Five to 15. The numbers sound so casual, so innocuous; like an age range for a clothing brand, or the height in centimetres of a tomato plant, or the amount of time before dinner is ready.
But the sad — and yes, inconvenient — truth is that we have less than this amount of time in years to solve climate change now. We now have between four and 10 years before climate tipping points may set in, leading to out-of-control climate change where we’ve lost the opportunity we have now to at least get the damn thing under control.
The Government’s carbon pollution reduction target of five to 15% by 2020, revealed today by a source reported in the SMH , derails the global climate change negotiations and condemns our generation to a future much worse than the ones our current politicians inherited when they took office.
Five to 15% throws a spanner in the works of our last hope to solve climate change through a global treaty. A senior Chinese climate advisor in Poznan yesterday joined the increasingly concerned chorus of warnings from other nations to Australia: any target range that doesn’t include at least 25% will lock in failure at the crucial climate negotiations next year in Copenhagen.
Five to 15% makes a mockery of the platform that the Labor party went to the polls with before last year’s climate election. And all the people who voted for a party promising genuine climate solutions have every right to feel betrayed.
Many people — even some environment groups — will say today that now the target is set we can’t change it; that it’s impossible; we have to move on to the next battle. Certainly, the government’s argument is that it is not politically possible to do more than 15% because of the pressure they are under from the Coalition and from Australia’s biggest polluting companies.
The motto of the Australian Youth Climate Coalition’s Your Targets = Our Future campaign for the past five weeks has been: “We must demand the impossible to avoid the unimaginable”.
These targets are not acceptable. The Government must go back to the drawing board. Or in this case, back to the cabinet room. And stay there until cabinet decides on a target range that at least includes the minimum number that leaves the possibility of a global deal based on 450 parts per million on the table. Which is, of course, as Garnuat found: 25%.
Obama’s new website, the cleverly named change.gov, features a quote in the top right-hand corner: “Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inherit today”.
If this is the flagship quote of the Obama administration, it gives me some hope as I think about those scary numbers: five to 15%. That simple goal Obama has set — leaving the world better off for our kids — should be the clearest motivator for all of our politicians, no matter what party, what age, or links to polluting companies.
Imagine your reaction to the rejection of this simple idea if you were actually aged five to fifteen.
But Kevin Rudd’s capitulation to five to 15% just made it a lot harder for the Obama administration and every other Government which hasn’t yet set 2020 targets, by being one of the first countries to set the benchmark so incredibly low.
Five to 15% is a small and short-sighted target range; one that refuses to recognise the short window of opportunity we have right now to make deep carbon pollution cuts that will solve climate change and also create new jobs, new industries and new export markets through a “green new deal” that strong targets could create.
When I work up this morning I remembered a quote from Arthur C. Clarke: “This is the first age that’s ever paid much attention to the future, which is a little ironic since we may not have one.”
China are on board, they are building sustainable cities and investing in renewables while all our technology is going to them and the Governator. Where is the investment? December 15 better bring some bloody action!
It’s a beautiful day? Don’t think so, not until I can enjoy the sun and stop thinking about how it’s going to be hotter for longer in summer-higher water restrictions will appear- all instead of scrapping the the pipeline and the de-sal plant (not to mention the channel deepening -what happened to that Crikey?).
We have the technology for solutions, they are there waiting, we don’t need targets we need flat-out action and political will, the parts per million will look after themselves.
This is typical of the alarmist claptrap that greens go on with. Instead of unquestionably accepting that global warming is man-made and engaging in never-ending hysterics, why can’t they get off their butts and spend time researching the literature on causes of climate change. A good place to start would be the The Australian of 18 July 2008 article at http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24036736-17803,00.html by scientist, Dr David Evans, who has spent years studying global warming. He concludes that man-caused global warming is a myth.
Yes – it is clear that big Kev and his useless mates Penny and Peter – to say nothing of Ross Garnaut – as they flap about assuring us that climate change really is an impending man-made disaster, really have absolutely no idea of the politics and the reality of the whole matter.
If they are right, and man is causing it, then urgent action is important, and that just is not 5-15 by 2020.
If they are wrong, 5-15 is right, because this pollution of our air should be stopped anyway.
Come on guys – it’s one or the other!!!
This news is very disappointing.
I am living in the UK at the moment and as an Australian I am a little embarrassed witnessing how much further ahead the Brits are in dealing with this pressing issue. Last month a new Climate Change Bill was passed that enshrines in law 32% emissions reduction targets for 2020 and 80% reductions by 2050. Over here both sides of politics acknowledge that climate change is a serious problem and in 8 months I have not yet seen or heard any substantive arguements between the different sides of politics regarding the need to act now and act fast. Yes, the legislation is not perfect, but the UK government is so far ahead of the Oz government it makes me sad.
I work in local government and even at this level, the local politicians are truly concerned about climate change and are pushing for even tougher emissions reductions targets and renewable energy initiatives.
Come on Oz, 5 to 15% reductions? It really is pathetic. Maybe we need the same kind of rivalry between the poms and the aussies with regards tackling climate change as exists on the sporting pitch . Because I have to say, the poms are kicking our asses!
Thank you for an excellent article Anne Rose.
Sadly this sounds like the end of Rudd’s promised “evidence -based policies”.
I fear future generations may be betrayed all the way to 6 degrees C ?
For the scale and time frame of runaway climate change, look at a recent paper published in:
http://www.opednews.com/articles/Dangerous-Climate-Change–by-Andrew-Glikson-081206-176.html
DANGEROUS CLIMATE CHANGE: LESSONS FROM THE RECENT HISTORY OF THE ATMOSPHERE
Andrew Glikson
Earth and paleo-climate scientist
Australian National University
Canberra, A.C.Y. 0200