-ontario-hydrogen-strategy-mirrors-industry-wish-list/">hydrogen</a>, the government’s new strategies have relied far too much on the input of industry lobbyists, too little on serious thought or analysis. </p>
<p>In the case of the critical minerals strategy, the implications for <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/thunder-bay/critical-minerals-strategy-first-nation-concerns-1.6389154">Indigenous Peoples</a> and their rights have been ignored. There is no movement in key areas like <a href="https://www.theenergymix.com/2021/04/28/ontario-creates-innovation-wasteland-with-latest-renewables-rollback-critic-warns/">renewable energy</a> and certainly no wider vision for Ontario’s role in a low-carbon global economic transition.</p>
<h2>Increasingly authoritarian</h2>
<p>For the most part, the Ford government seems to have operated on an assumption that anyone concerned about climate change and the environment wouldn’t be voting for it anyway. The moves to green some sectors may reflect a realization that the political landscape may not be that simple. Even some Progressive Conservative Party voters may sensitive to the implications of a changing climate. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A large white low-rise building with a smoke stack mid-fall." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/461044/original/file-20220503-33321-g8rrz9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The stacks at the former Nanticoke Generating Station come down during demolition in February 2018. The station first generated electricity in 1973, but stopped using coal as fuel in 2013 and was no longer in operation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Peter Power</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Barring a climate-related extreme weather event or a <a href="http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/en/e_records/walkerton/index.html">disaster on the scale of Walkerton</a> during the campaign period, the largest environmental political risk facing the government may be the growing backlash against the government’s increasingly authoritarian approach to planning and development issues. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2021/02/23/hardly-anyone-believes-the-ford-government-on-the-greenbelt-and-for-good-reason.html">ongoing threats to the GTHA Greenbelt</a> and, most recently, the aggressive use of <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/york-region-condo-mzo-1.6424568">ministerial zoning orders</a> in Richmond Hill and Markham to support hyper-intensive development that only seem to serve the interests of the development industry are <a href="https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/2021/12/29/something-is-stirring-in-suburban-ontario-new-survey-finds-most-905ers-believe-the-greenbelt-is-no-place-for-a-major-highway.html">causing unrest</a> among municipal governments and residents in the crucial 905 region around Toronto. That region forms a core part of the base of the Ford Nation constituency. </p>
<h2>The alternatives</h2>
<p>For Ontarians looking for alternatives to the current government around climate change and environmental issues, the province’s Green Party has, perhaps unsurprisingly, provided the most <a href="https://gpo.ca/climate/">comprehensive</a> response so far. But the <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/ontario-election/2022/election-forecast.html">party’s polling</a> has not been strong, likely collateral damage from the <a href="https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/federal-election-2021/green-party-in-tatters-with-glimmers-of-hope-after-disappointing-election-finish-1.5596122?cache=zviomxnayn">federal party’s meltdown</a> in the 2021 federal election. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/scrapping-environmental-watchdog-is-like-shooting-the-messenger-107345">Scrapping environmental watchdog is like shooting the messenger</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But the potential role of the Greens, whose deputy leader is the province’s former environmental commissioner, in the Ontario election should not be underestimated. In highly fractured vote the Greens could end up holding balance of power in a minority legislature, as happened in <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-ndp-green-agreement-1.4136539">British Columbia</a> in 2017.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.ontariondp.ca/platform/climate-jobs-justice">environmental dimensions</a> of the NDP’s platform are disappointingly thin on content and details by comparison. The party does propose a net-zero plan for 2050, to reintroduce a cap and trade system for greenhouse gas emissions and to re-engage around renewable energy development. <a href="https://ontarioliberal.ca/policy-announcements/">The Liberals have said little</a> specific to environmental issues so far. </p>
<p>The 2022 election looms as the most important for Ontario’s environment in modern era, and its impact may echo for generations to come.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/182021/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Winfield receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. </span></em></p>The 2022 election looms as the most important for Ontario’s environment in the modern era, and its impact may echo for generations to come.Mark Winfield, Professor, Environmental and Urban Change, York University, CanadaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1808462022-04-14T16:48:08Z2022-04-14T16:48:08ZCanada’s new climate plan is reckless, but a better way forward is still possible<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458031/original/file-20220413-17-cb2nsc.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=53%2C30%2C5015%2C3062&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Canada is the fourth-largest oil producer in the world, with almost all of its crude oil headed for the United States.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Canada’s new climate plan is reckless. The federal government’s Emissions Reduction Plan doesn’t meet the criteria of credible net-zero emissions plans, and it lacks any vision of a future capable of inspiring Canadians to change their lives.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/emissions-reduction-2030.html">Emissions Reduction Plan</a> is the first released under the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/net-zero-emissions-2050/canadian-net-zero-emissions-accountability-act.html">Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act</a>. It aims to put Canada on track to reduce emissions by 40-45 per cent from 2005 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050. </p>
<p>It will do neither. </p>
<p>More than 120 countries, 800 cities and <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/359874761_Transnational_Corporations_and_Climate_Governance_A_Case_Study_of_Amazoncom's_Net-Zero_Climate_Pledge">1,500 companies</a> have made net-zero pledges. Meeting the Paris Agreement’s goal of limiting global warming to 1.5 C above the pre-industrial average requires global greenhouse gas emissions to peak before 2025 and fall to net zero by 2050. </p>
<p>According to climate researchers, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-021-01245-w">credible, science-based net-zero plans</a> must: </p>
<ol>
<li>Reduce emissions as soon as possible.</li>
<li>Minimize reliance on removing emissions from the atmosphere.</li>
<li>Comprehensively address all greenhouse gas emissions. </li>
<li>Ensure an equitable approach to reducing emissions.</li>
<li>Align emissions reductions with broader socio-ecological objectives like biodiversity and habitat conservation. </li>
<li>Present an <a href="https://transitionaccelerator.ca/our-approach/">inspiring vision of a better future</a>.</li>
</ol>
<p>Canada’s Emissions Reduction Plan fails to meet any of these criteria.</p>
<h2>Canada’s Emissions Reduction Plan falls short</h2>
<p>The plan fails to aggressively reduce emissions in the short term. Instead, it sets an unambitious target for Canada’s <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/greenhouse-gas-emissions/sources-sinks-executive-summary-2021.html">largest and fastest growing source of emissions</a>, calling for <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2022/03/2030-emissions-reduction-plan--canadas-next-steps-for-clean-air-and-a-strong-economy.html">a 31 per cent reduction from the oil and gas sector</a>, but it is not binding. </p>
<p>According to <a href="https://www.iisd.org/publications/report/phaseout-pathways-fossil-fuel-production-within-paris-compliant-carbon-budgets">a recent analysis</a>, to have even 50-50 odds of meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 C target, Canada’s oil and gas output must fall by 74 per cent by 2030, with a complete phaseout by 2034. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-political-opportunities-and-challenges-of-canadas-new-9-1b-climate-plan-179564">The political opportunities and challenges of Canada's new $9.1B climate plan</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Just a week after Canada released the plan, the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/impact-assessment-agency/news/2022/04/government-accepts-agencys-recommendation-on-bay-du-nord-development-project-subject-to-the-strongest-environmental-ghg-condition-ever.html">government approved the Bay du Nord offshore oil project</a>, which will produce about 200,000 barrels of oil per day starting in 2028, and <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/bay-du-nord-approval-1.6410509">300 million barrels over its lifetime</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Image of a ship drawing oil from the sea bed via pipes." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458032/original/file-20220413-3788-ijwygx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Illustration of the planned Bay du Nord floating production storage and offloading vessel.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Equinor)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The government claims that offshore oil extraction produces fewer emissions per barrel than the oilsands, but that’s a dangerous distraction. Oil is inevitably burned, which accounts for 80-90 per cent of its emissions. In a world with <a href="https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_FinalDraft_Chapter03.pdf">a shrinking global carbon budget</a>, relative emissions intensity is irrelevant. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03821-8">Absolute emissions are what matter</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-clock-reset-shows-the-world-is-one-year-closer-to-1-5-c-warming-threshold-169122">Climate clock reset shows the world is one year closer to 1.5 C warming threshold</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Canada’s decision is far out of line with climate science. The <a href="https://www.iea.org/news/pathway-to-critical-and-formidable-goal-of-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-is-narrow-but-brings-huge-benefits">International Energy Agency’s 2021 net-zero pathway</a>, which the <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2022/03/14/opinion/every-tool-toolbox-why-we-need-carbon-capture-utilization-and-storage-fight">government relies on heavily</a>, clearly explains that the world can’t afford any new oil and gas development after 2021. None. </p>
<p>Even so, the <a href="https://www.cer-rec.gc.ca/en/data-analysis/canada-energy-future/2021/canada-energy-futures-2021.pdf">government projects oil and gas production to continue rising until 2050</a>, at which point <a href="https://cascadeinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Carter-Dordi-Canadas-one-eye-shut-climate-policy-1.1-April-16.pdf">Canada will produce more oil (1.9 billion barrels) than it did in 2019 (1.8 billion barrels)</a>.</p>
<p>Underscoring the urgency of the latest warning from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/21/climate/united-nations-fossil-fuels-climate-crisis.html">UN Secretary General António Guterres remarked</a>: “The truly dangerous radicals are the countries that are increasing the production of fossil fuels.”</p>
<h2>Canada doubles-down on carbon capture bet</h2>
<p>Canada’s Emissions Reduction Plan bets heavily on <a href="https://theconversation.com/canada-needs-to-cut-carbon-not-try-to-capture-it-175987">costly and ineffective carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) technology</a> to keep emissions from the atmosphere. The <a href="https://budget.gc.ca/2022/home-accueil-en.html">2022 federal budget</a> provides a subsidy to the oil and gas industry in the form of a $2.6 billion CCUS investment tax credit — the budget’s single largest piece of climate spending. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-2022-federal-budget-says-about-canadas-commitment-to-a-green-recovery-180453">What the 2022 federal budget says about Canada’s commitment to a green recovery</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The government has ignored the <a href="https://cehoicka.lab.yorku.ca/files/2022/01/Letter-from-Academics-re-CCUS-tax-investment-credit_January-2022-4.pdf?x98920">advice of more than 400 independent climate researchers, including myself, about the risks of CCUS</a>. Decades of research shows that CCUS actually captures and stores very little carbon (<a href="https://www.iisd.org/publications/report/phaseout-pathways-fossil-fuel-production-within-paris-compliant-carbon-budgets">less than 0.02 per cent of energy-related emissions in 2021</a>), <a href="https://theconversation.com/canada-needs-to-cut-carbon-not-try-to-capture-it-175987">remains prohibitively expensive</a> and <a href="https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2019/EE/C9EE02709B">requires more energy to operate than previously thought</a>. Renewable energy and electrification are cheaper and proven non-polluting alternatives. </p>
<h2>Canada’s ‘set-and-forget’ carbon price</h2>
<p>Canada’s plan doesn’t comprehensively address Canada’s emissions. Canada continues to rely almost exclusively on carbon pricing to reduce emissions. </p>
<p>The carbon price increased to $50 per tonne in 2022, and will reach $170 in 2030. But the plan fails to close its many loopholes. <a href="https://climatechoices.ca/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/State-of-carbon-pricing-report-English-FINAL.pdf">An independent analysis</a> shows that due to gaps and exemptions, large emitters paid, on average, only $4.96 per tonne of carbon in 2020. </p>
<p>Canada’s <a href="https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/03/26/have-economists-led-the-worlds-environmental-policies-astray">“set-and-forget” carbon price</a> will not reduce emissions if it doesn’t apply to all of Canada’s emissions. The <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/emissions-reduction-2030.html">government’s own Net-Zero Advisory Body told the government this</a>, but the government ignored its advice.</p>
<h2>Canada’s plan is unjust</h2>
<p>Canada’s plan is far from fair. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-00662-3">The world could not hope to achieve the Paris Agreement if every country to adopted</a> our dangerous approach. </p>
<p>Canada considers only its upstream oil and gas emissions, ignoring the downstream <a href="https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards_supporting/FAQ.pdf">Scope 3 emissions</a> that come from burning the fossil fuels we export. Canada’s plan unduly shifts the burden of reducing emissions to other countries. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/planting-trees-can-help-the-climate-but-only-if-we-also-stop-burning-fossil-fuels-179549">Planting trees can help the climate, but only if we also stop burning fossil fuels</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Canada’s plan pays insufficient attention to broader socio-ecological objectives. While it commits additional funding to land- and forest-management initiatives, that pales in comparison to its investment in CCUS. Nor does the plan ensure that nature-based solutions will be designed and implemented in partnership with Indigenous Peoples and local communities that disproportionately bear the brunt of climate impacts. </p>
<h2>A better way forward</h2>
<p>Finally, the Emissions Reduction Plan doesn’t offer an inspiring vision of Canada’s net-zero future; it won’t motivate Canadians to fundamentally alter their lives to mitigate and adapt to climate change. </p>
