Australia pledges 26% emissions cut by 2030

Let’s take a look (well at some at least).

Whether this statement is true or not depends on which countries you include in the comparison. 2005 was an historically high year for emissions. “It’s nearly the same as New Zealand. Australians and our precious environment deserve better”.

Others, like Blair Palese of 350.org Australia, said they remain suspicious of how Australia will handle itself in the Paris talks.

This is true, but also a highly misleading comparison, especially in China’s case. And it would have helped limit the instant (and unfair) comparisons about why Australia was making less of an effort than other developed countries.

“This is a responsible and achievable target”, Abbott said in a statement.

Abbott was defensive about the target, which came in for a firm backlash from environmental groups and opposition politicians, saying it was “fairly and squarely in the middle of comparable economies”. The survey comes six months after Mr. Abbott survived a leadership challenge driven by slumping poll numbers.

And I wouldn’t worry about population growth.

But Mr Abbott and Ms Bishop maintained Australia is doing its bit when compared with like-economies and trading partners.

Environment Victoria said the targets, which it described as “inadequate, reckless and illogical”, had “the dirty fingerprints of Australia’s coal industry” all over them.

“The science tells us that on a global scale we need to move towards zero carbon emissions by mid-century to avoid the most serious impacts of climate change“, he said.

But Australia is the highest per capita emitter in the developed world and would remain so with this target: “So nothing changes the relativity”, Dr Jotzo said.

The Australian leader has also cut the country’s renewable energy target and abolished the Climate Commission, a body to provide public information on the effects of global warming.

Australia’s target for reduction in absolute emissions is significantly weaker than that of the United States and the EU, weaker than Canada’s, and on par with Japan’s. “And… there are 330,000 more employed Australians”, Mr Abbott replied. And it is wrong.

The country has been heavily criticised both domestically and internationally for failing to do more to make bigger cuts. China committed to stop growing its emissions by 2030, while the U.S. pledged deeper cuts of up to 28% by 2025. Signing up to a 50 per cent renewable energy target was seen as a positive, but it hasn’t yet got its mind around how to sell an ambitious emissions reduction target either.

The government has boasted Australia will meet its 2020 commitment to reduce emissions by 5 per cent on 2000 levels.

“Anything over a two degrees [increase in global temperatures] is the end of our country, we go underwater when that happens”, he told the ABC.

But nor can the government afford to ignore Australia’s particular circumstances as a resource-based economy with abundant supplies of cheap coal and gas.

Frank Jotzo, director of the Centre for Climate Economics and Policy at the Australian National University in Canberra, agreed the target fell far short of the global goal. It’s a whisker below Canada.

The hope for business is this longer-term target will allow the development of policy that extends beyond the next election and partisan finger pointing.

He added that meeting the target would still impose costs of about A$4bn (£1.9bn) on the economy by 2030, equivalent to 0.2 or 03 per cent of GDP.