Download Att to 313 Ptok

Gregor Ptok LLB, LLM
24 April 2015
Dear Prime Minister,
Submission on Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target
Thank you for the opportunity of making a submission to your review of the post-2020
emissions reduction target.
When setting Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target, I would ask that the
economic, social and environmental impacts of the target be considered in a balanced way.
If trade-offs need to be made, I would ask that the following be considered:
1. The economy is a sub-set of human, social relations. Without people, there can be no
economy.
Ultimately, the way an economy is structured is by agreement between the people. If we
wanted to, we could agree to run our economy differently. What we now consider
“normal” has not always been part of the way societies have structured their trade and
financial relations. For example, there were times when the charging of interest was not
part of trade and financial relations.
2. Societies, groups of people living in the same area, are a sub-set of the environment.
Without habitable environment, there can be no society.
Volcanic eruptions, radioactive accidents, floods or natural disasters can make an area
uninhabitable for a short time or for generations.
3. To decide which to prioritise (economy, society, or environment), I hope that timescales
of impacts, risks, and maximising opportunities are factors in the decision-making
process.
3.1. Timescales of impacts
If significant action to mitigate impacts of climate change was taken and a “high”
post-2020 emissions reduction target was set:
- Negative economic impacts would occur in the short-term. An emissions target
of a 40 to 60 percent cut by 2030, in the words of the CEO of the Minerals
Council, would "slash economic growth, real wages and household living
-
standards.”i
If not action was taken, there would likely be no impact on the economy in the
short-term.
Social impacts would flow from the changes in the economy.
Positive environmental impacts would occur in the long-term in that the worst
effects (i.e. a greater than 2 degrees increase in average global temperature)
would be averted.
If no action was taken, there would likely be negative environmental impacts in
the long-term. Considering an increase in over 4 degrees by the end of the
centuryii is similar to the temperature difference to the last ice age (which was 5
degrees), this potentially has devastating effects on society and economy.
3.2. Risk-assessment
Greg Craveniii has developed a risk-assessment matrix to consider the impacts of
climate change and whether to take significant action to mitigate.
Whilst a lot of energy is spent discussing whether climate change is happening and
caused by humans, the question is not whether it is or not. Rather, he suggests the
question is whether to take action or not.
His model does not include the “social” sphere, which I will deal with afterwards.
Anthropogenic climate
change is real
Anthropogenic climate
change is not real
Take significant action
Action was necessary and was
taken.
Take no significant action
Action was necessary,
but was not taken.
As a result, risks were
minimised, resulting in the
smallest possible damage to
economy, society and
environment.
Risks were not minimised with
significant damage to economy,
society and environment
results.
No action was necessary, but
action was taken.
No action was necessary,
and was not taken.
There may have been some
damage to the economy.
No damage to the environment,
society or economy.
I agree with his conclusion that significant action should be taken.
The trade-off of short-term economic gain over long-term environmental, social and
economic loss is – in my view – too short-sighted. Not only is there a significant risk
of large impacts on the economy in future, these will likely pale in comparison to
impacts on society and the foundations for human life.
3.3. Maximising opportunities
Decisions we now make have potentially far-reaching consequences.
Whilst some can be reversed, others severely restrict the opportunities for future
governments, businesses and people. For example, not reigning in global warming
will put our future at risk as even if future governments and people may want to
severely restrict emissions, what we have set in train may not be stoppable. They
may find themselves in a similar situation to the passengers of the ill-fated
Germanwings plane.
4. It is my submission that an ambitious emissions reduction target should be set, such as
the one recommended by the Climate Change Authority.
Whilst in the short-term there may be impacts on the economy, it will enable our society
to have a conversation about the role of the economy and other factors in decisionmaking. It will also enable us to discuss what sort of society we want to create, including
the level of income inequality we consider appropriate.
In my submission, the Australian target should not be predicated on “what others are
doing”, but should truly lead the global response. As one of the largest per capita
emitters globally, our way of life is more dependent on fossil fuels than that in other
countries. If we are unable to have a significant impact on our fossil fuel use, our
economy will crash more severely when fossil fuels (especially petrol) run out. The
concerns raised by the CEO of the Minerals Council will then become reality. Better to
consider and deal with the risks earlier.
In terms of additional policy responses, proven policies such as an emissions trading
scheme and direct action (if emissions reductions can be shown after two years) should
be used. Further, businesses that profit through mining and exporting fossil fuels should
be accountable for the emissions those fuels will generate.
Thank you for considering the points raised in this submission.
Kind regards,
Gregor Ptok
i
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/climate-change-authority-targets-too-big-aburden-says-government-20150422-1mqxme.html
ii Climate Change 2014 – Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers; Intergovernmental Panel on
Climate Change, p.11
iii https://youtu.be/AE6Kdo1AQmY