<p><a href="https://report.ipcc.ch/ar6wg3/pdf/IPCC_AR6_WGIII_SummaryForPolicymakers.pdf">Comprehensive demand-side strategies across all sectors</a> can reduce emissions by 40-70 per cent by 2050. While climate change demands system change, individuals also have an important role to play too, especially the wealthiest: <a href="https://wir2022.wid.world/">The top 10 per cent of emitters are responsible for close to 50 per cent of global emissions</a>. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A car charges on a snowy street at a public charger" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/458030/original/file-20220413-20-8uew48.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">More than 90 per cent of cars sold in Norway are electric. In Canada, 3.5 per cent of new cars sold in 2020 were battery-powered or plug-in hybrids, with most of them registered in British Columbia and Québec.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>This requires an <a href="https://cup.columbia.edu/book/supercharge-me/9781788215190">EPIC approach: Extreme positive incentives for change</a>. Think of the significant subsidization of electric vehicles in Norway, where 90 per cent of cars sold are electric, or <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/solar-is-now-cheapest-electricity-in-history-confirms-iea">the dramatic cost reductions in solar and wind energy</a> due to generous government support. </p>
<p>We need much more of this: Massive mortgage discounts for owners who retrofit their homes, huge tax cuts for installing heat pumps, free — and electrified — public transit. Sector by sector, we need vastly cheaper green options. </p>
<p>But far more than this, Canadians must envision a future that is both decarbonized and desirable. This means re-imagining how we live, work, move and play, and demanding that our governments make it happen. </p>
<p>There’s still time for Canadians to come together and create a future that’s not only liveable but worth living, but our window is closing fast.</p>
<p><em>This is an updated version of a story originally published on April 14, 2022. It clarifies that Canada produced 1.8 billion barrels of oil in 2018.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/180846/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jason MacLean is a member of the board of directors of the Pacific Centre for Environmental Law and Litigation (CELL), and East Coast Environmental Law (ECELAW). </span></em></p>The recently released Emissions Reductions Plan aims to put Canada on track to reduce emissions by up to 45 per cent from 2005 and reach net-zero emissions by 2050. It will do neither.Jason MacLean, Assistant Professor of Law, University of New BrunswickLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1748212022-01-19T15:32:08Z2022-01-19T15:32:08ZThere’s a massive bubble in the price of carbon – and yet it won’t bring down emissions any faster<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441527/original/file-20220119-15-1q7hozd.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Too many industries have been exempted from carbon rules. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/distant-view-yorkshire-wolds-uk-power-1691651902">Coatesy</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Carbon trading was supposed to encourage companies to reduce their emissions. Yet for many years, the carbon price was trading well below €20 (£17) per tonne on the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS), which is by far the most established market for trading carbon in the world. Most agreed that this did not send any financial signals to carbon-intensive industries to invest in green technologies. </p>
<p>But since the onset of the pandemic in 2020, the carbon price has rocketed to close to €90, taking everyone by surprise, including EU climate policymakers. So why has this happened, what are the likely consequences – and what can we expect to happen to the price in the coming months?</p>
<p><strong>The price of carbon (€ per tonne)</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=302&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441250/original/file-20220118-23-1qezqrp.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=380&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Based on the price of ICE EUA Dec 22 futures.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Trading View</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>The changing market</h2>
<p>The carbon price is based on demand <a href="https://www.offsetguide.org/understanding-carbon-offsets/">for carbon credits</a>. These are awarded to organisations which have removed a quantity of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, through, say, tree planting or building a wind farm, by the EU or other authorities with newer ETSs such as <a href="https://www.offsetguide.org/understanding-carbon-offsets/other-instruments-for-claiming-emission-reductions/allowances/">the US</a> and <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01989-7">China</a>. Some people and companies buy offsets voluntarily, such as travellers paying a premium to offset carbon emissions in an air ticket. </p>
<p>Large polluters, on the other hand, are required to buy <a href="https://www.offsetguide.org/understanding-carbon-offsets/other-instruments-for-claiming-emission-reductions/allowances/">carbon allowances</a> when they exceed a so-called cap. The EU ETS was badly undermined for years because <a href="https://www.ieta.org/resources/Resources/Case_Studies_Worlds_Carbon_Markets/euets_case_study_may2015.pdf">many industries were exempted</a>, free allowances to polluters <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2021/12/17/eu-must-stop-subsidising-polluters-with-hundreds-of-billions-in-free-emissions-allowances-green-groups-demand/">were issued</a>, and the market was flooded by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/why-are-carbon-markets-failing">cheap (and dubious) offsets</a>. The EU’s new “<a href="https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/understanding-european-unions-emissions-trading-system">Fit for 55</a>” package aims to reset the EU ETS. It is a step in the right direction but it’s not clear whether it will bring about the rapid decarbonisation we urgently need.</p>
<p>There were three main reasons for the rapid increase of the price of carbon in 2021: political pressure, high energy prices and a flood of speculation from traders. </p>
<p><strong>1. Political pressure</strong></p>
<p>The political pressure to act on climate change has increased immensely since 2018, when <a href="https://extinctionrebellion.uk/">Extinction Rebellion</a> launched and Greta Thunberg’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/mar/11/greta-thunberg-schoolgirl-climate-change-warrior-some-people-can-let-things-go-i-cant">School Strike for the Climate</a> got underway. Both actions have erupted into global movements, buoyed by big names like David Attenborough also <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-59039485">calling for</a> more urgent climate action. Weather events such as the intense rainfalls and subsequent flooding <a href="https://www.jbarisk.com/flood-services/event-response/summer-floods-in-europe-2021/">in Germany</a> in July 2021 further drove climate change to the top of the political agenda.</p>
<p>In <a href="https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/polls-reveal-citizens-support-energiewende">various opinion polls</a>, European citizens now express increasing concern over climate change, prompting politicians to make greater commitments to take action. Members of the business community, too, have been falling over each other in declaring <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/news/third-of-uks-biggest-companies-commit-to-net-zero">“net zero”</a> targets. This means more demand for voluntary offsets and the prospect of tougher ETS cap rules that will lead to more mandatory offsets in the near future, all of which has encouraged traders to bid up carbon prices. </p>
<p><strong>2. ESG speculation</strong></p>
<p>There has generally been huge investor interest in what the financial community calls ESG (environmental, social and governance), which is broadly about ethical business. There has been high demand in the past two years for companies that score well on ESG, and investment funds that focus on such companies.</p>
<p>For example, Tesla is <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/u/1/d/1HflVng6sYIb6Gs4pOKiDGtqU5YJ2-hgdM4pRNaT62gs/htmlview">worth more than</a> the next nine global car manufacturers combined. This reflects the financial community’s view that electrified greener transport is here to stay – and probably also the billions of dollars <a href="https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/industry/inside-industry-how-selling-emissions-credits-helps-tesla-grow#:%7E:text=Hidden%20in%20what%20you%20might,7%25%20of%20the%20company's%20revenue.">Tesla receives</a> from more polluting automakers needing to buy carbon permits from greener rivals. This shows the carbon market in action, pushing carbon prices higher. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="white Tesla model X on display with its doors open" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/441529/original/file-20220119-27-hoe92z.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tesla is doing very well out of carbon trading.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/berlin-october-2-2017-photo-image-729205330">franz12</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet at the same time, there is clearly a lot of speculation at play. The Financial Times <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/c6346a90-6c3c-48f9-bec3-5ae5057e1ed7">cautioned recently</a> that a bubble might have formed in ESG, and it’s easy to make the same argument about carbon prices. </p>
<p><strong>3. High energy prices</strong></p>
<p>Natural gas has been in <a href="https://theconversation.com/energy-prices-are-unlikely-to-fall-in-2022-or-beyond-not-until-major-importers-get-serious-about-green-transition-174437">short supply worldwide</a>, triggering <a href="https://www.iea.org/news/coal-power-s-sharp-rebound-is-taking-it-to-a-new-record-in-2021-threatening-net-zero-goals">more use</a> of coal. Coal has <a href="https://group.met.com/fyouture/natural-gas-vs-coal/66#:%7E:text=According%20to%20the%20U.S.%20Energy,amounts%20of%20CO2%20while%20burning.&text=Natural%20gas%20also%20emits%20less%20carbon%20dioxide%20when%20combusted%20than%20fuel.">much higher</a> carbon emissions than gas, requiring power generators to buy more carbon allowances, pushing the carbon price higher. </p>
<h2>The bad news</h2>
<p>There are reasons to doubt that the surge in carbon prices will achieve the stated aim of ETSs, namely a faster decarbonisation of the economy. A <a href="https://www.openbookpublishers.com/product/1488">lot of evidence</a> suggests that many carbon credits are not worth the paper they are written on. There is a lot of <a href="https://theconversation.com/double-counting-of-emissions-cuts-may-undermine-paris-climate-deal-125019">double-counting</a> going on, in which those buying and selling offsets both count them as reducing carbon emissions, and there are other <a href="https://www.vox.com/2020/2/27/20994118/carbon-offset-climate-change-net-zero-neutral-emissions">loopholes</a>, particularly in <a href="https://energypost.eu/can-carbon-offset-loopholes-be-fixed-with-better-evaluation-and-rules/">questionable carbon offsets</a>. What happens, for example, if – in a warming climate – a <a href="https://www.ft.com/content/3f89c759-eb9a-4dfb-b768-d4af1ec5aa23">forest burns down</a> whose carbon-saving potential was sold to companies?</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/20/polluters-face-price-pain-as-global-carbon-trading-system-moves-forward">The integrity</a> of these markets will be even further challenged as the various regional ETSs seek to link up to create more global carbon trading. To achieve this, new global rules were agreed at the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/delivering-high-integrity-inclusive-voluntary-carbon-markets-for-1-5c/">recent negotiations</a> at the COP26 climate conference in Glasgow. These have been welcomed <a href="https://www.woodmac.com/news/the-edge/carbon-markets-cop26-breakthrough/">by industry</a>, but <a href="https://carbonmarketwatch.org/2021/12/10/faq-deciphering-article-6-of-the-paris-agreement/">critics say</a> the agreement opens the door to sub-standard carbon offsetting schemes that will make the system unreliable.</p>
<p>At a time when higher energy prices are squeezing businesses, they have an added incentive to push for a global carbon-trading system that goes easy on them. Higher energy costs are also creating a lot of <a href="https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/rising-energy-costs-the-impact-on-households-pensioners-and-those-on-low-incomes/">energy poverty</a> among consumers (and higher carbon prices are a contributing factor because it means that power providers have to pay more for offsets). This conflicts with consumers’ desire for more urgent climate change action, creating political pressure to slow the climate transition. </p>
<p>As for the price of carbon, I expect speculators to keep pushing up carbon prices as long as there is enough liquidity in the market – meaning credit they can borrow to make trades. This liquidity has been partially driven by all the money being created by central banks’ <a href="https://theconversation.com/will-the-bank-of-englands-reliance-on-quantitative-easing-work-for-the-uk-economy-149581">quantitative easing</a> (QE) programmes. When it disappears, the bubble will burst.</p>
<p>In other words, the price is not higher because ETSs are functioning well yet. To quote a recent comment from <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/18/why-europes-carbon-market-is-experiencing-a-boom-like-never-before.html">one market analyst</a>:
“I’d say that industry by-and-large for the last 16 years since the [EU] carbon scheme had been up and running in 2005 have really done pretty much nothing in terms of carbon emission reductions.” </p>
<p>If just a fraction of all the <a href="https://www.wri.org/insights/quantitative-easing-economic-recovery-must-consider-climate-change">QE money</a> would have been spent on climate goals, we would have made a lot more progress with climate mitigation over the past decade. The ETS system is only going to work if loopholes are removed so that many more companies have to pay for the carbon they emit. In the end, it’s all about political will and process.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/174821/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steffen Böhm has received funding from the British Academy, UKRI and the Swedish Energy Agency. </span></em></p>Emissions trading systems are supposed to speed up decarbonisation, but they are not yet capable of doing so in practice.Steffen Böhm, Professor in Organisation & Sustainability, University of ExeterLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1729742021-12-02T15:11:11Z2021-12-02T15:11:11ZVital Signs: Albanese to come clean on emissions targets, but a carbon price is still hush-hush<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435214/original/file-20211202-25-4tu0qn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C4918%2C2462&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Anthony Albanese in Nimbin, NSW, on November 12 2019 amid a season of a catastrophic bushfires. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Jason O'Brien/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The Australian Labor Party is set to announce its target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions today.</p>
<p>At the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/apr/27/labor-proposes-two-emissions-trading-schemes-costing-555m">2016</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/compare-the-pair-key-policy-offerings-from-labor-and-the-coalition-in-the-2019-federal-election-116898">2019</a> elections, Labor promised net zero emissions by 2050 and a cut of 45% on 2005 levels by 2030. Among the promises it adopted to get it there in 2019 was a target of 50% renewable energy by 2030.</p>
<p>But it lost those elections. So up to now Labor has refused to say what policies it will take to the 2022 election. We should know by the end of the day. </p>
<p>The Coalition’s position is clear – sort of.</p>
<p>Formally the government is sticking with its long-settled position of delivering a cut of 26-28% on 2005 levels by 2030 (as well as net zero by 2050).</p>
<p>But Prime Minister Scott Morrison is having a bet each way, by also saying the government will do better. As he said on <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-st-marys-nsw">November 15</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>We are going to achieve a 35% reduction in emissions by 2030. That is what we’re going to achieve. That is what actually matters. What matters is what you actually achieve. We are well above our target.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This leaves Labor, which has consistently taken a stronger stance than the Coalition, with three broad options. </p>
<h2>Targets, predictions, safeguards</h2>
