As COALition is increasingly adamant/confident about delivering on its promises for emission reductions here’s how they’re so deceitful – ‘How can it be possible for national emissions to rise over 30 years while a country “meets and beats” successive promises to reduce them?’. It is worth getting your head around some of this history.
Clive Hamilton summarises at the Conversation:
Compared to the base year of 1990, Europe promised to reduce its emissions by 8% in the five-year “commitment period”, 2008-12. The United States agreed to cut emissions by 7%, and Japan and Canada by 6%. Australia dug its heels in and got its way; its Kyoto target would be 8% above 1990 levels.
And then there was the addition of the “Australia clause” in the Kyoto Protocol inserted during final hours, which allowed Australia to include landuse emissions for it’s carbon accounting.
Sounds fair? Except we had a massive amount of land use change emissions in 1990 so our emission reduction target was from a very high base year.
And Greg Hunt insists that, because of 50% population growth, assuming actual emissions don’t increase(!), our emissions per capita will be reduced by 50%(not a prize winner for maths)