The nuclear energy debate has not re-ignited the climate wars. The climate war that must be won has been ongoing for many years. This is not a war between Labor and the Coalition, it is a war between people who understand that tackling the climate emergency must be a top priority, and both Labor and the Coalition. Both parties of government are ignoring the science and endangering our national security with their ongoing support for coal and gas extraction.

Both Australia’s parties of government, when in office, are failing the first responsibility of government; to ensure the safety and security of its people. They must be held to account, and forced to withdraw their support for fossil fuels, the root cause of climate change.

Australia is failing badly to address climate change. The heating planet is threatening life on this planet and Australia’s support for fossil fuels is contributing to this threat. There should be a major debate about this failure, and how Australia should contribute towards minimising the global climate threat. Currently there is little focus on this major government failure.

My recent P&I article (Calling all influencers, standup and be counted on climate, published on 6 July 2024) addressed Australia’s failure and proposed a strategy aimed at obtaining community support to force the Australian government to take-on a leading role in tackling what now is a climate emergency. The strategy calls for the creation of a non-political expert group, supported by high-profile, influential, leading Australians with the capability to make this catastrophic political failure a national conversation, with the potential to evolve into a global movement. This article complements my previous article.

The current nuclear energy debate illustrates the inadequacy of the climate debate in Australia. People are expected to make a judgement about nuclear energy without having the required knowledge. Getting the energy mix right, whilst addressing climate change is complex, and the government of the day should base policy on expert advice. This requires a team of relevant experts to work together and advise government on the optimal energy mix to provide a safe reliable supply of electricity at the lowest price compatible with Australia doing all it can to minimise the global climate threat. This expert group would include energy analysts, climate scientists and other relevant experts. I have proposed the formation of such an expert group.

The nuclear energy debate is distracting attention from the major deficiencies with the Albanese government’s climate policies. The following information illustrates how bad these policies are. Contrary to views expressed in the media, the nuclear energy debate has not re-ignited the climate wars. The climate war that must be won has been ongoing for many years. This is not a war between Labor and the Coalition, it is a war between people who understand that tackling the climate emergency must be a top priority, and both Labor and the Coalition. Both parties of government are ignoring the science with their ongoing support for coal and gas extraction. Clearly they have made addressing climate change a secondary priority.

The fossil fuel industry is relying on two mechanisms to justify the ongoing use of fossil fuels: CCS (carbon capture and storage) and carbon offsetting. Relying on these mechanisms is no more than an excuse to justify continuing to extract fossil fuels. The major problem is that national governments, including the Australian government, are supporting the use of these mechanisms. It is important therefore to thoroughly discredit their use. CCS and carbon offsetting are obstacles to successful climate action, but this is not being adequately articulated.

There are some legitimate uses for CCS as the world decarbonises, but not to justify continuing to extract fossil fuels. The extraction, processing, transportation and burning of fossil fuels creates major health problems and leads to the deaths of millions of people. It is in the best interests of human health that these fuels be left in the ground to the greatest extent responsibly possible, irrespective of climate change concerns.

The aim of carbon offsetting is to accelerate global decarbonisation. Its use is based on the belief that offsetting can speed-up decarbonisation by enabling companies that create emissions that can’t be avoided until new technologies are developed, to contribute towards decarbonisation by procuring carbon credits that help finance emissions reductions from processes that are able to be decarbonised. This enables companies that can’t abate emissions in the short term to contribute financially towards global decarbonisation. This is how offsetting should work. Unfortunately, it has strayed a long way from this. The most outrageous use of offsetting is by the major coal, oil and gas companies. It defies logic that an industry whose core business is extracting fossil fuels, the opposite of decarbonisation, is being allowed to use a mechanism aimed at accelerating decarbonisation to justify the continuing extraction of fossil fuels. This is happening globally and is specifically provided for in the Albanese government’s main policy instrument for domestic emissions reductions, the Safeguard Mechanism. If the invalid use of offsetting continues globally, this alone will make it impossible or climate catastrophe to be averted.

Just how bad Labor’s climate credentials are can be illustrated by comparing the goal of the Safeguard Mechanism with the potential emissions from new coal and gas projects being supported by the Albanese government. The aim of the Safeguard Mechanism is to reduce domestic emissions by 205 million tonnes by 2030. If the new coal and gas projects supported by the government proceed, especially several major gas projects, this will potentially collectively add approximately 3 billion tonnes of emissions to the atmosphere by 2030. Government support for ongoing coal and gas extraction will lead to increased emissions. The reductions the government claims it will achieve are based on offsetting the domestic emissions from extracting coal and gas, and ignoring the major emissions that are created in other countries where Australian coal and gas is burnt. The government justifies ignoring these emissions because they are the responsibility of the country where the fuel is burnt. However, where the fuel is burnt is irrelevant to the impact on the climate. The government has to rely on offsetting, and has to ignore overseas emissions, to meet domestic emissions reduction targets. However, targets that exclude major fossil fuel usage are irrelevant.

It is in Australia’s national interests to advocate for a rapid, but planned, equitable phase-out of fossil fuels. It is clear that neither Labor nor the Coalition have any interest in doing this. Does this generation of politicians really want to be remembered as the generation that contributed to increasingly disastrous floods, droughts and bushfires, and the loss of the Great Barrier Reef as a tourist attraction?!

The political failure to address a threat to humanity makes it imperative for action to be taken to resolve this major problem. With the ALP having seriously deficient climate policies, and the Coalition worse, the best hope for Australia to contribute towards the world avoiding a climate catastrophe is to force change on the politicians; a big challenge that needs to be taken up. My previous P&I article proposed a way forward. This follow-up article provides further information emphasising the need for people who can make a difference to step up and take action. It would be difficult to identify a higher priority.

https://johnmenadue.com/the-media-is-silent-on-the-climate-war-that-must-be-won/