Analysis of the Garnaut Climate Change Review

Professor Garnaut’s Climate Change Review totals 548 pages. But are its contents a good or bad outcome for the climate?

This depends largely on how the government responds to the review. However, there are some obvious highlights and lowlights in Garnaut’s report.

Highs and lows of the review

• Garnaut outlines how to price carbon but fails to recommend how much Australia needs to cut emissions.
• He notes that climate change is a severe problem but fails to mention how bad it could be if you factored in the latest scientific information.
• He tells how a high price on carbon emissions will drive innovative low emission technologies but doesn't say much about how to quickly and efficiently build a renewable energy supply.

Greenpeace analysis of key issues from the review:

Garnaut: The price we put on using fossil fuels should be shared across everyone.

Greenpeace agrees. It makes the cost less for each of us and spreads the burden. However, those who are unfairly affected (like low-income families who might live in poorly insulated houses) need support through the transition. This support isn’t necessarily cash handouts to pay bills but, rather, help to install energy efficiency measures so that electricity bills go down for good.

Garnaut: The big coal-fired electricity generators are a low priority for compensation.

We think they should definitely not be compensated. The idea is to discourage and eventually phase out coal-fired power, not give financial handouts that might make it viable.

Garnaut: Geosequestration (CCS) of carbon dioxide underground would be a good outcome for the domestic coal-fired power generation sector and the coal-exporting sector in Australia.

Perpetuating the myth that CCS could help with emissions allows the coal sector to go on polluting while promising us a cleaner future. For those who want to see emissions falling now, this is a disaster. It takes attention and resources away from renewable energy solutions to climate change. Proven technologies are ready right now and just need political support.

Garnaut:  A renewable energy target can be phased out when the price on carbon is high enough.

We say let’s not get ahead of ourselves. Potential investors in new renewable energy infrastructure will need a long and strong price signal to ensure they get a good return on their investment. Professor Garnaut’s emissions trading scheme has a slow start, five-yearly price changes and potential changes dependent on government-set emissions reduction targets. Sure, the idea is to give a long-term indication on the price to pollute, but is that a clear enough signal for an investor who wants to build a solar thermal power plant?

Garnaut: We need to provide "policy certainty and long-term investment signals" to accelerate Australia’s technological transition to a low-carbon economy.

We couldn’t agree more. Long-term policy signals need to be loud and clear. To coal-fired power generators the message is "It's time to pack it in".  And to the global renewable energy industries, it's "Come to Australia, where we want renewable energy now and it is a great place to invest".

Unless the Government’s response to Garnaut delivers that kind of policy certainty, we won’t able to cut emissions quickly enough and we won’t be doing out bit to solve climate change.

Talk to Professor Garnaut

Professor Garnaut is hosting public forums around Australia from 7-11 July 2008. Seats are filling fast so get in quick for your chance to question Professor Garnaut and the review secretariat.

By Helen Oakey
Head of Political Unit
Greenpeace Australia Pacific