<p>Option 1 is to match the 35% reduction but make it a formal target, not a prediction.</p>
<p>Option 2 is to go a little higher with a prediction – say 40% – and claim this is achievable given announced Labor policies such as electric vehicles and upgrading the electricity grid (“rewiring the nation”).</p>
<p>Option 3 is set a more ambitious target – perhaps 45%, as Labor did at the last election, along with a change to the so-called “safeguard mechanism” <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/rp/rp1819/Australias_climate_safeguard_mechanism">introduced by the Coalition</a> in 2016 as part of its alternative to a price on carbon.</p>
<p>The safeguard mechanism requires Australia’s largest greenhouse gas emitters to keep their net emissions below a certain cap. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-governments-net-zero-modelling-shows-winners-weve-found-losers-171502">The government's net-zero modelling shows winners, we've found losers</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the 2019 election Labor proposed to cut the eligibility threshold for the cap from 100,000 to 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year, and extend it to more emitters.</p>
<p>The difference between now and 2019 is that this time the business community is behind the approach. </p>
<p>In fact, the Business Council of Australia’s <a href="https://www.bca.com.au/achieving_a_net_zero_economy">climate plan</a>, published in October 2021, is to do exactly this. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=160&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=160&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=160&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=200&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=200&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435258/original/file-20211202-19-jnfzsh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=200&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.bca.com.au/achieving_a_net_zero_economy">Business Council of Australia</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Pitfalls abound</h2>
<p>Each one of these options have pitfalls. Option 1 looks weak, and gives the government a free pass on climate. It’s hard for Labor politicians to campaign on the government not doing enough if they aren’t willing to do more themselves.</p>
<p>Option 2 (perhaps the most likely) is a hedge: Labor will do more because it cares about the planet, but not too much more because, you know, politics.</p>
<p>Option 3 is the bravest of the likely targets. It’s a bigger number that would make for more meaningful change. It also now has air cover from the Business Council of Australia. </p>
<p>But it’s also the option taken to the last election, which Labor lost. Maybe that was due to other reasons, such as the retiree tax, but it still seems politically risky.</p>
<h2>No talk about a carbon price</h2>
<p>One option you can bet Labor will not adopt is a price on carbon. </p>
<p>That’s the best way to balance what’s good about emissions (economic growth and development) with what’s bad about emissions (climate change).</p>
<p>This has been off the table with Labor since it lost government in 2013 – in no small part due to Tony Abbott exploiting the issue with his “great big tax” campaigning.</p>
<p>But a funny thing has happened on the way to the 2022 election. A few months ago the Coalition inserted a price on carbon into its own plan. </p>
<p>As The Conversation’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-government-modelling-found-net-zero-would-leave-us-better-off-171743">Peter Martin</a> put it, the plan assumed emissions reductions “the same as what would be expected if Australians faced a carbon price (or tax) that climbed to A$24 per tonne of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2050”.</p>
<p>If Energy Minister Angus Taylor is trying to hide this, he is not being particularly stealthy about it.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-government-modelling-found-net-zero-would-leave-us-better-off-171743">How government modelling found net-zero would leave us better off</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Page 6 of the <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/November%202021/document/australias-long-term-emissions-reduction-plan-modelling.pdf">government document</a> outlining the modelling and analysis behind the plan acknowledges it models voluntary emissions reductions “as an abatement incentive which is taken up across the economy and rises to $24/t CO2-e in 2050”.</p>
<p>It says behaving “<a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/sites/default/files/November%202021/document/australias-long-term-emissions-reduction-plan-modelling.pdf">as if</a>” there was a carbon price of A$24 per tonne in place would get emissions down by 85%.</p>
<p>To get them down further to net zero would require <a href="https://www.afr.com/politics/federal/morrison-s-dirty-secret-he-s-matched-labor-s-2013-carbon-price-20211115-p5990m">an even higher carbon price</a>: about A$80 per tonne on the model’s logic.</p>
<h2>Labor could take its cue from the Coalition</h2>
<p>So why doesn’t Labor do what it knows to be right – announce a price on carbon? It could say it will start at the government’s own figure of $24/tonne, and take any needed subsequent increases to future elections.</p>
<p>That won’t happen on Friday. Or any time soon. We should reflect on why.</p>
<p><iframe id="5ewrO" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/5ewrO/3/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/172974/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Holden is President of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.</span></em></p>The Australian Labor Party has options on emissions reduction targets, but it is still running scared from the best mechanism to achieve them.Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1716022021-11-11T19:00:40Z2021-11-11T19:00:40ZVital Signs: Marketing is getting in the way of markets that could get us to net-zero<p>This week the prime minister entered full marketing mode.</p>
<p>Scott Morrison’s topic was climate change and his plans to get to net-zero.</p>
<p>At the Victorian Chamber of Commerce and Industry on Wednesday, he tried out a few <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/address-victorian-chamber-commerce-and-industry">slogans</a>.</p>
<p>Among those he test marketed:</p>
<ul>
<li><p><em>can do capitalism, not ‘don’t do governments’</em></p></li>
<li><p><em>no one passed a law or introduced a tax or passed a resolution at the UN that led to the world developing a COVID vaccine, no one passed a law for the world to move digital, Google and Cochlear were not invented at a UN workshop or summit</em></p></li>
<li><p><em>Australia has already reduced our emissions by more than 20%, now, our emissions are going down, not up, they’re down by more than 20%</em> </p></li>
</ul>
<p>He said a bunch of other stuff, but those are my top three.</p>
<p>He wants to contrast his approach with certain United Kingdom and US environmentalists, who do indeed want to restrict what people can buy or do. Ideas like mandatory “<a href="https://www.mondaycampaigns.org/meatless-monday/news/nyc-expands-meatless-monday-schools">meatless Mondays</a>” and <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/aug/03/ban-suv-adverts-to-meet-uk-climate-goals-report-urges">banning advertising for SUVs</a> do indeed have no place in Australia, or even in the UK for that matter.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/economists-back-carbon-price-say-benefits-of-net-zero-outweigh-costs-169939">Economists back carbon price, say benefits of net-zero outweigh costs</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>And nor does telling people where to drive, although the prime minister assured us he was not going to tell people “<a href="https://www.minister.industry.gov.au/ministers/wilson/transcripts/press-conference-prime-minister-hon-scott-morrison-mp-and-minister-industry-energy-and-emissions-reduction-angus-taylor-toyota-hydrogen-centre-altona-north-victoria">where to drive or where they can’t drive</a>”. </p>
<p>Economists don’t like such ideas either. The whole idea behind a price on carbon (whether through a carbon tax or a system of tradable permits) is to respect people’s preferences, while making sure their decisions take account of the costs they impose on others.</p>
<h2>Innovations often come from government</h2>
<p>His second claim was that innovation (things like the COVID vaccine, Google search and digitisation) isn’t sparked by governments.</p>
<p>While it’s true that “Google and Cochlear were not invented at a UN workshop or summit”, to suggest that governments played no role is to wilfully ignore history.</p>
<p>The miraculous Moderna mRNA vaccine was developed… checks notes… in partnership with the US National Institutes of Health. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/09/us/moderna-vaccine-patent.html">Moderna received</a> nearly US$10 billion in taxpayer funding.</p>
<p>Much of the work on the Cochlear ear implant was done at the largely government-funded <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4921065/">University of Melbourne</a>; the internet revolution grew from the US Department of Defense’s <a href="https://historycooperative.org/who-invented-the-internet/">Advanced Research Projects Agency</a>; and Google’s search algorithm was developed by fully-funded graduate students at <a href="http://infolab.stanford.edu/pub/voy/museum/pictures/display/0-4-Google.htm">Stanford University</a>, whose endowment is tax exempt.</p>
<h2>Very often, cuts in emissions come from government</h2>
<p>Morrison emphasised on Wednesday that Australia has reduced emissions by 20%. </p>
<p>It’s natural to ask what brought it about. Much of it was a cutback in land clearing, which is counted as emissions reduction under the rules. Land clearing is <a href="https://theconversation.com/land-clearing-laws-bring-out-worrying-libertarian-streak-29978">regulated by government</a>.</p>
<p>Much of the rest happened during the two years Australia had a carbon price in place, as this chart shows. </p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Australian emissions excluding land use, land-use change and forestry</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=285&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=285&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=285&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/431464/original/file-20211111-27-mha6a7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=358&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per annum, updated quarterly.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Climate-Cuts-Cover-Ups-and-Censorship.pdf">Climate Council, Department of Industry</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>The claimed 20% reduction owes much to the laws and summits the prime minister derides.</p>
<p>All prime ministers are politicians, so isn’t surprising they spin narratives. But to spin one so sharply at odds with reality is surprising.</p>
<p>When it comes to “<a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-berkeley-vale-nsw">technology not taxes</a>”, the truth is it is often taxes that drive the development and uptake of technologies.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/top-economists-call-for-measures-to-speed-the-switch-to-electric-cars-162883">Top economists call for measures to speed the switch to electric cars</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Importantly, taxes don’t specify the particular technologies that will emerge. </p>
<p>Perhaps that’s why the nation’s peak body for can-do-capitalitsts – the Business Council of Australia – has asked the government to subject more businesses to Australia’s existing little-known (weak) <a href="https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/bca/pages/6612/attachments/original/1633693581/BCA_Achieving_a_net_zero_economy_-_9_October_2021.pdf?1633693581">price on carbon</a>.</p>
<p>If we are going to get to net-zero, we’ll need less marketing and more markets. Now there’s a slogan.</p>
<p><iframe id="bKoWR" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/bKoWR/35/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171602/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Holden is President-elect of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.</span></em></p>The prime minister road-tested an avalanche of slogans on Wednesday, some of them clearly false.Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1690162021-11-07T19:14:47Z2021-11-07T19:14:47ZScott Morrison is hiding behind future technologies, when we should just deploy what already exists<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430568/original/file-20211106-9872-kygarh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=7%2C0%2C5168%2C3445&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>At the United Nations climate summit in Glasgow last week, more than 40 countries <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59159018">pledged</a> to phase out coal-fired power. Some were big coal-using countries such as Poland, Canada and Vietnam – however Australia was not among them. Australia was similarly absent for a methane reduction pledge.</p>
<p>Achieving the Paris Agreement — limiting global warming to well below 2°C and preferably 1.5°C — requires the <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03821-8">rapid phase out</a> of coal, oil and fossil gas. Failure to do so will <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/barrier-reef-doomed-as-up-to-99-percent-of-coral-at-risk-report-finds-20210331-p57fng.html">spell the end</a> of the Great Barrier Reef and make a large swathe of Australia virtually <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/24/catastrophic-fires-and-devastating-floods-are-part-of-australias-harsh-new-climate-reality">unlivable</a>.</p>
<p>Yet the Morrison government’s technology-driven net-zero “plan” contains no concrete measures to end this fossil fuel addiction. It’s more a placeholder than a strategy, fulfilling the government’s need to have a document to wave around. Meanwhile, the government seems intent on sitting back and letting the future happen, rather than creating it.</p>
<p>I’ve spent 25 years working and investing in technology commercialisation, focusing over the past 15 years on clean technologies. I know Australia doesn’t need to wait for new technology before committing to and achieving deep emissions cuts. Most technologies we need already exist – they just need to be deployed, rapidly and at massive scale. And that requires an <em>actual</em> plan.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="wind farm in field" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430569/original/file-20211106-10422-1plrn4y.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Australia has the technology for a net-zero future – now it must be deployed.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mick Tsikas/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>We have the technology</h2>
<p>The Morrison government’s path to reach net-zero by 2050 relies primarily on technology, but fails to even remotely outline what that would mean in practice.</p>
<p>A total of 70% of the emissions cuts would purportedly be achieved by technology “investment”, “trends” and “breakthroughs”. But it’s not technology per se that reduces emissions, it’s deploying it.</p>
<p>The government missed the opportunity to explain decarbonisation at its simplest: electrify everything we can, and power it with renewables.</p>
<p>Some <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/what-is-climate-change-what-can-we-do/">84% of Australia’s emissions</a> come from activities related to the energy sector. Recent overseas <a href="https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/abbd02/pdf">analysis</a> shows electrification could replace 78% of energy emissions using established technologies. Add technologies being developed, and the figure rises to 99%.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/data-and-publications/australias-national-hydrogen-strategy">Hydrogen</a>, one of the government’s technologies du jour, is likely to play a modest but important role in domestic decarbonisation. And if we don’t get left behind, it could become a significant export earner.</p>
<p>But what’s required in the near term is much more boring: build lots of wind, solar and storage, retire coal and gas as soon as possible, and electrify transport and heating.</p>
<p>Carbon capture and storage (CCS), a favourite of Australian governments for decades, remains a distraction. First, since CCS adds significant cost but no benefit to a process, it will always require either a carbon price or regulations to be viable. Second, while CCS may play a role at the margins in areas where emissions are hard to abate, such as cement production, its only significant role for coal and gas is as a fig leaf for inaction. </p>
