The Hon. Steven Miles MP

The Hon. Steven Miles MP

Minister for Environment and Heritage Protection and Minister for National Parks and the Great Barrier Reef

GPO Box 2454
BRISBANE QLD 4002

Email:

Dear Sir,

Threats to Great Barrier Reef

The National Council of Women of Queensland (NCWQ), which represents over 50 women’s organisations, commends the Government and its partners for initiatives undertaken to improve the water quality in the reef catchments. In particular, we laud you for agreeing or agreeing in principle, and commencing implementation of the recommendations of the Great Barrier Reef Water Science Taskforce, and for commissioning the investigation to cost various policy options to meet the reef water quality targets. We urge you to ensure the recommendations come to fruition.

Also as you would be well aware, the biggest danger to the Great Barrier Reef is climate change. The National Council of Women of Australia (NCWA) has urged the Federal Government to ratify the Paris Climate Change Agreement, to consider not only the Direct Action scheme but also alternatives such as a baseline and credit scheme without government subsidies, an emissions tax and an emissions trading scheme, and to maintain support to the renewable energy industries. (letter attached)

On 14 April 2016 .the NCWQ wrote to you concerning the impact of microplastics on the marine environment. In your reply ( Your Ref CIS 07393/15) you drew attention to initiatives of State Governments to address the disposal of plastics at the national level.

The NCWQ urges your Government to advance action on these issues through the Council of Australian Governments.

Attached is supporting evidence on the Great Barrier Reef and Climate Change for our recommendations.

Yours sincerely,

Lyn Buckley, President of National Council of Women of Queensland.

Supporting Information on Climate Change from NCWA &NCWQ Environment Adviser, P.M. Pepper B.Sc. M.Sc. Ph.D

Global efforts on climate change: In preparation for the adoption of the Paris Agreement in December 2015 Governments including Australia submitted an intended nationally determined contribution(INDC). http://climateactiontracker.org/indcs.html The Climate Action Tracker (CAT), a Consortium of four research organisations. {Climate Analytics, Ecofys, NewClimate Institute, Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research}, has tracked climate action and global efforts towards the globally agreed aim of holding warming below 2°C, since 2009. Thirty two countries which cover about 80% of global emissions are tracked and their submitted INDCs assessed and rated, focusing on:

·  Impact of INDCs or other commitments on emissions in 2020, 2025 and 2030 and beyond.

·  Effect of current policies on emissions

·  Whether the INDCs is a fair share of global effort to limit warming below 2°C

Australia has been rated “inadequate”. Australia’s target is to reduce Green House Gas (GHG) emissions by 26–28% from 2005 levels including land-use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) by 2030. After accounting for LULUCF, this target is equivalent to a range of around 5% below to 5% above 1990 levels of GHG emissions excluding LULUCF in the year 2030. Australia has a large gap between current policy projections for 2030 and the INDC target. Of the nine industrialised countries assessed to date (Australia Canada, EU, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, Switzerland, USA) Australia ranks eighth on its projected rate of reduction in per capita emissions, exceeded only by Russia, and eighth on projected improvement in emissions intensity for the period from 2012 to 2030, with Canada ranking worst. The “inadequate” rating indicates that Australia’s commitment is not in line with most interpretations of a “fair” approach to reach a 2°C pathway: if most other countries followed the Australian approach, global warming would exceed 3–4°C.

CAT noted that had the Australian Climate Change Authority’s recommendations been adopted (an emissions reduction target of 30% below 2000 levels by 2025 (incl. LULUCF). 40–60% below 2000 levels (incl. LULUCF) by 2030) Australia would be much closer to being in line with 2°C and placing it in the “medium” category in 2030 instead of “inadequate”. http://climateactiontracker.org/countries/australia.html

