Australia`s plan to use an accounting loophole to meet its obligations under the Paris climate agreement has no legal basis and suggests it is committed to further reducing emissions once a comprehensive agreement is reached, a new report says. “Australia is largely on fire for climate change and I don`t understand why the Australian government is looking for ways to weaken the Paris agreement so that it and others can do less to resolve the climate crisis,” Tong said. Under the kyoto Protocol, which is soon to be obsolete, deferral credits have been granted to encourage countries to be as ambitious as possible in reducing pollution. They were not mentioned in the original Paris agreement, but they were added to the text to be negotiated in Madrid, with some countries proposing a ban. Tony Abbott has changed his mind and is now saying Australia must stay in the Paris climate agreement. According to the report, Australia does not appear to have met its commitment to reduce its target from 5% below 2000 levels to 15% by 2020 if the world achieves a comprehensive treaty capable of limiting its emissions to less than 450 parts per million carbon dioxide atmospheres. The Paris agreement could limit emissions to this level. Mr Turnbull`s energy policy – the national energy guarantee – envisaged reducing Australia`s emissions by 26% by 2030, based on 2005 levels. The laws have helped the country meet its obligations under the Paris climate agreement. In December 2015, the parties to the Un Framework Convention on Climate Change adopted the Paris Agreement: a pioneering agreement to combat climate change and measures to move their economies towards a sustainable, low-carbon future.
The climate conference and debate on the text, including the ban on transfer credits, are due to end on Friday. On Wednesday night in Australia, it was not clear whether an agreement would be reached. It found that the two agreements were separate and should not be considered a continuation of an agreement. Australia`s NDC Intended, published by the federal government in August 2015 before the Paris Agreement was adopted, has required Australia to achieve a “macroeconomic target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% from 2005 to 2030 levels.” However, Australia has qualified its objectives by reserving the right to adapt its objective, “if the rules and other terms of support of the agreement are different in a way that greatly influences the definition of our objective.” Australia did not commit to carbon neutrality in the second half of this century. So why is the country taking responsibility away from Paris? It should be noted that it was only last year, after Trump`s withdrawal, that Australia “re-engaged” the agreement. Their plan to abolish the guarantee was completed after Scott Morrison replaced Malcolm Turnbull as Australian prime minister at the end of August. Although Morrison took a tougher line than Turnbull, he rejected the party`s proposal to leave the Paris agreement altogether and said the country was still on track to achieve its goals.