<p>Green steel could be a significant opportunity for Australia, given our abundance of iron ore and access to low-cost clean energy. But while Australia <a href="https://www.smart.unsw.edu.au/technologies-products/green-steel">dips a toe</a> in the water, overseas companies like <a href="https://www.ssab.com">SSAB</a> and <a href="https://www.volvoce.com/global/en/news-and-events/press-releases/2021/volvo-launches-worlds-first-vehicle-using-fossil-free-steel/">Volvo</a> are demonstrating that the days of metalurgical coal — one of Australia’s biggest exports — are numbered.</p>
<p>Clearly, the technologies are here. What we need is deployment.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="a mining vehicle made from fossil-free steel" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430607/original/file-20211107-48235-1c8zm2s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Volvo recently produced the first vehicle made from fossil-free or ‘green’ steel.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">SSAB</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Learn from Henry Ford</h2>
<p>A decade ago, energy from wind and solar was significantly more expensive than from coal and gas. But renewables are now the <a href="https://www.csiro.au/en/news/News-releases/2021/CSIRO-report-confirms-renewables-still-cheapest-new-build-power-in-Australia">cheapest form of new energy</a>, even including additional costs such as energy storage and transmission.</p>
<p>Renewable energy’s fast fall in price was due to a mix of well-designed government policies and massive private investment, both here and around the world.</p>
<p>The Commonwealth’s Renewable Energy Target, for example, required electricity retailers to purchase a small but increasing amount of renewable energy each year, in a way that did <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/resources/myth-busting-does-more-renewable-energy-make-power-prices-go-up-or-down/">not significantly affect</a> energy affordability. With renewables now at a lower cost than new coal and gas, that early investment is paying dividends.</p>
<p>The experience showed we don’t have to wait until technology is cheap and perfect before deploying it. In fact, the only way to make it cheap and perfect is to deploy it, again and again.</p>
<p>When Henry Ford released the <a href="https://corporate.ford.com/articles/history/the-model-t.html">Model T</a> in 1908 his horseless carriage was imperfect and expensive. Yet it kicked off a process of technological improvement in which each successive generation of cars has learnt lessons from those which came before. </p>
<p>If federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor time-travelled back to 1908, would he advise Ford not to release the Model T until it resembled the Tesla Model S?</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="man stands between two vintage cars" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=458&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=576&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=576&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/430570/original/file-20211106-10546-369svb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=576&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Henry Ford didn’t wait until the Model T ran like a Tesla before deploying the technology.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Ford Motor Co</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Seizing opportunities</h2>
<p>Most economists <a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-top-economists-back-carbon-price-say-benefits-of-net-zero-outweigh-cost-169939">agree</a> the most efficient way to reduce emissions is to put a price on carbon and let the market respond. More than a decade of toxic Australian politics has poisoned that well. It leaves policymakers with few tools, and politicians with even fewer ideas.</p>
<p>In the absence of an explicit carbon pricing scheme, the federal government should set clear emissions reduction targets in each sector of the economy. </p>
<p>Monash University’s ClimateWorks has developed a <a href="https://www.climateworksaustralia.org/resource/decarbonisation-futures-solutions-actions-and-benchmarks-for-a-net-zero-emissions-australia/">plan</a> for doing so. Such a plan, with an added combination of policy “carrots” (subsidies or incentives) and “sticks” (regulations or taxes) would ensure emissions reduction targets are met.</p>
<p>Our lowest hanging fruit would include a carefully managed coal phase-out and policies to rapidly electrify transport and heating, using existing technologies. This would help us hit meaningful 2030 emissions reduction targets consistent with the Paris Agreement.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, we sit on the cusp of what is almost certainly Australia’s biggest ever investment opportunity. Our wide brown land is chock full of the <a href="https://www.industry.gov.au/policies-and-initiatives/critical-minerals-facilitation-office/investing-in-critical-minerals-in-australia">critical minerals</a> needed in a decarbonising world — lithium, nickel, cobalt, rare earth metals and silicon. Moreover, our windswept and sun-drenched plains are ready to produce the low-cost energy required to locally transform these raw minerals into valuable refined materials.</p>
<p>Our state governments, some having committed to net-zero five years ago, are making progress – particularly in electricity. But complementary and coordinated policies at the federal level would almost certainly make progress faster — and cheaper.</p>
<p>The coal and methane pledges at COP26 shows many of the world’s most emissions-intensive economies are ready to make the transition. Meanwhile, the federal government’s so-called “plan” prevents Australia from claiming our place in the sun, and wind.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/economists-back-carbon-price-say-benefits-of-net-zero-outweigh-costs-169939">Economists back carbon price, say benefits of net-zero outweigh costs</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169016/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Simon Holmes à Court has indirect stockholdings in numerous domestic and international clean tech and clean infrastructure companies. He is a director of the Smart Energy Council, a peak body for solar, storage, smart-grids and hydrogen. He is also the convenor of Climate 200, a non-profit supporting pro-climate, pro-integrity and pro-gender equity political candidates.</span></em></p>We already have most technologies Australia needs to make the clean energy transition. What’s missing is a plan to deploy them at huge scale.Simon Holmes à Court, Senior advisor, Climate and Energy College, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1709792021-11-02T15:36:50Z2021-11-02T15:36:50Z6 priorities could deliver energy breakthroughs at the Glasgow climate summit – there’s progress on some already<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429678/original/file-20211102-19-a871qm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C18%2C6240%2C4072&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The energy transition is already underway.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/electricity-pylons-and-wind-turbines-stand-beside-the-rwe-news-photo/510814700">Volker Hartmann/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Much of the news coming out of the U.N. climate conference has focused on the spectacle, and how countries’ pledges <a href="https://www.climate-transparency.org/g20-climate-performance/g20report2021">aren’t on track</a> to prevent dangerous climate change. But behind the scenes, there is reason for hope.</p>
<p>In many countries, the energy transition is already underway as falling costs make renewable energy ubiquitous and <a href="https://www.irena.org/newsroom/pressreleases/2021/Jun/Majority-of-New-Renewables-Undercut-Cheapest-Fossil-Fuel-on-Cost">more affordable than fossil fuels</a>. A growing number of world leaders agreed at the climate summit to <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-announces-a-sweeping-methane-plan-heres-why-cutting-the-greenhouse-gas-is-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-168220">reduce methane emissions</a> and aim for net-zero emissions. Over 40 countries <a href="https://ukcop26.org/global-coal-to-clean-power-transition-statement/">committed to phase out unabated coal power</a> in the next two decades.</p>
<p>The challenge for government officials now is figuring out how to help scale up clean energy dramatically while reducing fossil fuel emissions, and still meeting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-financing-for-fossil-fuel-projects-in-africa-isnt-a-climate-solution-169220">rapidly growing energy demands</a> of billions of people in developing and emerging economies. With an <a href="https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/110121-europes-energy-crisis-deepens-as-russia-slashes-gas-exports">ongoing energy crisis</a> creating shortages and record high prices in several countries, navigating this early stage of the energy transition requires thoughtful policies and well-prioritized plans. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DAwwVkwAAAAJ&hl=en">climate</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=sfI-c0YAAAAJ&hl=en">policy experts</a> with decades of experience in international energy policy, we identified six strategic priorities that could help countries navigate this tricky terrain.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Illustration showing where to cut emissions soonest most efficiently" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Meeting the Paris climate agreement goal of keeping global warming under 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 F) will require reducing fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere with techniques such as carbon capture and storage or use (CCS and CCU).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">International Renewable Energy Agency</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>1) Deploy carbon pricing and markets more widely</h2>
<p>Only a few <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/">countries, states and regions currently have a carbon price</a> that is high enough to push polluters to cut their emissions. </p>
<p>A price on carbon, often created through a tax or carbon market system, captures the cost of harms caused by greenhouse gas emissions that companies don’t currently pay for, such as climate change, damage to crops and rising health care costs. It is particularly critical for power production and energy-intensive industries. </p>
<p>One goal of the Glasgow negotiations is to write rules to help carbon markets function well and transparently. That’s essential for effectively meeting the many net-zero climate goals that have been announced by countries from <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-pledges-grow">Japan and South Korea to the U.S., China and those in the European Union</a>. It includes rules on the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/sep/16/carbon-offset-projects-carbon-emissions">use of carbon offsets</a>, which allow individuals or companies to invest in projects elsewhere to offset their own emissions. Carbon offsets are currently <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-corporate-climate-pledges-of-net-zero-emissions-should-trigger-a-healthy-dose-of-skepticism-156386">highly contentious</a> and not delivering trustworthy emissions credits.</p>
<h2>2) Focus attention on the hard-to-decarbonize sectors</h2>
<p>Shipping, road freight and industries like aluminum, cement and steel are all <a href="https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Sep/Reaching-Zero-with-Renewables">difficult places for cutting emissions</a>, in part because they don’t yet have tested, affordable replacements for fossil fuels. While there are some <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">innovative ideas</a>, competitiveness concerns – such as companies moving production out of the country to avoid regulations – have been a key barrier to progress.</p>
<p>Europe is trying to overcome this barrier by establishing a <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12228-EU-Green-Deal-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-_en">carbon border adjustment mechanism</a>, which would tax imports of goods that didn’t face the same level of carbon taxes at home.</p>
<p>The United States and the European Union also announced at the summit that they would work to negotiate a global agreement to <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/31/joint-us-eu-statement-on-trade-in-steel-and-aluminum/">reduce the high emissions in steel production</a>.</p>
<h2>3) Get China and other emerging economies on board</h2>
<p>It is clear that coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, needs to be phased out fast, and doing so is critical to both the U.N.’s energy and climate agendas. Given that more than <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal/china-generated-over-half-worlds-coal-fired-power-in-2020-study-idUSKBN2BK0PZ">half of global coal</a> is consumed in China, its actions stand out, although other emerging economies such as India, Indonesia and Vietnam are also critical.</p>
<p>This will not be easy. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants">Notably half of the Chinese coal plants are less than a decade old</a>, a fraction of a coal plant’s typical life span. China has raised its climate commitments, including pledging to reach net-zero emissions by 2060 and agreeing to <a href="https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02645-w">end financing of coal power plants in other countries</a>, but its <a href="https://www4.unfccc.int/sites/NDCStaging/Pages/Party.aspx?party=CHN&prototype=1">current pathway</a> will not yield substantial reductions this decade.</p>
<p>A major announcement by <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/11/01/india-targets-2070-for-net-zero-emissions-china-makes-no-new-commitments.html">India’s prime minister at the COP around a net-zero goal</a> for his country by 2070, with interim targets for ratcheting down emissions before then, is an early win. </p>
<p>Indonesia and Vietnam signed on to the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/global-coal-to-clean-power-transition-statement/">pledge to phase out unabated coal power</a>, but Indonesia included some caveats. It said it would “consider accelerating coal phase-out into the 2040s,” but made that conditional on receiving more international financial and technical assistance.</p>
<h2>4) Focus on innovation</h2>
<p>Support for innovation has brought cutting-edge renewable power and electric vehicles much faster than anticipated. More is possible. For example, <a href="https://www.g20.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/Annexes-G20-Joint-Energy-and-Climate-2021.pdf">offshore wind</a>, geothermal, carbon capture and <a href="https://theconversation.com/hydrogen-is-one-future-fuel-oil-execs-and-environmentalists-could-both-support-as-rival-countries-search-for-climate-solutions-159201">green hydrogen</a> are new developments that can make a big difference in years to come.</p>
<p>At the climate conference, a coalition of world leaders launched what they call the “Breakthrough Agenda” – a framework for bringing governments and businesses together to collaborate on clean energy and technology. The <a href="https://racetozero.unfccc.int/system/glasgow-breakthroughs/">Glasgow Breakthroughs</a> include making electric vehicles the affordable norm, <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2021/Oct/IRENA-to-Mobilise-Energy-Transition-Action-at-COP26">bringing down clean energy costs</a>, scaling up hydrogen energy storage and getting steel production to near-zero emissions, all by 2030.</p>
<p>The countries and companies that lead in developing these new technologies will reap economic benefits, including jobs and economic growth. More opportunities exist in <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2020/Aug/Thirty-Innovations-for-a-Renewable-Powered-Future">market design, social acceptance, equity, regulatory frameworks and business models</a>. Energy systems are deeply interconnected to social issues, so changing them will be successful only if the solutions look beyond the technology to societal needs.</p>
<h2>5) Prioritize green financing</h2>
<p>Over 160 banks and investment groups are involved in another coalition that has agreed to <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/biggest-financial-players-back-net-zero">put pressure on high-emissions industries</a> by tying lending decisions to the goal of global net-zero emissions by 2050.</p>
