Scott Morrison hopes he can attend the Glasgow summit and not feel like he has a “Kick me!” sign taped to his backside.

With the release today of his uninspired, go-slow climate plan, Morrison might be surprised to find that many in Glasgow are keen to put in the boot anyway.

This is not a serious plan with a credible trajectory and targets. It is more of the same and living in hope that the Australian community and its various economic sectors will do the right thing.

The big news in Scott Morrison’s announcement isn’t the 2050 net-zero target, but the estimate that the cost of solar PV will fall to $15/MWh (1.5 c/kWh).

Coal-fired power cannot possibly compete with this price, even after allowing for the need for battery storage. Cheap hydrogen, produced by electrolysis, will replace metallurgical coal in steel production.

It follows that the government must plan for the end of the Australian coal industry, sooner rather than later.

The Academy of Science welcomes the Government’s commitment to net-zero emissions of greenhouse gases from human activity by 2050 and is pleased to see recognition that while science and engineering alone will not deliver net-zero, there is no realistic path to decarbonisation without advances in research.

We have seen how research and innovation have been vital in responding to the pandemic where the nation has witnessed the importance of convening scientific, engineering, and economic experts from academia and industry to provide rapid, relevant, timely and independent advice. The same will be essential to deliver the net-zero transformation required across all sectors of the economy.
 
This will be an incredibly complex undertaking that will require coordination across sectors and mechanisms to stimulate technology development at scale.
 
Capitalising on Australia’s excellent research and innovation capabilities can drive new economic opportunities, skills, and the creation of new well-paid jobs.
 
The Academy stands ready to assist by providing independent scientific advice on emissions reduction to inform the detailed short- medium- and long-term plans that are needed to achieve net-zero by 2050.
 
The IPCC shows that reaching this target is an absolute minimum if Australia is to avoid potentially insurmountable challenges to our cities, lands, coasts, industries, food and health systems and our economy.
 
Australians have experienced first-hand the devastating impact of record bushfires and other extreme weather events that cost lives, are a drain on the economy and impact the health and wellbeing of communities for years after each event.
 
As the driest inhabited continent, with many assets vulnerable to climate change, Australia has a palpable self-interest in getting a global commitment to reducing emissions consistent with the Paris targets. Australia is well-positioned to play its part in meeting this challenge, with a skilled workforce, strong industrial base and plentiful renewable energy resources facilitating easier emission reductions compared to many other countries.
 
Time is running out if we want to limit the devastating effects of climate change.
 
As the report of the IPCC concluded in August, every tonne of CO2 emissions adds to global warming[1].
 
Australia must strive to accelerate our transition to net-zero greenhouse gas emissions over the next 10 years to play our part in avoiding the worst impacts of climate change. This demands that Australia commits to accelerating emission reductions in the next decade as recommended by the IPCC.  On the current 2030 trajectory, 1.5 degrees is unachievable."
 

[1] Figure SPM.10, Summary for Policymakers, Climate change 2021: The Physical Science Basis, IPCC.

ATSE welcomes the Government’s commitment to achieving net zero emissions by 2050 but reiterates calls for a stronger mid-term target supported by rapid deployment of renewable technologies and a net zero implementation framework. 
 
We need to fast track to clean future which delivers jobs, economic growth and prosperity for all Australians. Australia has the potential to be among the world’s leading nations in renewable energy generation, low-emission and negative emission technologies.
 
While industry is making great strides, we need strong Government leadership and incentives to realise the intentions outlined today and we need public accountability for the delivery of the plan.

The Prime Minister’s announcement of the federal government’s plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 is welcome news in the lead up to the COP26 meeting in Glasgow. However, despite the Prime Minister’s statement that Australia has already met and beaten our 2020 targets and will beat its 2030 targets, there is a large and growing gap on another target; namely, the public’s perceptions and expectations of federal government leadership on the environment.

Swinburne’s Australian Leadership Index reveals that less than a quarter of Australians believe that the federal government is focused on creating positive environmental outcomes. By contrast, over two-thirds believe the federal government should be focused on creating positive environmental outcomes.
 
This gap has widened in recent months and has been accompanied by a corresponding collapse in public perceptions of federal government leadership for the greater good. Perceptions of federal government leadership for the greater good are now as low as they were during the 2019/2020 bushfire crisis. These results are a sobering reminder that backing a goal of net-zero emissions by 2050 is necessary, but not sufficient, to persuade the public of genuine government commitment to the stewardship of the common good.

To limit warming below 1.5°C is now almost impossible. The key to net-zero is emissions reductions rather than over-reliance on technologies such as Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), which remain unproven to be effective in reducing global warming. We need to decarbonize our energy system and electrify transport, and there is everything to be gained from doing so.

Scott Morrison is a man who believes in miracles, and his 'long term emissions reduction plan' leaves space for plenty.

The report's modelling (not published) apparently details how emissions can decline by two-thirds, to 215 Mt CO₂-e annually, by 2050. This is not a net-zero plan.

