Steggal Climate Change Bill Submission December2020
I wish to affirm my strong support for the Climate Change Bill tabled in Parliament by the independent MP Zali Steggall. In my opinion it is crucial that a national target for net zero emissions be written into law, and that the Commonwealth provide the basis for a strong, shared legal and policy framework for climate action, in collaboration with the states and territories. The proposal to set up an Independent Advisory Commission (IAC) is an excellent one, and would address the issues of nebulousness and lack of transparency that characterise the Federal Government’s technology ‘road map’.
The proposed Climate Change Act sets out a clear target, net zero by 2050. Given not only the evident necessity to act before climatic ‘tipping points’ are reached, but given also the rapid and continuing reduction in the cost of renewable energy generation and storage, specific provision should be made for the proposed independent Climate Change Commission to reassess the target date of 2050 for net zero emissions, with the option to legislate for the date to be brought forward. I would prefer that the date be set at 2030, or 2035 at the latest. (Given the important role of private transport in the national energy budget, in my wildest dreams I also hope that the Bill provides the possibility that Australia could follow the example of the Parliament of Norway, where a goal has been set that by 2025 all new cars sold should be zero emission (battery electric or hydrogen) vehicles.)
As I write this submission, two of today’s news items strike me as immediately relevant to the issue of addressing climate change. These are: the excitement among the scientific community at the annual spawning event about to occur on the Great Barrier Reef, with the Reef now in serious trouble due mainly to the effects of global warming; and the issue of the enormous cost of decommissioning the abandoned Northern Endeavour oil and gas rig off the coast of the Northern Territory, a cost to be borne by taxpayers. These two issues bring home with intensity the reasons why I have been a committed environmentalist all my (long) adult life.
My environmental concerns are both personal and professional. I have worked in the field of environmentally responsible building and precinct design since the early 1960s, as architect, researcher and university academic. I designed my first ‘passive solar’ house, in rural Victoria, in 1965. I also worked for decades with the Permaculture Institute of Nepal, discovering with the Nepalese farmers with which PION worked, the possibilities of good thermal design offered by non-industrial ‘natural’ materials. (Sadly, the founder of PION died very recently.)
The impetus for my early work was ethical and even emotional, the necessity to reduce the environmental impact of the built environment on the natural environment; the short-lived ‘oil crisis’ of the mid-70s led to an emphasis on reducing the use of fossil fuels. I was a co-author of D. White et al., Seeds for Change: Creatively Confronting the Energy Crisis, Melbourne: CCV/Patchwork Press, published in 1978, before the greenhouse effect was well understood, so with an emphasis on energy conservation. Though the effect on the climate of carbon dioxide emissions into the atmosphere had been known for a century, the global impact of the ‘greenhouse effect’ was broadly acknowledged only in the 1980s. Later referred to as global warming or climate change, the catastrophic climatic effects of CO2 emissions are now universally recognised.
My experience with the design and construction of low-energy buildings, initially those described as ‘passive-solar’, that is, directly utilising solar input, insulation, orientation, shading and natural ventilation, but later involving the installation of solar panels, has always made it clear that effective energy conservation leads to positive economic outcomes — it saves money. And with the steep reductions in the cost of renewables, the economic benefits of the use of avoiding fossil fuel-derived energy are increasingly evident.
The positive economics of renewable energy combined with energy conservation can be typified on a small scale by my own passive-solar house. It was constructed in 1984, has a solar hot-water service still functioning after 36 years, makes good use of natural lighting, and requires no air-conditioning. In mid 2009 the (few) photovoltaic solar panels required to power the house were installed, making it a zero-emissions building, and extremely inexpensive to run, even with the relatively low efficiency and high cost of the pv solar panels at that time.
A decade later, the impact of the 2020 covid crisis on the economy presents Australia with the opportunity to reduce the cost of electricity to the whole community, to build a new and vibrant economy. (Even leaving the covid crisis and the issue of fractious relations with China aside, Australia must address the economic problems that are inevitable now that many countries with which Australia has trade relations — the European Union, Japan and South Korea — and China — have strengthened their emissions reduction targets moving towards zero emissions by 2050. Even in the USA, President-elect Biden won the election on a strong climate change platform.)
In relation to the opportunities presented by the post-covid challenge, The Clean Energy Council (CEC) (>cleanenergycouncil.org.au>) has published a plan for a Clean Recovery, based on the development of renewable energy infrastructure for local use and for export. In May 2020 the CEC held a forum with representatives from industry, politics and the community to discuss the potential of a Clean Recovery, the CEC’s plan to ‘kick-start the economy and create quality Australian jobs’.
‘The economic recovery from the impacts of COVID-19 presents Australia with an incredible opportunity to drive economic growth by injecting $50 billion worth of new investment into the economy, creating over 50,000 jobs for regional Australians while building the infrastructure necessary to create a 21st century electricity system and taking substantial steps to reducing Australia’s contribution to climate change.’
Australia is not only one of the countries likely to be most badly affected by climate change, but given its location, size, geography, and scientific/technical human assets it is also the country with the greatest and most economically attractive renewable energy resources. On the Renew Economy web site
BloombergNEF attributes the falling costs of these technologies to a combination of technology improvements, manufacturing efficiencies, and the impact of policy instruments such as reverse auctions.’ Economies of scale and the growing experience of developers also play their part.
The political resistance to national action on climate change appears to be based on mistaken assumptions about the cost of a rapid transition, in both economic and employment terms. (The perceived effects — in my opinion mistakenly perceived — on employment of a transition to zero emissions may of course be seen to have political implications in terms of the re-election of incumbents.) Furthermore, those resisting the introduction of net zero emissions targets do not appear to have considered the enormous cost of NOT addressing carbon emissions.
So not only is time running out (remember the Great Barrier Reef), but opportunities are being missed. As long ago as 2010, the University of Melbourne Energy Research Institute and Beyond Zero Emissions (lead authors Matthew Wright and Patrick Hearps), produced Australian Sustainable Energy • Zero Carbon Australia. Stationary Energy Plan: • a ten year roadmap for 100% renewable energy • base-load energy supplied by renewable sources.
2