<p>Ramping up green financing will require transparent taxonomies, or guidelines, for defining green and clean investments; science-based transition plans for companies and financial institutions; and a hard look at portfolios of financial institutions given the risk of substantial stranded fossil fuel assets, such as coal power plants that haven’t reached the end of their life spans but can no longer be used. </p>
<p>Meeting the <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-banning-financing-for-fossil-fuel-projects-in-africa-isnt-a-climate-solution-169220">transition funding needs of developing economies</a> should be a high priority. </p>
<h2>6) Reduce short-lived greenhouse gases</h2>
<p>The Biden administration <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/11/02/fact-sheet-president-biden-tackles-methane-emissions-spurs-innovations-and-supports-sustainable-agriculture-to-build-a-clean-energy-economy-and-create-jobs/">announced a sweeping set of rules</a> on Nov. 2, 2021, for reducing emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas many times more potent than carbon dioxide that comes from leaking oil and gas infrastructure, coal mines, agriculture and landfills. Methane doesn’t stay in the atmosphere as long, so stopping emissions can have faster climate benefits while carbon emissions are reduced. </p>
<p>The U.S. and the European Union also launched a new global pledge to <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-eu-urge-30-methane-emissions-cuts-a-move-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-and-it-can-pay-for-itself-168220">cut methane emissions by nearly one-third by 2030</a>. Over 100 countries have <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/statement_21_5766">signed on</a>.</p>
<p>This type of coalition, based on a tightly focused issue, can bring meaningful emissions reductions in places that are less likely to support broader climate agreements.</p>
<h2>Not one solution</h2>
<p>It is likely that U.N. energy and climate deliberations will continue to move in fits and starts. The real work needs to take place at a more practical implementation level, such as in states, provinces and municipalities. </p>
<p>If there is one thing we have learned, it is that mitigating climate change will be a long slog. While it’s uncontested that <a href="https://irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2021/Jun/IRENA_World_Energy_Transitions_Outlook_2021.pdf?la=en&hash=C2117A51B74EAB29727609D778CDD16C49E56E83">the benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation far exceed the costs</a>, politicians need to show that the many energy transitions emerging are good for economies and communities, and can create long-lasting jobs and tax revenue. </p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="COP26: the world’s biggest climate talks" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/424739/original/file-20211005-17-cgrf2z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p><br>
<strong>This story is part of The Conversation’s coverage of COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.</strong>
<br><em>Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/cop26">Read more of our U.S.</a> and <a href="https://page.theconversation.com/cop26-glasgow-2021-climate-change-summit/">global coverage</a>.</em></p>
<p><em>This article was updated Nov. 4, 2021, with the countries agreeing to phase out unabated coal power and Indonesia’s caveats.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170979/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Clean energy innovation, giving up coal, cutting methane and getting China and India on board for net-zero can deliver progress at COP26.Dolf Gielen, Director for Technology and Innovation at the International Renewable Energy Agency and Payne Institute Fellow, Colorado School of MinesMorgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director, Payne Institute, Colorado School of MinesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1709592021-11-02T02:52:59Z2021-11-02T02:52:59ZAustralia is about to be hit by a carbon tax whether the prime minister likes it or not, except the proceeds will go overseas<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429676/original/file-20211102-17-1b2uh7k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=213%2C367%2C2219%2C1167&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Perutskyi Petro/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ten years ago, in the lead-up to Australia’s short-lived <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_pricing_in_Australia">carbon price</a> or “carbon tax” (<a href="https://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/2F467985129CAEE6CA257A4800137831/$File/5257055001_jul%202012.pdf">either</a> description is valid), the deepest fear on the part of businesses was that they would lose out to untaxed firms overseas.</p>
<p>Instead of buying Australian carbon-taxed products, Australian and export customers would buy untaxed (possibly dirtier) products from somewhere else.</p>
<p>It would give late-movers (countries that hadn’t yet adopted a carbon tax) a “<a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/from-rio-to-copenhagen-the-model-was-wrong/news-story/a5f8b72e0d685a0fd574059bc6e4ab07">free kick</a>” in industries from coal and steel to aluminium to liquefied natural gas to cement, to wine, to meat and dairy products, even to copy paper.</p>
<p>It’s why the Gillard government handed out free permits to so-called trade-exposed industries, so they wouldn’t face unfair competition.</p>
<p>As a band-aid, it sort of worked. The firms with the most to lose were bought off. </p>
<p>But it was hardly a solution. What if every country had done it? Then, wherever there was a carbon tax (and wherever there wasn’t), trade-exposed industries would be exempt. The tax wouldn’t do enough to bring down emissions.</p>
<h2>We are about to face carbon tariffs</h2>
<p>The European Union has cottoned on to the imperfect workarounds introduced by countries such as Australia, and is about to tackle things from the other direction.</p>
<p>Instead of treating foreign and local producers the same by letting them both off the hook, it’s going to place both on the hook.</p>
<p>It’s about to make sure producers in higher-emitting countries such as China (and Australia) can’t undercut producers who pay carbon prices.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=391&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/429667/original/file-20211101-19-1q0v4ka.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=491&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/P1031-Carbon-Border-AdjustmentsWEB.pdf">Australia Institute</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>Unless foreign producers pay a carbon price like the one in Europe, the EU will impose a carbon price on their goods as they come in — a so-called <a href="https://economics.rabobank.com/publications/2021/july/cbam-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-eu-explained/">Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism</a>, or “carbon tariff”.</p>
<p>Australia’s Energy Minister Angus Taylor says he is “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-dead-against-climate-tariffs-declares-taylor-20210211-p571iq.html">dead against</a>” carbon tariffs, a stance that isn’t likely to carry much weight in France or any of the other 26 EU nations.</p>
<h2>Australia is familiar with the arguments for them</h2>
<p>From <a href="https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Markets-Are-Moving_V5-FA_High_Res_Single_Pages.pdf">2026</a>, Europe will apply the tariff to direct emissions from imported iron, steel, cement, fertiliser, aluminium and electricity, with other products (and possibly indirect emissions) to be added later.</p>
<p>That is, unless they come from a country with a carbon price.</p>
<p>Canada is also exploring the idea, as part of “<a href="https://budget.gc.ca/fes-eea/2020/report-rapport/FES-EEA-eng.pdf">levelling the playing field</a>”. So is US President Joe Biden, who wants to stop polluting countries “<a href="https://joebiden.com/made-in-america/">undermining our workers and manufacturers</a>”.</p>
<p>Their arguments line up with those heard in Australia in the lead-up to our carbon price: that unless there’s some sort of adjustment, a local carbon tax will push local employers towards “<a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8462.2011.00671.x">pollution havens</a>” where emissions are untaxed.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-eu-is-considering-carbon-tariffs-on-australian-exports-is-that-legal-156946">The EU is considering carbon tariffs on Australian exports. Is that legal?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In practice, there’s little Australia can do to stop Europe and others imposing carbon tariffs.</p>
<p>As Australia discovered when China blocked its exports of wine and barley, there’s little a free trade agreement, or even the World Trade Organisation, can do. The WTO was neutered when former US President Donald Trump blocked every appointment to its appellate body, leaving it <a href="https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/appellate_body_e.htm">unstaffed</a>, a stance Biden hasn’t reversed. </p>
<p>Even so, the EU believes such action would be allowed under trade rules, pointing to a precedent established by Australia, among other countries.</p>
<h2>Legality isn’t the point</h2>
<p>When Australia introduced the Goods and Services Tax in 2000, it passed laws allowing it to tax imports in the same way as locally produced products, a move it has recently extended to small <a href="https://sellercentral.amazon.com.au/gp/help/external/help.html?itemID=4BBHW7XBNS2GMWU&language=en_AU&ref=efph_4BBHW7XBNS2GMWU_relt_5QUHUE75VHSWTAZ">parcels</a> and <a href="https://www.ato.gov.au/Business/International-tax-for-business/GST-on-imported-services-and-digital-products/">services purchased online</a>.</p>
<p>Trade expert and Nobel Prizewinning economist <a href="https://messaging-custom-newsletters.nytimes.com/template/oakv2?productCode=PK&te=1&nl=paul-krugman&emc=edit_pk_20211102&uri=nyt://newsletter/bfdee52e-e286-5cfe-8d11-9f6a5a5403c4">Paul Krugman</a> says he is prepared to argue the toss with politicians such as Australia’s trade minister about what’s legal and whether carbon tariffs would be “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/new-protectionism-australia-to-fight-boris-johnson-s-green-tariff-bid-20210210-p5714j.html">protectionist</a>”.</p>
<p>But he says that’s beside the point:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Yes, protectionism has costs, but these costs are often exaggerated, and they’re trivial compared with the risks of runaway climate change. I mean, the Pacific Northwest — the Pacific Northwest! — has been baking under triple-digit temperatures, and we’re going to worry about the interpretation of Article III of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade?</p>
<p>And some form of international sanctions against countries that don’t take steps to limit emissions is essential if we’re going to do anything about an existential environmental threat.</p>
</blockquote>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/australias-economy-can-withstand-the-proposed-eu-carbon-tariff-159062">Victoria University</a> calculations suggest Europe’s carbon tariffs will push up the price of imported Australian iron, steel and grains by about 9%, and drive up the price of every other Australian import by less, apart from coal whose imported price would soar by 53%.</p>
<p>The tariffs would be collected <a href="https://australiainstitute.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/P1031-Carbon-Border-AdjustmentsWEB.pdf">by Europe</a> rather than Australia. They could be escaped if Australian makers of iron, steel and other products can find ways to cut emissions.</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Increase in price of exports to EU under carbon border adjustment mechanism</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=310&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/396459/original/file-20210422-21-xjnbmq.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=390&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Assumes an EU carbon price of 60 euro per tonne, which is roughly today’s price; assumes the CBAM covers CO2 emissions including fugitive emissions involved in production other than direct combustion emissions that are priced already by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>The tariffs could also be avoided if Australia were to introduce a carbon price or something similar, and collected the money itself.</p>
<p>This makes a compelling case for another look at an Australian carbon price. If Australian emissions are on the way down anyway, as Prime Minister Scott Morrison contends, it needn’t be set particularly high. If he is wrong, it would need to be set higher.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-point-protesting-australia-faces-carbon-levies-unless-it-changes-course-155200">No point protesting, Australia faces carbon levies unless it changes course</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One thing the sad story of Australia’s on-again, off-again, now on-again (through carbon tariffs) history of carbon pricing has shown is that politicians aren’t the best people to set the rates.</p>
<p>In 2011, Prime Minister Julia Gillard set up an independent, Reserve Bank-like Climate Change Authority to advise on the carbon price and emissions targets, initially chaired by a former <a href="https://www.climatechangeauthority.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-06/Climate%20Change%20Authority%20Annual%20Report%202012-13/CCA-Annual-Report-Text-Accessible-PDF-03.pdf">governor</a> of the Reserve Bank.</p>
<p>Astoundingly, despite attempts to <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5136">abolish it</a>, it still exists. It might yet have work to do.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/170959/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A carbon tariff is a carbon tax applied to exports from countries such as Australian that don’t have one. Europe is planning to impose one.Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1699392021-10-17T03:21:12Z2021-10-17T03:21:12ZEconomists back carbon price, say benefits of net-zero outweigh costs<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/426607/original/file-20211015-20-55nadk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=538%2C0%2C3155%2C1994&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wes Mountain/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Eight in ten of Australia’s leading economists back action to cut Australia’s carbon emissions to net-zero. </p>
<p>Almost nine in ten want it done by a carbon tax or a carbon price – mechanisms that were explicitly rejected at the 2013 election.</p>
<p>The panel of 58 top Australian economists selected by the Economic Society of Australia wants the carbon price restored to the public agenda even though it was rejected seven years ago, some saying Australia’s goods and services tax was rebuffed in 1993 and then restored to the public agenda seven years later.</p>
<p>Among those surveyed are former heads of government departments and agencies, former International Monetary Fund and OECD officials and a former and current member of the Reserve Bank board.</p>
<p>Asked ahead of November’s Glasgow climate talks whether Australia would likely benefit overall from the national economy transitioning to net-zero emissions by 2050, 46 of the 58 said yes.</p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/426363/original/file-20211014-23-1tc85lk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=639&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>The response is at odds with the previous positions of groups such as the Business Council of Australia which in the leadup to the 2019 election labelled Labor’s proposed steps towards net-zero “<a href="https://twitter.com/BCAcomau/status/1011414577702031361">economy wrecking</a>”. </p>
<p>This month the Business Council <a href="https://www.bca.com.au/achieving_net_zero_with_more_jobs_and_stronger_regions">backed</a> net-zero by 2050, and produced modelling suggesting it would make Australians A$5,000 better off per year.</p>
<h2>Only one net-zero doubter</h2>
<p>Only five of the 58 economists surveyed disagreed with the proposition that cutting Australia’s emissions to net-zero would leave Australians better off. </p>
<p>Of those five, only one doubted that cutting global move emissions to net-zero would leave Australia better off. The others believed that even if a global move to net-zero did leave Australians better off, it was likely to happen anyway, meaning Australia wouldn’t need to act, a stance derided by others as “free-riding”.</p>
