As you Wish

Australian Paris Agreement

“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. Australia`s INDC said that “Australia will achieve a macroeconomic target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28% from 2005 levels by 2030.” The comparison of objectives between Member States is made difficult by the use of different base years and by different target years. By way of comparison, for the first time in an international climate agreement, the Paris Agreement stipulates that we must “make efforts” to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius (Article 2). In Paris, the IPCC was invited to present a new special report (known as SR1.5) in 2018 on the effects of global warming of 1.5oC above pre-industrial levels. In addition, the parties are working to improve global greenhouse gas emissions “as soon as possible” (Article 4). 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. 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. At COP 15 in Copenhagen in 2009, it was hoped that a new legally binding agreement would be reached in line with the Kyoto Protocol. Although the meeting did not live up to these expectations, the Copenhagen agreement notably recognized the need to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions in order to limit global temperature rise to less than 2 degrees Celsius. The professors, all from Australian universities, argued that the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement were “completely separate treaties.” As such, they stated that the Kyoto appropriations could only be used to achieve the objectives of the Paris Agreement, if this had been decided and agreed by all the contracting parties to the agreement.