Climate Change Commission taken to court for lack of ambition
A group of 300 climate-concerned lawyers is suing the Governments independent climate advisers, alleging their carbon-cutting plan is inconsistent with the goal to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. The Climate Change Commission issued its final advice in June . In the report, the body determined its plan contributes to global efforts to achieve 1.5C and avoid the worst effects of a climate crisis. However, the commission relied on an apples-to-oranges comparison to make that claim the fairness of this choice will now be tested in court by Lawyers for Climate Action. READ MORE: * 'The Government will not hold back': Jacinda Ardern on how NZ could go zero carbon * NZ must make a tougher climate pledge to the UN - independent report * Earth may temporarily pass dangerous 1.5C warming limit by 2024, major new report says The commission compared its projected emissions cuts between now and 2030 to work done by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), an international group of leading scientists. In 2018, the IPCC issued a now-famous warning: the world must cut net carbon dioxide emissions by 45 by the end of the decade, compared to 2010 levels . Deeper in the work, the IPCC set a wider target to aim for cuts of between 40 and 58 per cent to carbon dioxide would give us a good chance to achieve the 1.5C target. The IPCC pathway gives different goals for agricultural methane (cuts of between 11 and 30 per cent) and other greenhouse gases by 2030. The commission said its plan will cut carbon dioxide emissions by 55 per cent in 2030. But it had to do some controversial accounting to get to that. There are two ways to count the countrys carbon footprint. We can add up all the pollution from fossil fuels, plus the methane producing from burping livestock and rotting waste, the nitrous oxide bubbling up from our soils and the refrigerant gases leaking from fridges and air conditioners. This total is our gross emissions. Then we have net emissions. This takes into account all the trees across the country sucking up carbon dioxide, balancing out a small proportion of our gross emissions. The net emissions total is a smaller figure than gross emissions. In 2019, the countrys gross emissions were the equivalent of 82.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, while our net emissions were 54.9m tonnes. To calculate its 55 per cent reduction in carbon dioxide, the commission had to compare 2010 gross emissions to 2030 net emissions. This type of apples-to-oranges comparison was allowed under the previous emissions treaty, the Kyoto Protocol which is why our government was able to meet these obligations even though our gross emissions kept rising . The IPCC only mentions net emissions in its 1.5C paths. Statistics NZ also used 2010s net emissions as the yardstick in its interpretation of the IPCCs recommendations . Lawyers for Climate Action treasurer James Every-Palmer said the commission should use an apples-to-apples comparison even if the 2010 baseline is inconvenient. In 2010, our net carbon dioxide was extremely low compared to our gross carbon dioxide it was a big year for forestry. The implication would be we would have to have an incredibly low number in 2030 to be consistent with the [IPCCs calculations]. I kind of get that, but I dont think it excuses the maths. Its really an issue for the politicians... It should all be transparent. Every-Palmer thought the commission became bogged down with the political acceptability of the proposed carbon cuts. Consciously or subconsciously, theyre trying to do the politicians job rather than just painting the harsh reality for the politicians to respond to. In a statement, Lawyers for Climate Action president Jenny Cooper said the commissions recommendations appear ambitious at first glance. However, when you dig into the detail, it fails to adequately address the scale and urgency of the task and is inconsistent with the legislation and international agreements it is meant to address. The Government signed up to the Paris Agreement and passed the Zero Carbon Act, both of which set 1.5C as a target. There is scientific consensus that limiting warming to 1.5C is essential to avoid the worst impacts of climate change... The Commissions current advice does not meet this target, Cooper said. The commissions final report does specify the difference between net emissions in 2010 and its projected net emissions in 2030 for carbon dioxide. But its data shows that net carbon dioxide emissions sat at 22.3m tonnes in 2010 and will fall to 15.8m tonnes by 2030 a 29 per cent decrease. Net emissions have risen between 2010 and 2020, because the pace of new plantation forest slowed from 2004. To keep the rate of carbon absorption up, the country needs to plant additional forests every year. Plantation forests have an additional quirk for the accounting: when the trees are felled, some stored carbon is gradually released from the land , which could create swings in our yearly emissions. The commission has smoothed some of these peaks and troughs by following one set of carbon counting rules . This is another point the activist group will challenge in court since the methodology obscures how much greenhouse gas will enter the atmosphere in individual years towards the end of the decade, when net emissions are expected to grow. Commission chair Rod Carr said in a statement the body has received a copy of the legal proceedings, which were filed in the High Court. The board and the commission will consider the issues raised, and the board plans to meet next Tuesday 6 July to discuss, he said. He did not comment on the issues raised. The commissions final advice notes there is a gap of 52m tonnes of carbon dioxide between the emissions cuts it proposes and the pledge the John Key Government made under the Paris Agreement, to cut emissions by 30 per cent , compared to 2005. (This gap could change if the commission is ordered by the court to reassess key figures.) The commission determined that to meet this through domestic action alone would be a tougher challenge for our country. The US, for example, produces nearly 60 per cent of its electricity from burning coal and gas here its less than 20 per cent . Other nations can make quick gains by decarbonising their grids, but with less ground to cover, New Zealand would have to also significantly curb sectors such as farming, industrial manufacturing and transport, the commission warned. Excessively fast cuts to emissions would have a legacy impact on the quality of life for younger generations as families are left without employment or essential services. This pace of change would also disproportionately affect iwi [and] Maori in terms of the Maori economy, given its large agricultural base, and Maori workforce who are disproportionately represented in agricultural and manufacturing industries, the final advice said. In addition, the commission recommended the Government boost its Paris pledge to much more than 36 per cent so Aotearoa shoulders its fair share. The commissions proposed solution to this gap is the purchase of between $2.4 billion and $11.2b of international carbon credits, though it notes there is no market yet available to buy these sorts of credits. The lawyers will challenge this advice to rely on other countries efforts, rather than domestic action based on the Zero Carbon Acts requirements. The Government will continue to develop its Emissions Reduction Plan, said Climate Change Minister James Shaw, because its legally required to release one before the end of the year. Cooper said the group did not want to slow down current government work to introduce emissions-cutting policies. Work to reduce emissions should not be delayed because of this litigation. However, it is important to get the budgets aligned with the science on what is required, or we will fail to achieve our goal of avoiding catastrophic climate change.