Paris Climate Change Conference: As at 21 September 2016, the historic United Nations Paris agreement on climate change has been signed by 189 countries and 60 have ratified, accounting in total for 47.76% of the total global greenhouse gas emissions. http://climateanalytics.org/hot-topics/ratification-tracker.html For the treaty to become law, 55 countries need to ratify it, and at least 55% of global emissions to be represented by those accepting countries. The agreement sets crucial goals to limit global temperature increases, and specific goals in three areas – mitigation, adaptation and finance. Mitigation includes a long-term goal – early peaking, balancing emissions and sinks with emissions to be reduced from 55 gigatonnes (Gt) to 40Gt in 2030.A new global adaptation goal aims to increase countries’ adaptive capacity and resilience. There are also aims to achieve a finance increase to US$100 billion per year post 2020. While the Paris agreement, as it stands, will not solve the ongoing problem of climate change, if momentum can be created the target of preventing warming from exceeding 1.5 degrees might be achieved. With global temperatures already at one degree warmer, and emissions continuing as strongly as ever, the world has to act quickly to achieve this target. While most of those countries ratifying the Agreement make a minor contribution, it is pleasing major contributors China (20.09%) and USA (17.89%) have ratified. and that India with 4.10% has promised to ratify on 2 October. In Australia, ratifying the Paris agreement means tabling the document in Parliament and submitting it for scrutiny by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. However, Australia has bipartisan support for the agreement, so no impediments are expected. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-04-22/what-happens-after-this-paris-climate-deal-is-signed/7350506 https://theconversation.com/paris-set-a-benchmark-in-the-battle-against-climate-change-what-now-56934 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-06/ban-ki-moon-says-time-to-increase-climate-change-action/7389482?section=environment http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9444.php. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/What-does-ratifying-Paris-climate-deal-mean-for-India/articleshow/54511938.cms

Australia’s emissions reduction policies: Australia which is responsible for around 1.3 per cent of global emissions, has steadily reduced the task of meeting its 2020 target to reduce emissions to five per cent below 2000 levels and is expected to beat this target by 78 million tonnes. The 2030 target to reduce emissions by 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels is expected to be met through energy productivity, fuel switching, fugitive emissions management, land use change, management of agricultural practices, management of industrial processes, renewable energy and waste management. The Direct Action scheme with the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF; $2.55 billion) supports Australian businesses, communities and landholders to undertake activities which reduce or avoid greenhouse gas emissions such as projects improving energy efficiency, capturing methane from landfills and storing carbon in forests and soils. The scheme uses a reverse auction to allocate payments from ERF. Bids to implement registered emissions reduction projects are submitted the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) who selects the lowest bids per unit of notional abatement. The auction winners enter into contracts with the CER to deliver Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs), each representing a tonne of carbon dioxide equivalence (t CO2-e) emissions reduction below an assumed baseline. The contracts guarantee payment from ERF in return for delivery of emissions reductions. A Safeguard Mechanism commenced on 1 July 2016 to ensure emission reductions purchased by the Government are not offset by significant rises in emissions above business-as-usual levels elsewhere in the economy. The safeguard mechanism requires Australia’s largest emitters, around 140 large businesses that have facilities with direct emissions of more than 100,000 t CO2-e a year, to keep emissions within baseline levels which have been set using data already reported under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Scheme. This will cover around half of Australia's emissions. Flexible compliance arrangements allow a range of options for meeting safeguard obligations.

 ACCUs can be used to offset emissions above the baseline.

 Multi-year monitoring will allow a facility to exceed its baseline in one year, so long as average emissions over two or three years are below the baseline.

 An exemption will be available for facilities whose emissions are the direct result of exceptional circumstances, such as a natural disaster or criminal activity.

 There will be a range of discretionary, graduated enforcement options that the CER will be able to apply to deter non-compliance. factsheet- Australian-government-action.docx; factsheet- safeguard-mechanism.pdf; https://www.environment.gov.au/node/41417?utm_source=Climate%20change&utm_campaign=feed&utm_medium=rss However the key disadvantage of the scheme is that it could fund individual projects that would have happened without government funding e.g. landfill projects which already generate revenue from electricity. To accurately assess the scheme the ongoing emissions levels of participating projects and the emissions that would have been observed without the subsidy should be known. The latter is difficult to assess. . An alternative could be a baseline-and-credit scheme without government subsidies. Other alternatives are an emissions tax or an emissions trading scheme (ETS) which would introduce a price per unit of emissions and the private sector would decide which projects to implement. Large emitters are already required to report their emissions, so implementation would be comparatively straightforward. Firms covered by an emissions tax or an ETS could be allowed to use voluntary offsets generated outside the scheme to reduce their tax/permit liabilities. However offset arrangements would need to be carefully designed. https://theconversation.com/direct-action-not-giving-us-bang-for-our-buck-on-climate-change-59308 Burke, P.J. (2016), Undermined by adverse selection: Australia’s Direct Action abatement subsidies, CCEP Working Paper 1605, Apr 2016. Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.

