Climate Change: Who Promises What?

Error message

  • Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in _menu_load_objects() (line 579 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/menu.inc).
  • Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Sat, 14/05/2022 - 4:14am in


In this election campaign the COALition has set the debating agenda. And they have done their best to bury climate change.

Permanently on the defensive, the Australian Labor Party has done little to change that. An attempt by Labor’s Penny Wong (considering climate change implications to Australia and our Pacific neighbours’ national securities) was rather embarrassing (not because she wasn’t right on her criticism to the COALitiion, but because after her criticism an eventual Labor government had little more to offer). You really should see “Postcards from the frontlines of climate change”, by the ABC’s Asia Pacific Newsroom.

This may have been a blessing in disguise. Scientists have more relevant things to say.
----------
 Climate Analytics assessed the global warming impact of the 2030 GHG emissions reductions targets of the COALition, Labor, the so-called teal independents (the Zali Steggall Bill), and the Australian Greens (that analysis did not – I repeat, did not – explicitly address their credibility).

This is how they ranked them, from higher to lower resulting temperature (see infographic above):

  • Coalition (26-28%) consistent with at least 3°C, bordering on 4°C.
  • Labor (43%) consistent with 2°C warming.
  • Teal independents (60%) and Greens (74%) are both consistent with Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C limit. The Greens, however, add a safety margin (represented by their lower position in the scale).

----------
The ABC’s Nick Kilvert and Emma Machan asked four leading Australian climate scientists and IPCC contributors to evaluate the climate change policies (not just their 2030 GHG emissions reduction targets) of the COALition, Labor, and Greens (they, alas, left out the teal independents).

Their verdict? (1 being highest preference)
 
The four scientists elaborated on their assessments. Have a look.
----------
These headlines remained largely unnoticed, as we discussed the all-important “productivity”:

(source, see also)

(source, see also)

(source, see also)

When an unusual second La Niña in a row was announced last November, it was expected to be relatively mild. It was also expected to last until January or at most, February. It’s already mid-May and it’s still raining:

(source, accessed today at 19:57 AEST)

(source)
That’s how that weather looks at ground level. This year, some towns have already been flooded twice …

The long La Niña doesn’t bode well for the Americas either (particularly North America): they are going into summer.

(source, see also)
----------
Although most of them are still too young to vote, the climate kids of SS4C Australia are mobilising for these elections. They are planning a number of actions. But they need our support.

If you can, chip in (donations are 100% tax deductible).