Comically flawed Australia slammed for its approach to net-zero modelling

Climate experts have criticised the Australian government's modelling underpinning its plan to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

The modelling, released on Friday afternoon, outlines Australia’s emissions will decrease by 85 per cent, with the remaining 15 per cent expected to drop with “future technology breakthroughs”.

Experts are left puzzled at the modelling which they say have been founded upon assumptions on technological advancements that haven’t yet happened, and is heavily reliant on offsets.

Read More

University of Melbourne climate science associate professor Malte Meinshausen says Australia missed an opportunity to maximise its renewable energy sector, which is recommended in other countries' modelling.

"The modelling that we see is rather odd ... the Australian way is to continue ... to emit as you normally would do and do some accounting tricks to appear to reduce emissions," Professor Meinshausen told SBS News.

"Australia is blessed with renewable energies and it would be a tremendous opportunity to embrace it ... but instead, this modelling is supposed to continue into this status quo path."

Instead, Professor Meinshausen warned Australia will be perceived as a "laggard" to the rest of the world and will face the consequences.

"If Australia does not play a fair game here in the international effort to limit climate change then other trade partners will impose taxes on their exports and it will be at the disadvantage of Australia," he said.

In the regions, over 6,000 farmers have expressed concern at the amount of pressure the government is putting on the agriculture industry to draw down emissions through offsetting.

Australian bushfire survivors and firefighters plead for urgent climate action

"Rural and regional Australia are already being impacted by climate change. If we don’t act now, farmers’ ability to continue feeding our nation and the world will be in question," said the Farmers for Climate Action CEO, Fiona Davis.

"We know the most important action to tackle climate change is to keep fossil fuels in the ground ... instead [the modelling] seems to be operating on a wing and a prayer that we'll figure it all out sometime in the future."

Climate Council's Tim Baxter said the modelling "may as well have been written in crayon".

"This modelling doesn’t even consider climate impacts on our economy. It assumes a heroic performance from the federal government’s pet technologies, without interrogating a single one of these wild assumptions. It downplays the potential of all other alternatives at every opportunity," he said.

"If this wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable," he said.

Greenpeace Australia said the modelling relies on offsetting, leaving the government accountable for only 29 per cent of total emissions.

“The report is comically flawed and isn’t worth the six million dollars of paper it's written on. Scott Morrison has tried to hide his failure, but the lack of a credible plan is there for all to see,” Greenpeace Australia Pacific’s Dr Nikola Casule said.

Share this post