Carbon Tax Repeal Boosts Australian Pollution

(Reuters) - Carbon emissions and electricity demand in Australia have risen in the two months since the government repealed a tax on emissions, bucking a nearly six-year long trend of decline, an energy consultancy said on Thursday. Consultancy Pitt & Sherry, which tracks electricity use and emissions in Australia's National Electricity Market (NEM), said emissions would continue to grow unless new policies were introduced.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

(Reuters) - Carbon emissions and electricity demand in Australia have risen in the two months since the government repealed a tax on emissions, bucking a nearly six-year long trend of decline, an energy consultancy said on Thursday.

Consultancy Pitt & Sherry, which tracks electricity use and emissions in Australia's National Electricity Market (NEM), said emissions would continue to grow unless new policies were introduced.

Emissions growth in the past two months was equivalent to an annual increase of 0.8 percent, Pitt & Sherry said in a report.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


The rise was caused by increased electricity demand, where a drop in renewables was replaced by more generation from black and brown coal power stations, according to the report.

The upswing marked a change from a steady decline in emissions from electricity generation since they peaked in December 2008, driven by lower demand and a rising share of renewables.

Australia's conservative government in July repealed a tax that had forced around 300 of the country's biggest emitters to pay for their CO2 emissions.

Last month, a government-commissioned report recommended Australia to effectively end its Renewable Energy Target (RET), a scheme designed to ensure that 20 percent of its electricity would be generated from renewable sources by 2020.

Australia could now fail to meet its target of cutting emissions to 5 percent below 2000 levels by 2020 unless new policies are implemented, Pitt & Sherry said.

"Had electricity emissions remained at the levels of June 2014, very little further reduction would have been needed for Australia to meet its (very modest) politically bipartisan target," the report said.

"However, the change in trends ... plus the reduction in gas generation expected in the near future, would, if maintained mean that the required emissions reductions would have to be achieved from other sources and by other means."

The office of Environment Minister Greg Hunt did not respond to emailed requests for comment on the report.

The government plans to implement a new set of climate policies, built around a A$2.55 billion ($2.38 bln) fund that would pay emitters to reduce their CO2 output.

But a number of reports have concluded that the new policy would fail to meet its objectives unless much more money is invested, and it remains uncertain whether the plan would make it through Senate.

 

 

(Reporting by Stian Reklev in Beijing; Editing by Joseph Radford)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe