Through the center of Glasgow, he had been chained right behind a phony President Jair Bolsonaro as activists paraded in masks and labeled as “climate criminals.” Scott Morrison, prime minister of Australia, was fourth in that line, behind former US president Donald Trump, Chinese leader Xi Jinping and the Brazilian president.
But, in the balance of COP26, climate meeting that tries to close the rules of the Paris Agreement, Morrison took a comfortable lead in the position of environmental villain, a role that was played by the Bolsonaro government at the previous conference, in 2019, in Madrid.
The Australian government is negatively highlighted both in surveys recently released during the event and in the positions taken during technical, diplomatic and political negotiations.
He is in last place, for example, in the climate policy category of the Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI), which since 2005 has evaluated the actions of 60 countries and the European Union. Australia scored zero in this criterion, being below Brazil, the third from the bottom.
In the general index, which also includes the level of emissions, renewable energies and energy use, the country of Oceania dropped four positions in the last year and appears in 58th place, with a level of climate protection considered very low.
In part, the Bolsonaro government passed the spoiler baton to Australia because it retreated in Glasgow from the aggressive and openly denialist stance it led to Madrid two years ago while Morrison and his ministers remained hard-line.
As hundreds of negotiators tried to reach agreements to reduce the use of fossil fuels, for example, Australia’s Resources Minister Keith Pitt declared that, as a large exporter, his country would continue producing “as much coal as other countries want purchase”.
Morrison’s management has also refused to sign a commitment to reduce methane emissions (gas produced primarily from ruminant herds), has not announced any new long-term plan to zero emissions of pollutants that warm the atmosphere and maintained it in 2050 its deadline to reach carbon neutrality.
For the short term, Australia also did not present more ambitious targets for cutting pollutants until 2030, which would not be so serious if they were already ambitious.
The target maintained, however, is a cut of up to 28% compared to 2005 levels and was set before the signing of the Paris Agreement in 2015 (by comparison, Brazil, also under pressure to increase its cuts, promises 50% ).
As a result, Morrison has received a barrage of criticism from Pacific island nations, which are at risk of being submerged by rising sea levels, one of the consequences of climate change.
The Australian government has also approved three new coal projects in recent months, ignored efforts to curb the circulation of gasoline or diesel cars, bet on a “gas-led” economic recovery and promoted oil and gas companies at its COP pavilion. .
On the day the conference discussed how to make transport greener, the Australian government launched a strategy for electric vehicles that ignores incentives to produce or buy this alternative and is limited to promising more charging stations.
This sum of actions against the grain earned Australia last Friday (12) the anti-Colossal Fossil prize at COP26, an election for the country that most harms climate actions, made by more than 1,500 entities in the sector.
The distinction was already called ball. “Australia, we’re expecting some unscrupulous behavior on your part regarding climate change, but this time you’ve really outdone yourself. How low can you go?” the jurors wrote Wednesday in their usual sardonic tone.
In addition to the maximum anti-prize, the Morrison government attracted criticism from day one and took 5 of the 9 Fossil of the Day distributed during COP26, provoking the joke that it would need to buy a bigger trophy cabinet — Brazil, which at the last COP took the Fossil of the Year for blocking the deals, so far it doesn’t need more shelves: it was mentioned twice.
Not that only bad news is coming from Australia: it has improved its energy production and renewable sources over the last year and reduced per capita energy consumption. In addition, Morrison’s office includes a Ministry of Emission Reductions.
Its occupant, Angus Taylor, refuted the CCPI report in a statement, saying that the methodology is subjective, non-transparent and non-replicable and that the index is produced “by organizations that have their own agendas”.
According to CAN (the same network of organizations that promote the Fossil of the Day), there is no subjectivity: Australia is at the bottom of the index because it consumes a lot of energy and is one of the largest exporters and consumers of fossil fuels in the world, as well as the US and Russia.
In addition to the entity, the survey is carried out by the Germanwatch and NewClimate Institute study centers, which in the report justify their assessment: “There is currently no national plan for the transition to renewable energy, and regulatory uncertainty jeopardizes investment and causes concerns about the supply”.
As happened in Brazil after Bolsonaro took office, Morrison dismantled the environmental commitments of previous administrations. For example, it failed to support the Green Climate Fund, created to help developing countries adapt to the impacts of climate change and reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.
Instead, the prime minister prioritized bilateral partnerships with Pacific nations, which, according to Morrison, do not need to submit to rules and bureaucratic procedures imposed by international bodies.
Australia recently announced that it will increase funding for these countries by $500 million, but this news that could have been positive was also overshadowed by a Greenpeace survey that accused the country of “greenwashing” (promises or plans that do not translate into climate action in practice).
According to the organization, three-quarters of aid projects in the Pacific presented in 2018 and 2019 by the Morrison administration as “significant” in helping these countries overcome the effects of global warming do not mention climate change.
Wanted to comment on criticisms of Australian climate policies and the positions taken at COP26, the spokesman for the country’s delegation did not comment.
THE 7 AUSTRALIAN SINS IN COP 26
- While several countries have pledged to zero their production of coal, one of the most climate-damaging fuels, the Ministry of Resources has said that, as a major exporter, Australia will continue to produce “as much coal as other countries want to buy”
- It did not present new policies or plans to achieve zero emission of polluting gases in the long term
- Didn’t improve on its promise to cut emissions in the short term
- Did not adhere to the commitment to reduce the emission of methane gas, one of those that most cause global warming
- Not committed to ending investments in fossil fuels
- Did not commit to financing developing countries through the UN Green Fund
- Plan to encourage non-polluting vehicles boiled down to installing more recharging points, without incentives for the production or purchase of cars powered by renewable energy
.