A review of Australia’s emissions reduction policies is scheduled for 2017. Hopefully all options including the Direct Action, a baseline-and-credit scheme without government subsidies, an emissions tax or an emissions trading scheme will be considered.

Renewable Energy: In addition to reducing emissions other Government policies include supporting clean and efficient energy, building resilience to the unavoidable impacts of climate change and supporting an effective international response to climate change. To meet the Renewable Energy Target of 23% of Australia’s electricity coming from renewable sources by 2020, Australian households and businesses are encouraged to install solar and other renewable energy technologies, and the electricity sector to move to cleaner and more diverse sources. A $1billion Clean Energy Innovation Fund aims to help emerging clean energy technologies move from demonstration to commercial deployment. https://www.environment.gov.au/node/41417?utm_source=Climate%20change&utm_campaign=feed&utm_medium=rss factsheet- Australian-government-action.docx

Australia’s electricity sector accounts for 33% of Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions with 90% of electricity production generated by burning fossil fuels (75% from coal). Giga-What? A guide to the Renewable Energy Target by Petra Stock (Climate Council of Australia)2015) Yet, Australia’s renewable energy resources are capable of producing 500 times the amount of electricity currently used. (Geoscience Australia and ABARE 2010; AEMO 2013b). A Productivity Commission review of more than 1,000 emissions reduction policies found that policies encouraging additional large-scale renewable electricity power plants were the second-most cost-effective set of policies after emissions trading schemes.

When Australia’s Renewable Energy Target(RET) was 41,000GWh large-scale renewable electricity annually by 2020 plus uncapped support for eligible small-scale solar and wind, greenhouse gas emissions were reduced by 22.5 million tonnes carbon dioxide- equivalent to 10 per cent of Australia’s annual electricity emissions. If the policy with that target had continued, the RET was estimated to reduce emissions by 58 million tonnes carbon dioxide (2015–2020) – equivalent to annual emissions from all of Australia’s passenger cars and light commercial vehicles. With the target now of 33000 GWh this could change but the fact remains that, the RET has increased the supply of renewable energy thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions from electricity generation. Giga-What? A guide to the Renewable Energy Target by Petra Stock (Climate Council of Australia)2015)

As energy storage technologies are becoming more viable in Australia, wind and solar power should become more viable. A lithium-ion battery, Powerwall, is expected to sell in Australia next year for about $5,500 http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-21/powerwall-solar-batteries-to-transform-electricity-industry/6488230 While currently batteries are considered the default form of electricity storage, at an industrial scale, there are promising technologies for particular applications and locations e.g. storage systems, such as flywheel and compressed air. Once energy storage can be cost-effectively deployed at a large scale, the implications for energy markets and energy security are immense. http://www.cleanenergycouncil.org.au/technologies/energy-storage.html

South Australia with more than 40% of its energy based on wind and solar is currently experiencing an energy crisis indicating the need for diverse energy sources with sufficient transmission connections nationwide. The Weekend Australian July 16-17, 2016. The Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) has announced a review of the national market to look at whether the current wholesale energy market frameworks can support increasing volumes of renewable energy and maintain system security. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-07-21/energy-ministers-need-to-focus-on-reforming-electricity-market/7646106 However as Tony Wood, Director of the energy program at the Grattan Institute, has said it is unhelpful to blame the perceived failure of the wholesale market, inadequate transmission planning or the intermittent nature of wind and solar. He advocates the 2017 review of climate change policy begin immediately, with a priority to strengthen and evolve the existing Safeguard Mechanism so that it becomes an effective market mechanism for reducing emissions and driving new investment. He also recommended that the national electricity market be reviewed, considering alternative or additional mechanisms that may be needed to avoid future threats to reliability and/or prices. http://www.afr.com/opinion/from-reliable-and-cheap-to-patchy-and-expensive-south-australias-energy-policy-20160719-gq8ths

Impact of climate change: A recent study which analysed 14 years of satellite data measuring the key climate variables of air temperature, water availability and cloud cover, has given a deeper insight into the impact of extreme events on ecosystems and which aspects of climate have been the most important in shaping different vegetation types around the world. The study confirmed that most of Australia was most sensitive to variability in water, rather than to temperature. But while there were areas of very high climate sensitivity in the east of Australia, the study showed inland ecosystems were among the world's least sensitive to climate variability, particularly in terms of rainfall. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-02-18/global-map-highlights-sensitivity-of-australian-vegetation/7178164