13 September 2016, Renew Economy, Coalition, Labor agree to slash $500m from ARENA budget. The Australian Renewable Energy Agency will have its funding slashed by $500 million after Labor and the Coalition agreed on Tuesday to a compromise deal on the government’s omnibus budget repair package. As RenewEconomy flagged last week, the compromise came after ARENA sought to strike a last-minute compromise on its funding position, in an effort to continue its support of critical research and early stage development in new renewable energy and storage technologies. Several scenarios were reportedly outlined by the Agency’s board, including that the cuts be reduced to $300 million or $500 million. The Agency has been awaiting news of its fate since March, when the Turnbull-led Coalition proposed to essentially de-fund it and replace it with a new “Clean Energy Innovation Fund.” The two mainstream parties finally agreed on stripping $500 million from the remaining $1.3 billion legislated budget in the agency that was created by Labor in 2012, but which the Coalition has spent three years trying to dismantle, along with the Climate Council, the Climate Change Authority, the carbon price, and originally the renewable energy target and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. There has also been a furious public and industry-based campaign to save ARENA, both from state governments, the renewable energy industry, NGOs, and researchers, who warn that Australia will face an exodus of R&D capabilities and new technologies if the cuts go ahead. Just last week, ARENA announced the 12 large-scale PV projects that won grants in what many thought might be the agency’s last major funding round. The tender was credited for reducing solar PV costs by 40 per cent, and a similar program is being sought for large-scale solar thermal with storage. Labor says it will seek talks with the Coalition over the funding priorities for ARENA. Both parties had expressed interest in solar thermal with storage, which is considered a critical new technology for a high renewables grid. In the meantime, the party is taking credit for “saving” ARENA. But others are not so complimentary, like the Greens, who described Labor as “clean energy charlatans” because of the move. “Labor had absolutely no reason to cut half a billion dollars out of ARENA,” climate change spokesman Adam Bandt said. “If Bill Shorten had joined with the Greens and the crossbench, we could have stared the Coalition down and found fairer places to raise revenue.” Read more here
Tag Archives: Fed Govt
13 September 2016, Renew Economy, Interminable climate argument is costing us solutions for our future. It is fair to say that people are getting fairly tired of the climate change debate in Australia. Whenever the issue emerges, all you see and hear is heated disagreement. Usually name calling then ensues – “environment evangelists”, “big polluters” and political “sell outs” become all too common catch phrases. These are points that avoid addressing the fundamentals of what we are trying to achieve.That is, to make effective, pragmatic decisions and to take action now that will address the economic and safety challenges climate change is confronting us with. It’s not a difficult concept. And we have to play a credible part in assisting the rest of the world to do this.Yet, over the last week or so, we have seen tiresome name calling return after the Climate Change Authority – the Parliament’s climate change advisory group – released a report that suggested a fresh approach to these decisions and actions. It was asked to outline a pathway for the current Parliament to agree on a policy framework that would actually stop Australia’s emissions from continuing to increase, so they would start to fall, in line with the international commitments Australia has made under the Paris climate agreement last year. This is an agreement around 180 countries of the world have entered into in an historic attempt to deliver economic prosperity and safety to all of us. This report was quickly followed by a dissenting report from two of the Authority’s own members, which stated that the Climate Change Authority had not gone far enough and had made compromises for political expediency. They said it had failed in its own mandate to provide rigorous independent science-based advice to the Australian community. The merry go round continued. Once again we fell into discussing the merits of “emissions intensity schemes” and other arcane policy solutions. Read More here
7 September 2016, The Conversation, Pacific pariah: how Australia’s love of coal has left it out in the diplomatic cold. Australia’s Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull will have some explaining to do when he attends the Pacific Islands Forum leaders’ meeting in Pohnpei, Micronesia, this week. Australia’s continued determination to dig up coal, while refusing to dig deep to tackle climate change, has put it increasingly at odds with world opinion. Nowhere is this more evident than when Australian politicians meet with their Pacific island counterparts. It is widely acknowledged that Pacific island states are at the front line of climate change. It is perhaps less well known that, for a quarter of a century, Australia has attempted to undermine their demands in climate negotiations at the United Nations. The Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) – organised around an annual meeting between island leaders and their counterparts from Australia and New Zealand – is the Pacific region’s premier political forum. But island nations have been denied the chance to use it to press hard for their shared climate goals, because Australia has used the PIF to weaken the regional declarations put forward by Pacific nations at each key milestone in the global climate negotiation process. In the run-up to the 1997 UN Kyoto climate summit, Pacific island leaders lobbied internationally for new binding targets to reduce emissions. However, that year’s PIF leaders’ statement was toned down, simply calling for “recognition of climate change impacts”. Likewise, in the lead-up to the 2009 Copenhagen talks, Pacific island countries called for states to reduce emissions by 95% by 2050. But at that year’s PIF meeting in Cairns, the then prime minister, Kevin Rudd, convinced leaders to scale back the proposed target to 50%. Pacific media branded the outcome “a death warrant for Pacific Islanders”. Ahead of last year’s Paris summit, Australia again exercised its “veto power” over Pacific climate diplomacy. Over the preceding years Pacific island leaders had made their climate positions quite clear, both at UN discussions in New York and in a string of declarations including the Melanesian Spearhead Group Declaration on the Environment and Climate Change, the Polynesian Leaders’ Declaration on Climate Change, and the Suva Declaration on Climate Change. Read More here
5 September 2016: THE CLIMATE CHANGE AUTHORITY’S SPECIAL REVIEW ON AUSTRALIA’S CLIMATE GOALS AND POLICIES: TOWARDS A CLIMATE POLICY TOOLKIT MINORITY REPORT Professor Clive Hamilton AM Professor David Karoly 1. Introduction 1. As Members of the Climate Change Authority who have participated fully in the processes of the Special Review, we have reached the conclusion that the majority report does not respond adequately to the Review’s terms of reference and has not followed the principles set out on the Climate Change Authority Act (Section 12). We also disagree with several, but not all, of the major recommendations and conclusions of the majority report. We find the analysis used to defend some of the report’s recommendations inadequate. Overall, we view the majority report as a recipe for further delay in responding to the urgent need to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. 2. We regret that a consensus report has not been possible but feel that in good conscience we cannot lend our names to the majority report. After consideration, we have therefore decided to write a minority report. Access full minority report here Access Climate change Authority’s Special Review here