<p>“The argument that we are only a small percentage of global emissions holds no water either ethically or in terms of establishing and implementing a global agreement,” said Grattan Institute’s Danielle Wood. “If rich countries like Australia won’t do their fair share, this undermines the likelihood that others will.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/barnaby-joyce-has-refused-to-support-doubling-australias-2030-emissions-reduction-targets-but-we-could-get-there-so-cheaply-and-easily-169932">Barnaby Joyce has refused to support doubling Australia's 2030 emissions reduction targets – but we could get there so cheaply and easily</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Others including Reserve Bank board member Ian Harper pointed out that Australian exporters faced punitive tariffs and lending and insurance embargoes unless Australia pulled its weight in reducing emissions.</p>
<p>His comments echo those of Reserve Bank Deputy Governor <a href="https://www.rba.gov.au/speeches/2021/sp-dg-2021-10-14.html">Guy Debelle</a> and Treasurer <a href="https://ministers.treasury.gov.au/ministers/josh-frydenberg-2018/speeches/address-australian-industry-group-melbourne">Josh Frydenberg</a> who have said that unless Australia takes action it will face reduced access to capital markets “impacting everything from interest rates on home loans and small business loans to the financial viability of large‑scale infrastructure projects”.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/frydenberg-prepares-ground-for-morrison-to-commit-to-2050-target-168610">Frydenberg prepares ground for Morrison to commit to 2050 target</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>University of Melbourne economist Leslie Martin made the broader point that Australia had a lot to lose from rising temperatures if free-riding didn’t pay off.</p>
<p>“Although Australia could possibly free-ride on the efforts of other larger economies, it would suffer disproportionately if other countries chose to do the same” he said.</p>
<h2>Only one overwhelmingly preferred option</h2>
<p>Offered a choice of four options for rapidly reducing emissions, and asked to endorse only one, the economists surveyed overwhelmingly backed an economy-wide carbon price in the form of a carbon tax or market for emissions permits. </p>
<hr>
<iframe src="https://flo.uri.sh/visualisation/7524430/embed" title="Interactive or visual content" class="flourish-embed-iframe" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="width:100%;height:400px;" sandbox="allow-same-origin allow-forms allow-scripts allow-downloads allow-popups allow-popups-to-escape-sandbox allow-top-navigation-by-user-activation" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<div style="width:100%!;margin-top:4px!important;text-align:right!important;"><a class="flourish-credit" href="https://public.flourish.studio/visualisation/7524430/?utm_source=embed&utm_campaign=visualisation/7524430" target="_top"><img alt="Made with Flourish" src="https://public.flourish.studio/resources/made_with_flourish.svg"> </a></div>
<hr>
<p>Of the 58 surveyed, 49 backed a carbon price, seven backed government support to develop and roll out emissions-reducing technologies, and one backed support for technologies that drew down carbon from the atmosphere. </p>
<p>None backed so-called “<a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-12-20/coalition-climate-change-direct-action-policy-explained/5067188">direct action</a>” – the program of competitive grants for firms that cut emissions the government took to the last two elections.</p>
<p>“The less federal governments choose to involve themselves with the technical aspects of the alternatives at a micro scale the better,” said Lin Crase, a specialist in environmental management at the University of South Australia.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/climate-wars-carbon-taxes-and-toppled-leaders-the-30-year-history-of-australias-climate-response-in-brief-169545">Climate wars, carbon taxes and toppled leaders: the 30-year history of Australia’s climate response, in brief</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Crase said governments had shown themselves to be very bad at picking winners, but very good at putting in place broad settings that allowed the people and businesses closest to the action to pick winners.</p>
<p>Several of the economists surveyed said the government’s slogan of “technology, not taxes” set up a <a href="https://www.pm.gov.au/media/press-conference-berkeley-vale-nsw">false distinction</a>. Taxes could drive the switch to better technologies – ones chosen by the market rather than by government edict.</p>
<p>Australia’s carbon price was introduced in 2012 and abolished in 2014. Had it still been in place Australia would have at hand the tools it needed to get to net-zero.</p>
<p>Some of those surveyed said it was “too late” for a carbon price, partly because of politics and partly because of lost time.</p>
<h2>Time for everything plus the kitchen sink?</h2>
<p>Saul Eslake said Australia was no more likely to adopt an economy-wide carbon price than he was “to step in thylacine droppings on my front lawn of a morning”, the views of the <a href="https://www.oecd.org/environment/climate-carbon.htm">OECD</a> and the <a href="https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/staff-climate-notes/Issues/2021/06/15/Proposal-for-an-International-Carbon-Price-Floor-Among-Large-Emitters-460468">International Monetary Fund</a> notwithstanding.</p>
<p>What was needed was everything possible, including the second-best option of direct action. John Quiggin said Australia needed direct action in the literal sense of government investment in renewable electricity and infrastructure.</p>
<p>Rana Roy said nothing should be ruled out, including the resurrection of a carbon tax or a carbon price, perhaps by a different name. An option rejected once was not rejected “for the rest of time”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/we-cant-stabilise-the-climate-without-carbon-offsets-so-how-do-we-make-them-work-169355">We can't stabilise the climate without carbon offsets – so how do we make them work?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Others pointed to Australia’s natural advantages in solar, wind, geothermal energy and carbon removal via means such as reforestation and storing carbon in soil.</p>
<p>With the right settings in place, Australia could become a major producer of zero-emissions hydrogen, and an industrial powerhouse that used its own iron ore and green energy to export green steel to the world.</p>
<p>With one of the most important settings missing, Australia would find it harder.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Detailed responses:</em></p>
<p><iframe id="tc-infographic-614" class="tc-infographic" height="400px" src="https://cdn.theconversation.com/infographics/614/cc8f46b3140f1282dc21ed862ff375393571693e/site/index.html" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/169939/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter Martin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Australia’s top economists say Australia can’t “free-ride”, allowing others to cut emissions while it gets the benefits.Peter Martin, Visiting Fellow, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1689182021-09-30T14:01:04Z2021-09-30T14:01:04ZCanada’s federal election made big strides for climate and the environment<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423928/original/file-20210929-66155-x1rxb8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=80%2C89%2C5910%2C3898&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is seeing nothing but blue skies ahead when it comes to his policies on climate change. But will the newly re-elected Liberal government follow through?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick </span></span></figcaption></figure><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 175px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/canada’s-federal-election-made-big-strides-for-climate-and-the-environment" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>The outcome of the recent federal election — a Liberal minority dependent on the NDP or Bloc Québécois for support — has been widely seen as having a “Groundhog Day” aspect to it. It left the composition of Parliament very much as it was before, <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-election-call-1.6141189">reinforcing questions about the necessity</a> of the election in the first place.</p>
<p>Yet the election has major implications for Canada’s approach to climate change and other environmental issues. Many progressives likely wanted the result: a Liberal government — but one they may not entirely trust to meet its promises on climate, child care and a host of other issues — reliant on more progressive parties to stay in office. </p>
<p>The overall outcome may have actually left Canada better positioned than before the election to make significant progress on reducing its greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<h2>Holding the progressive vote</h2>
<p>The Liberals’ efforts to hold onto progressive voters in the face of challenges from the NDP, Greens and, in Québec, the Bloc Québécois, translated into an impressive menu of climate commitments. </p>
<p>Even before the election, the government expanded <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2021/04/canadas-enhanced-nationally-determined-contribution.html">Canada’s commitment to lower greenhouse gases</a> to a 40 to 45 per cent reduction by 2030 relative to 2005. (Canada’s previous target had been 30 per cent below 2005 levels.) </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/canada-finally-has-a-climate-plan-that-will-let-it-meet-its-carbon-targets-by-2030-152133">Canada finally has a climate plan that will let it meet its carbon targets by 2030</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Canada has also said it will <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/net-zero-emissions-2050.html">reach net-zero emissions by 2050</a>. Under that scenario, the details of which have yet to be <a href="https://www.theenergymix.com/2021/07/20/exclusive-experts-press-trudeau-to-link-energy-planning-to-1-5c-targets/">fully developed or modelled</a>, any remaining greenhouse gas emissions would have to be balanced by the amounts absorbed by biological processes (such as growing trees) and carbon sequestration or storage technologies.</p>
<p>The government’s December 2020 <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/healthy-environment-healthy-economy.html">climate policy paper</a> proposed to increase the backstop federal carbon price to $170 per tonne by 2030. It is now expected to follow through on that.</p>
<p>The campaign produced <a href="https://liberal.ca/our-platform/cap-and-cut-emissions-from-oil-and-gas/">a promise to ensure the oil and gas sector</a> hits net-zero emissions by 2050, “with five-year targets starting in 2025.” There were also commitments to a <a href="https://liberal.ca/our-platform/cutting-methane-emissions/">75 per cent</a> reduction in fossil industry methane emissions from 2012 levels by 2030, and to “develop a plan to <a href="https://liberal.ca/our-platform/eliminating-subsidies-and-public-financing-for-fossil-fuel/">phase-out</a> public financing of the fossil fuel sector, including from Crown corporations.”</p>
<h2>Electricity, transportation and buildings</h2>
<p>About 17 per cent of Canada’s electricity comes from fossil fuels. In addition to the planned phase-out of conventional coal-fired electricity generation by 2030, a proposed “<a href="https://liberal.ca/our-platform/our-clean-power-advantage/">clean electricity standard</a>” would bring the electricity grid to net-zero by 2035. <a href="https://liberal.ca/our-platform/eliminating-thermal-coal-exports/">Thermal coal</a> exports would end by 2030.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Graphic showing how hydropower, nuclear, gas, coal, wind, solar, oil and other renewables contribute to electricity production in Canada." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=424&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/423861/original/file-20210929-13-pxdwwy.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=532&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The burning of fossil fuels — coal, oil and gas — to produce electricity is a major source of greenhouse gases around the world. While Canada’s dependence on coal and oil for electricity has declined in the past 20 years, gas has been on the rise.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-elec-by-source?country=~CAN">(OurWorldInData.org)</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Transportation is the <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html">second-largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Canada</a>. The federal government has <a href="https://liberal.ca/climate/100-zero-emissions-car-sales-by-2035/">accelerated its target</a> so that every new passenger vehicle sold in 2035 and beyond is a zero-emission vehicle (ZEV). The commitments come with electric vehicle rebates of up to $5,000 for 500,000 buyers, plus 50,000 new charging stations across the country. And a low-carbon fuel standard would reduce emissions from gas-burning vehicles that remain on the road.</p>
<p>For homes and buildings, which account for about 13 per cent of Canada’s emissions, the government has <a href="https://liberal.ca/climate/a-retrofit-economy-that-cuts-pollution-and-creates-jobs/">promised $5,000 energy retrofit grants for nearly half a million households</a>, with interest-free loans of up to $40,000 for deeper retrofits. There will also be a national strategy to bring the building stock to net-zero by 2050 with “ambitious milestones along the way.”</p>
<h2>Following through will be crucial</h2>
<p>The crucial question now will be the follow-though on these commitments. Many of the government’s promises, like the commitments to reduce fossil fuel and electricity sector emissions, could lead to significant federal-provincial conflicts, particularly with Alberta and Saskatchewan. </p>
<p>Over the past six years, the Liberals’ approach to addressing climate change has had some profound contradictions. The government purchased and approved the <a href="https://theconversation.com/canadas-liberals-make-it-hard-for-green-voters-to-love-them-122935">Trans Mountain pipeline</a>, and it has supported controversial technologies like <a href="https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/november-2020/canadas-newest-nuclear-industry-dream-is-a-potential-nightmare/">small modular nuclear reactors</a>, <a href="https://www.ciel.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/CCS-Letter_FINAL_CAN-1.pdf">carbon capture and storage</a>, and fossil-fuel dependent “blue” and “grey” <a href="https://www.pembina.org/pub/hydrogen-primer">hydrogen</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-green-hydrogen-but-not-grey-could-help-solve-climate-change-162987">Why green hydrogen — but not grey — could help solve climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>To its credit, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government had already implemented far more substantive climate policies than all of its predecessors, Liberal and Conservative, combined. The government’s minority status, dependent on two opposition parties with strong commitments to climate action, will help see these further commitments through to implementation, even if some say its <a href="https://ipolitics.ca/2021/08/21/liberal-and-conservative-climate-promises-fall-short-experts-say/">pledges still fall short of what is needed to meet the revised emissions reduction targets</a>.</p>
<p>The election also had significant implications for the other parties. The credibility of the Conservative party’s stance on climate change remains suspect, and is reinforced by the <a href="https://sei.info.yorku.ca/files/2012/12/TheEnvironment.pdf?x60126">anti-environment legacy</a> of the Stephen Harper government and the behaviour of current Conservative provincial governments <a href="https://www.nationalobserver.com/2019/09/13/opinion/global-assault-environmental-rights-behind-jason-kenneys-war">in Alberta</a>, <a href="https://leaderpost.com/opinion/columnists/moe-ducking-talk-of-global-warming-ghg-reduction-for-political-gain">Saskatchewan</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/new-and-improved-doug-ford-doesnt-extend-to-the-environment-128432">and Ontario</a>. <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/8200829/future-of-canadas-greens-in-the-spotlight-after-election-setbacks/">Support for the Green Party collapsed</a> to its lowest level in two decades, yet the <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2021/09/20/ndp-tempers-expectations-as-early-results-put-party-far-behind-rivals.html">NDP failed to make any significant gains</a> among progressive voters despite a relatively strong campaign performance by Jagmeet Singh. </p>