Getting from this plan to net-zero would require an unplanned miracle: purchase of international offsets or new negative emissions technologies are suggested.

The modelling anticipates that 'there will still be some coal and a significant proportion of gas in the electricity grid in 2050'.

Carbon capture and storage technology is anticipated to allow the production of 'clean hydrogen using natural gas or coal.'

The largest share of emissions reductions '131-278%' is from 'Land, regional offsets and negative emissions'. The plan’s continued financial support for soil carbon should be popular with farmers. 

Confusingly, the report groups 'Carbon capture and storage' as a negative emissions technology, even though CCS does not achieve negative emissions. 

Since the election of the Biden Administration, it has been clear that the Morrison government would need to shift its climate rhetoric. The political genius of the technology roadmap approach, developed during the Trump Presidency, was that it could be dialled up or down depending on who occupied the White House.

This new 'plan' offers the most minimal shift in government positioning that responds to changing international pressure. The plan's most promising element is a shift in rhetoric: the Morrison government is signalling that it intends to support, rather than resist, decarbonising trends to whatever extent is consistent with maintaining support for existing carbon-intensive industries.

The announced Net Zero by 2050 policy has all the strength of a wet paper bag.  Without further 2030 ambitions, we will see the same rudderless policy vacuum that has been a headwind to investment and innovation to drive decarbonisation of the Australian economy. 

Taking such a hollow policy to Glasgow will further solidify Australia’s reputation as a climate laggard and cheater dating back to Kyoto in 1997.
 
The consequences of such a weak climate policy will be felt by all Australians as we are left out of the global shift and become a dumping ground for old technology such as low quality passenger vehicles and suffer stunted economic growth from a combination of lost opportunities, declining agriculture and tourism, and intensifying climate disasters like fire, cyclones, drought, and heat waves. 

We need policies such as those in New South Wales which set out clear, transparent goals and steps for decarbonisation of the energy sector.  Electrification and decarbonisation of energy are necessary first steps before the rest of the economy can follow suit.  There is a clear path to getting things right where we build the renewable energy and transmission before coal plants close, or the opposite where chaotic, rudderless policy sends us hurtling backwards and energy prices skyrocket.

Is this the end of the climate wars that have destroyed Australia’s political response and made us a global laughing stock for 20 years? Maybe it’s the top of the peak in anti-climate madness and from here we will go down into common-sense practical mitigation steps.

Industry and most of Australia’s community are now looking to partner with governments at all levels and create Australian leadership in the next economy. After 20 years it's hard to believe but maybe, just maybe, we are over the hard climb to the top and are on our way down the mountain created by political stupidity and fossil fuel interests.

The Australian government's change of position on net zero by 2050 is very welcome. We now need them to turn this into a detailed policy that includes a firm 2030 science-based target (essentially 50 per cent below 2020 level), and a proper integrated national energy market reform strategy.

We also need to go back to the drawing board on the design of the national energy market (NEM) as the current frameworks were designed completely for old technologies. An incremental reform process will not deliver the targets.

This is not the time for half measure. I would encourage a strong 2030 target which will provide appropriate investment signals to Australian industry which is well ahead anyway on a net zero 2050 target.

It is an extraordinary achievement to use 850 words to make a statement that tells us absolutely nothing about the plan the Australian Prime Minister says his government has to reach net zero emissions by 2050.

As the Liberal Treasurer of NSW said on Insiders last Sunday, saying there is a plan without a meaningful target for 2030 shows the government is not taking climate change seriously. 

Meeting the inadequate target of 26-28 per cent is a combination of creative accounting and taking credit for what has been done by the states, by large corporations and individual householders. We have no plan to accelerate investment in clean energy, no plan for reducing emissions from transport or manufacturing, no plan for agriculture. 

The Commonwealth Treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, recently warned there would be economic consequences if the world were to get a false impression that the Australian government is not taking responsible action.

This statement will avoid that but achieve the worse outcome of giving the world an accurate impression that the government is not acting responsibly. The statement tells us nothing about the concessions the National Party say they have been given; the only thing we know is that a trenchant laggard still advocating expansion of fossil fuel industries,  Keith Pitt, has been elevated to Cabinet. That alone tells us the government is not serious about addressing climate change. So does the continuing subsidies for fossil fuel development after the International Energy Agency said that achieving net zero by 2050 means no new coal or gas developments. We will be accurately perceived at the Glasgow COP as an irresponsible nation.

Setting a goal for net-zero-carbon emissions by 2050 is a fantastic start but the devil will be in the detail of how we reduce carbon emissions to address the climate crisis.

Central to the energy transition will be the shift to renewables and to achieve that we will need a revolution in energy storage. The zinc-bromide batteries we are developing through a University of Sydney spin-out company Gelion Technologies are a safe, non-flammable, robust and scalable alternative to lithium-ion, which pose a risk of thermal runaway and fires.

Australia should embrace the net-zero future with all the opportunities. In contrast, it seems Australia is now dragged across to Glasgow against its will. There is no doubt the world will have to go to net-zero. What matters is the action this decade, though.