<p>The overall results have left Canada reasonably well-positioned to move forward on its climate commitments. The question now will be whether the re-elected Trudeau government will carry through on its promises. Its survival through the next federal election may well depend on the results.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168918/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Winfield receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada</span></em></p>While the outcome of the 2021 federal election offered little in the way of change, it may have left Canada better positioned to make progress on reducing greenhouse gas emissions.Mark Winfield, Professor of Environmental Studies, York University, CanadaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1685602021-09-23T20:03:41Z2021-09-23T20:03:41ZVital Signs: a simple way to cut carbon emissions — don’t let polluters hide<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422818/original/file-20210923-17-1c6y87h.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C922%2C5760%2C2905&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>World leaders and about 30,000 others from assorted interest groups will converge on Glasgow in November for the United Nations’ 26th annual climate summit, COP26 (“Conference of the Parties”).</p>
<p>It will be five years (allowing for a one-year Tokyo 2020-style pandemic hiatus) since the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">Paris Agreement</a> adopted at COP21 in 2015. </p>
<p>There has been plenty of cynicism about that agreement, its structure and non-binding nature. Important emitters like China were effectively exempt from making meaningful carbon-reduction commitments. </p>
<p>Some OECD countries (<a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/environmental-indicators/greenhouse-gas-emissions.html">such as Canada</a>) have paid lip service to the agreement but done little. Still others (such as Australia) have made some progress reducing emissions but have no long-term plan, relying instead on bumper-sticker slogans about “technology not taxes” and, until recently, hiding behind <a href="https://www.afr.com/opinion/command-and-control-no-substitute-for-a-carbon-market-20190226-h1bqpq">dodgy accounting tricks</a>.</p>
<p>That aside, it’s hard to see how the world solves what amounts to — as economists put it — a “coordination problem” without global agreements. </p>
<p>For roughly half a century economists have been unanimous about what those agreements must involve — a price on carbon. The 2018 economics Nobel prize <a href="https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/economic-sciences/2018/nordhaus/facts/">awarded to William Nordhaus</a> was belated recognition of this fact.</p>
<p>A price on carbon — in the form of a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme — is a way to use the power of the market’s price mechanism to balance the good that comes from emitting carbon (economic development) with the bad (climate change). </p>
<p>Set the price of carbon at the true social cost of carbon (taking into account all the ills that come from climate change) and the invisible hand of the market will balance the pros and cons. Think of it as Friedrich von Hayek meets Greta Thunberg.</p>
<p>But there is another, less dramatic way to harness market forces to reduce carbon emissions: disclosure.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-a-global-carbon-price-could-soon-be-a-reality-australia-should-prepare-149919">Vital Signs: a global carbon price could soon be a reality – Australia should prepare</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Public disclosure works</h2>
<p>The idea starts with this: plenty of consumers want to reduce their carbon footprint and are willing to pay for it. That’s why people recycle, use green energy even when it’s more expensive, buy low-carbon clothing, and drive electric cars. A bunch of folks are willing to pay to be green.</p>
<p>The success of companies such as eco-friendly sneaker company Allbirds and electic vehicle maker Tesla exist is evidence of the market catering to these consumer preferences. But can we make it easier for consumers to express their environmental preferences? Can we turbocharge the market for greener products?</p>
<p>A working paper published this month by the <a href="https://www.nber.org/digest-202109/emissions-disclosure-requirements-lower-co2-output">National Bureau of Economic Research</a> suggests the answer is “yes”. </p>
<p>Authored by Carnegie Mellon University economists Lavender Yang, Nicholas Muller and Pierre Jinghong Liang, the paper looks at the US Environmental Protectino Agency’s <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting">Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program</a>. In effect from 2010, this has required big carbon emitters (including all power plants that produce more than 25,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year) to publicly disclose how much they emit.</p>
<p>The authors look at the effect of this disclosure program on the electric power industry, which accounts for 27% of all US emissions.</p>
<p>The results are striking. Plants subject to greater scrutiny reduced their carbon emissions by 7%. Plants owned by publicly listed companies reduced their emissions by 10%. Large public companies, such as those in the S&P500 stock index, cut emissions even more (11%).</p>
<hr>
<p><strong>Accountability increases environmental performance</strong></p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Change in estimated CO2 emissions for GHGRP plants and non-GHGRP plants by year using data from the US EPA's Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID)." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/422811/original/file-20210923-15-1mtc1e.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Change in estimated CO2 emissions for GHGRP plants and non-GHGRP plants by year using data from the US EPA’s Emissions & Generation Resource Integrated Database (eGRID).</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.nber.org/papers/w28984">NBER Working Paper 28984</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<h2>Responding to investor concerns</h2>
<p>The reason appears to be responsiveness to investors wanting companies to be more environmentally responsible. This explains why emissions went down more for public companies, and even more for large public companies, whose shares are more likely to be held by funds with an ESG (Environment, Social and Governance) mandate.</p>
<p>Some of these investors have pro-social preferences and want to invest their money in more sustainable companies. Others might not care about the environment per se, but know that lots of folks do. Businesses that cater to these consumer preferences have an advantage.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/vital-signs-a-3-point-plan-to-reach-net-zero-emissions-by-2050-132436">Vital Signs: a 3-point plan to reach net-zero emissions by 2050</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The dark side to this is that the decline in emissions by major plants was partially offset by an increase in emissions by plants under the 25,000-tonne threshold not subject to disclosure.</p>
<p>In other words, companies responded to the incentives provided by disclosure requirements. Those who could “hide” their emissions did not.</p>
<p>The lesson is that disclosure requirements work. They force companies to own up to their customers and investors, and face the reality of their emissions behaviour. But we need to apply it to all companies, not just big ones.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/168560/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Holden is President-elect of the Academy of the Social Sciences in Australia.</span></em></p>Disclosure requirements work, forcing companies to own up to their customers and investors.Richard Holden, Professor of Economics, UNSW SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1678672021-09-16T12:11:41Z2021-09-16T12:11:41Z4 strategies for a global breakthrough on energy and climate change<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421446/original/file-20210915-25-w0b0qb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C83%2C3992%2C2886&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Reducing fossil use and increasing renewable energy worldwide are crucial to both sustainable development and fighting climate change.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/chinese-worker-from-wuhan-guangsheng-photovoltaic-company-news-photo/684080492">Kevin Frayer/Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Two important global events are coming up that are widely hoped to help address what the United Nations calls the “dual challenge” – fighting climate change and ensuring that poorer countries can develop sustainably. Energy is a central theme in both.</p>
<p>For the first time in 40 years, the U.N. General Assembly is convening a <a href="https://www.un.org/en/hlde-2021/page/world-leaders-meet-24-september">global summit of world leaders focused solely on energy</a>. If all goes as planned on Sept. 24, 2021, they will <a href="https://mailchi.mp/un/hlde2021_updateissue13-4937782">consider a road map</a> that includes tripling investment in renewable power and making affordable modern and clean energy available to everyone everywhere within the decade. </p>
<p>The second event is the <a href="https://ukcop26.org/">U.N. climate conference</a> in November, where negotiators representing nations around the world will be asked to ramp up their countries’ efforts to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.</p>
<p>This year’s climate summit will be the first to assess progress toward meeting the <a href="https://unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/the-paris-agreement/the-paris-agreement">2015 Paris climate agreement</a>. There are a few new efforts – President Joe Biden announced on Sept. 17 plans for a U.S. and European Union <a href="https://theconversation.com/biden-eu-urge-30-methane-emissions-cuts-a-move-crucial-for-protecting-climate-and-health-and-it-can-pay-for-itself-168220">pledge to cut methane emissions</a> by 30% within the decade and urged other countries to join – but there are also some remaining sticking points in how nations will meet their promised targets. Resolving these will be important for the credibility of the agreement and the willingness of developing countries to commit to further progress. </p>
<p>As <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=DAwwVkwAAAAJ&hl=en">climate</a> <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=sfI-c0YAAAAJ&hl=en">policy experts</a> with decades of experience in international energy policy, we have identified four strategic priorities that would help provide the foundations for success in cleaning up both energy and climate change. </p>
<h2>What has been achieved so far?</h2>
<p>Despite the ambitious goals in many countries, the world’s greenhouse gas emissions have continued to rise. The year 2020 was a brief exception – <a href="https://www.iea.org/articles/global-energy-review-co2-emissions-in-2020">emissions fell</a> significantly due to the global pandemic – but that trend has already reversed as economies recover.</p>
<p>The statements released by world leaders after the recent <a href="https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/g7-climate-and-environment-ministers-meeting-may-2021-communique/g7-climate-and-environment-ministers-communique-london-21-may-2021">G7</a> and <a href="https://www.g20.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021_G20-Energy-Climate-joint-Ministerial-Communique.pdf">G20</a> meetings underlined recognition of the problem. Still, very few countries and companies have detailed plans and budgets in place to meet their own high-level goals.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Illustration showing where to cut emissions soonest most efficiently" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/421580/original/file-20210916-21-15niz3l.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=632&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Meeting the Paris climate agreement goal of keeping global warming under 1.5 C (2.7 F) will require reducing fossil fuels and increasing renewable energy and energy efficiency, as well as keeping carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere with techniques such as carbon capture and storage or use (CCS and CCU).</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">International Renewable Energy Agency</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>4 strategic priorities</h2>
<p>Getting energy and climate policies worldwide headed in the same direction is a daunting task. Here are four strategies that could help countries navigate this space:</p>
<p>1) Deploy carbon pricing and markets more widely.</p>
<p>Only a few <a href="https://carbonpricingdashboard.worldbank.org/">countries, states and regions currently have carbon prices</a> that are high enough to push polluters to cut their carbon dioxide emissions. The climate negotiations in Scotland will focus on getting the rules right for global markets. </p>
<p>Making these markets function well and transparently is essential for effectively meeting the many net zero climate goals that have been announced by countries from <a href="https://www.un.org/en/climatechange/net-zero-pledges-grow">Japan and South Korea to the U.S., China and the European Union</a>. These include rules on the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2011/sep/16/carbon-offset-projects-carbon-emissions">use of carbon offsets</a> – they allow individuals or companies to invest in projects that help balance out their own emissions – which are currently highly contentious and largely not functional or transparent. </p>
<p>2) Focus attention on <a href="https://www.irena.org/publications/2020/Sep/Reaching-Zero-with-Renewables">the “hard-to-decarbonize” sectors</a>.</p>
<p>Shipping, road freight and industries like cement and steel are all difficult places for cutting emissions, in part because they don’t yet have tested, affordable replacements for fossil fuels. While there are some <a href="https://theconversation.com/bendable-concrete-and-other-co2-infused-cement-mixes-could-dramatically-cut-global-emissions-152544">innovative ideas</a>, competitiveness concerns – such as companies moving production outside regulated areas to avoid regulations – have been a key barrier to progress.</p>
<p>Europe is trying to overcome this barrier by establishing a <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/12228-EU-Green-Deal-carbon-border-adjustment-mechanism-_en">carbon border adjustment mechanism</a>, with emission levies on imports similar to those for European producers. The Biden administration is also <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-23/biden-exploring-border-adjustment-tax-to-fight-climate-change">exploring such rules</a>. </p>
<p>3) Get China and other emerging economies on board.</p>
<p>It is clear that coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel, needs to be phased out fast, and doing so is critical to both the U.N.’s energy and climate agendas. Given that more than <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-climate-change-china-coal/china-generated-over-half-worlds-coal-fired-power-in-2020-study-idUSKBN2BK0PZ">half of global coal</a> is consumed in China, its actions stand out, although other emerging economies such as India, Indonesia and Vietnam are also critical.</p>
<p>This will not be easy. <a href="https://www.carbonbrief.org/mapped-worlds-coal-power-plants">Notably half of the Chinese coal plants are less than a decade old</a>, a fraction of a coal plant’s typical lifespan. </p>
<p>4) Focus on innovation.</p>
<p>Support for innovation has brought us cutting-edge renewable power and electric vehicles much faster than anticipated. More is possible. For example, <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-us-just-set-ambitious-offshore-wind-power-targets-what-will-it-take-to-meet-them-158136">offshore wind</a>, geothermal, carbon capture and <a href="https://theconversation.com/hydrogen-is-one-future-fuel-oil-execs-and-environmentalists-could-both-support-as-rival-countries-search-for-climate-solutions-159201">green hydrogen</a> are new developments that can make a big difference in years to come.</p>
<p>Who leads in developing these new technologies, and which companies, will reap important economic benefits. They will also support millions of new jobs and economic growth. </p>
<p>Luckily, investors are actively supporting these technologies. More investors are starting to believe in energy transitions and <a href="https://about.bnef.com/blog/energy-transition-investment-hit-500-billion-in-2020-for-first-time/">are putting their money into developing the associated technologies</a>. Still, increased government support for research and development funding can catalyze these efforts.</p>
<p>An opportunity also exists to broaden innovation efforts beyond technology, to a systemic approach that includes dimensions such as <a href="https://www.irena.org/events/2020/Aug/Thirty-Innovations-for-a-Renewable-Powered-Future">market design, social acceptance, equity, regulatory frameworks and business models</a>. Energy systems are deeply interconnected to social issues, so changing them will not be successful if the solutions focus only on technology. </p>
<h2>Not one solution</h2>
<p>It is likely that U.N. energy and climate deliberations over the coming months will continue to move in fits and starts. The real work needs to take place at a more practical implementation level, such as in states, provinces and municipalities. If there is one thing we have learned, it is that mitigating climate change will be a long slog, not a one-off political announcement or celebrity endorsement. It requires much more than simply repeating platitudes.</p>
<p>Politicians need to show that the many energy transitions emerging are good for economies and communities, and can create long-lasting jobs and tax revenues. While it’s uncontested that <a href="https://irena.org/-/media/Files/IRENA/Agency/Publication/2021/Jun/IRENA_World_Energy_Transitions_Outlook_2021.pdf?la=en&hash=C2117A51B74EAB29727609D778CDD16C49E56E83">the benefits of greenhouse gas mitigation far exceed the cost</a>, it is not always easy to marry this with short-term political cycles. </p>
<p><em>This article was updated Sept. 17, 2021, with Biden’s methane pledge announcement.</em></p>
<p>[<em>The Conversation’s Politics + Society editors pick need-to-know stories.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/politics-weekly-74/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=politics-need-to-know">Sign up for Politics Weekly</a>._]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167867/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Energy and climate policies aren’t always headed in the same direction, but if they work together they can tackle two of the biggest challenges of our time.Morgan Bazilian, Professor of Public Policy and Director, Payne Institute, Colorado School of MinesDolf Gielen, Payne Institute Fellow, Colorado School of MinesLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1675012021-09-14T16:57:59Z2021-09-14T16:57:59ZClimate action is at risk because of the snap federal election call<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420909/original/file-20210913-15-miquyy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C457%2C6500%2C3833&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The words Government Arson are painted on a shipping container on a property that was destroyed by the White Rock Lake wildfire in August in British Columbia. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck </span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Canadian voters concerned about the environment and climate change find themselves presented with a series of dilemmas with the Sept. 20 election almost upon us.</p>
<p>The environment is often a forgotten issue once politicians are on the campaign trail. But this time, propelled by the <a href="https://bc.ctvnews.ca/b-c-wildfires-nearly-250-blazes-burning-across-the-province-60-evacuation-orders-in-place-1.5558086">catastrophic wildfires</a> in British Columbia this summer and the dire conclusions in the recently released <a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/">sixth assessment report</a> of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, climate change sits at or near the top of the <a href="https://angusreid.org/federal-election-top-issues/">list of issues</a> most important to voters. Yet Justin Trudeau’s early election call may have set the stage for a major setback on climate action.</p>
<p>The election call was met with immediate questions <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/federal-election-call-1.6141189">about its rationale</a>, given a minority but relatively stable and productive Parliament, the crisis in <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-afghanistan-last-flight-1.6153899">Afghanistan</a> and a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/covid-4th-wave-arrival-1.6136506">mounting fourth wave of COVID-19</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/rhetoric-check-parliament-wasnt-toxic-justin-trudeau-just-wants-a-majority-167245">Rhetoric Check: Parliament wasn't toxic — Justin Trudeau just wants a majority</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p><a href="https://newsinteractives.cbc.ca/elections/poll-tracker/canada/?cmp=dm_fd21_fbig_pt_paid&fbclid=PAAaaALmzG4NF2HhSBCFwzBOnRiNJVZ9txuSqHS2L9O4RbLQSk76NYAubevUk_aem_Adp-dGI-xcGh9W3HlJfhDe69tljH5h25v2NetLPn_2PJou84Bi0WyyWvZ3KtHjU5ifaCeHDV0V6rKV_lPXPofgbFf0IxBvH7fTbJy4lFx7_L0wU5FhY85QbHLtT34TT4-0c">Polls are suggesting</a> that after a weak start, Trudeau’s Liberals are only just catching up to Erin O’Toole’s Conservatives.</p>
<p>This is likely due to O'Toole’s largely successful repositioning of his party towards the political centre, including a <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/opinion-election-conservative-party-climate-platform-1.6155156">belated recognition</a> of the reality of climate change and the need for some form of carbon pricing. </p>
<p>But it’s important to look beyond the rebranding and consider what a Conservative win might mean for Canada’s approach to climate change.</p>
<h2>Climate action in motion</h2>
<p>Progressive voters have been left confused and more than a little annoyed by Trudeau’s election call. The Liberal minority government that resulted from the October 2019 election was dependent on the support of Jagmeet Singh’s NDP and, to a lesser extent, Yves-Francois Blanchet’s Bloc Québécois to survive. The result had been considerable action on climate change and a host of other issues.</p>
<p>The Liberal government, bolstered by a series of court decisions culminating in a <a href="https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/cb/2021/38663-38781-39116-eng.aspx">March 2021 Supreme Court of Canada ruling that upheld the validity of its backstop carbon pricing system</a>, had implemented the federal system, as promised, in those provinces without adequate carbon pricing systems of their own. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-the-supreme-court-ruling-on-national-carbon-pricing-means-for-the-fight-against-climate-change-157675">What the Supreme Court ruling on national carbon pricing means for the fight against climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The federal <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work.html">backstop charge</a> on heating and transportation fuels now applies in Ontario, Manitoba, Yukon, Alberta, Saskatchewan and Nunavut. An <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/services/climate-change/pricing-pollution-how-it-will-work.html">output-based pricing system</a> for industrial emitters is in place in Ontario, New Brunswick, Manitoba, Prince Edward Island, Yukon, Nunavut and partially in Saskatchewan.</p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A person fills up a truck with gas." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420911/original/file-20210913-23-ap55p8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A person fills up a truck with gas in Toronto.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Christopher Katsarov</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Although the carbon pricing system goes far further than any previous federal government has gone to implement substantive climate policies, it’s not without significant weaknesses. </p>
<p>The burden of the pricing system falls overwhelmingly on individual consumers and households rather than industry. In addition to that unfairness, the effective cost to industrial facilities is far too low to significantly affect their behaviour. What’s more, the standard applied by the federal government to provinces seeking exemptions on the basis of their own systems <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-ottawa-has-a-self-made-mess-to-clean-up-before-resentment-toward/">has been profoundly inconsistent</a>. </p>
<h2>Liberal climate commitments</h2>
<p>At the same time, the Liberals <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/healthy-environment-healthy-economy.html">had committed</a> to moving the carbon price to $170 a tonne by 2030 and revising <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2021/04/canadas-enhanced-nationally-determined-contribution.html">what’s known as the Nationally Determined Contribution</a> to reduce emissions under the 2015 Paris climate agreement. The Liberals originally committed to a 30 per cent reduction by 2030 and increased it to a 45 per cent reduction. It also adopted a broader net zero emission target for 2050. </p>
<p>A national phaseout of coal-fired electricity <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-38056587">has been accelerated</a> and new programs for funding <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-transit-fund-1.5908346">public transit</a>, <a href="https://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy-efficiency/transportation-alternative-fuels/zero-emission-vehicle-infrastructure-program/21876">electric vehicles</a> and energy-efficient renovations <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/home-renovation-green-energy-1.6041876">for buildings</a> are under way or proposed. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A woman prepares to plug in her electric vehicle" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420914/original/file-20210913-19-1xii0za.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A woman prepares to plug in her electric vehicle in Markham, Ont.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In a reversal from the government’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/canadas-liberals-make-it-hard-for-green-voters-to-love-them-122935">previous contradictory</a> position of both pursuing reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and the expansion of fossil fuel exports, Trudeau <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-liberals-pledge-cap-on-oil-sector-emissions/">has reaffirmed</a> the commitment implied in the Liberals’ <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/services/environment/weather/climatechange/climate-plan/climate-plan-overview/healthy-environment-healthy-economy.html">December 2020</a> climate policy paper to capping and reducing emissions from the fossil fuel sector.</p>
<p>Beyond the environment, the government has also adopted legislation recognizing the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (<a href="https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/declaration/index.html">UNDRIP</a>), and has been moving forward with a <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/canada-put-up-c30-bln-long-awaited-national-childcare-program-2021-04-19/">national child-care plan</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/canadian-election-2021-will-the-national-child-care-plan-survive-166084">Canadian election 2021: Will the national child-care plan survive?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Low voter turnout?</h2>
<p>The risks in this context enormous. The unpopular and unwelcome election call, in combination with the continuing threat of COVID-19, is a potential recipe for low voter turnout. Under Canada’s first-past-the-post electoral system, there’s the potential for irregular electoral outcomes. </p>
<p>The core Conservative voter is generally <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/environment-climate-change/news/2021/04/canadas-enhanced-nationally-determined-contribution.html">loyal and reliable</a>, giving O'Toole a significant advantage in such a scenario.</p>
<p>Other factors may also favour the Conservatives, including the <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-blocs-strength-could-determine-who-forms-the-next-government/">Bloc Québécois’s</a> potential for growth in Québec. Although the federal Greens have <a href="https://www.thestar.com/politics/federal/2021/09/03/peoples-party-equals-greens-support-maxime-bernier-could-win-his-old-seat-poll-analysis-says.html">diminished as a factor</a> outside of a few specific ridings, the risks of vote-splitting between the Liberals and NDP exist.</p>
<p>The situation could lead to a Conservative victory and even a majority.</p>
<p>O’Toole has, so far, done a skillful job moving his party from the right to the moderate centre, but major questions still have to be asked what sort of government he would actually lead. Although acknowledging the reality of climate change, his party’s climate policies, particularly on carbon pricing, remain <a href="https://institute.smartprosperity.ca/Election2021">weak shadows</a> of what’s being proposed by the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="O'Toole and his wife walk past a mural on his campaign bus that shows loons." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=341&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=341&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=341&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420915/original/file-20210913-27-1qpnqiy.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=429&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole and his wife, Rebecca, walk past a mural on his campaign bus in Whitby, Ont.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Frank Gunn</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Conservatives more popular in the West</h2>
<p>The Conservatives may see some gains in Ontario and Québec, but they’re still fundamentally grounded in Alberta and Saskatchewan where many voters are hostile to climate action and dependent on resource development industries.</p>
<p>A Conservative cabinet would likely include more than a few holdovers from the Stephen Harper era, which was defined by the abandonment of Canada’s international climate change commitments, particularly the <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-pulls-out-of-kyoto-protocol-1.999072">Kyoto Protocol</a>.</p>
<p>A new Conservative federal government would likely draw heavily on Jason Kenney’s government in Alberta, and Doug Ford’s in Ontario, for political staff and advisers. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man rides his rickshaw with a Recall Kenney sign attached." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/420916/original/file-20210913-19-18np7v8.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=508&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A man rides his rickshaw with a Recall Kenney sign during a protest in support of COVID-19 health orders.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jason Franson</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Both governments have been unwilling to act on <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/abandoning-oil-and-gas-a-utopian-impossibility-alberta-s-premier-says-1.6135512">climate change</a> and have been criticized for their poor management of the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-ontario-can-recover-from-doug-fords-covid-19-governance-disaster-159783">COVID-19 pandemic</a>. They remain overwhelmingly pro-industry, carbon-intense and development-friendly.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/doug-fords-ontario-whos-winning-and-what-it-means-for-the-provinces-future-112127">Doug Ford’s Ontario: Who's winning, and what it means for the province’s future</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This all makes for some very difficult choices for voters concerned about climate change. Many would prefer a Liberal minority government dependent on the NDP, Bloc Québécois and/or Greens for support. </p>
<p>Such outcomes are, however, notoriously difficult to engineer from the perspective of individual voters.</p>
<p>O’Toole’s recent stumble on <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-otoole-risks-electoral-gains-with-stance-on-gun-control/">gun control</a> may significantly weaken his party’s appeal to moderate voters, particularly in Québec and in urban areas. </p>
<p>But Canadians are still faced with an unwanted election, that has placed climate progress at unnecessary risk.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/167501/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Mark Winfield receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada </span></em></p>Canadians are faced with an unwanted election that’s placed climate progress at unnecessary risk.Mark Winfield, Professor of Environmental Studies, York University, CanadaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.