Is it really ‘madness’ to account for emissions from fossil fuels burned overseas? The Coalition sure thinks so |Temperature Check
The emissions might occur elsewhere, but they generate global harm that scientists can now quantifyThe Coalition has come up with the perfect solution to deal with the climate pollution from when Australian fossil fuels are burned overseas.We should either just pretend they don’t
The Australian Coalition's stance on not accounting for emissions from fossil fuels burned overseas is a concerning approach to addressing climate change. By ignoring these emissions, Australia would be neglecting its responsibility to acknowledge and mitigate the global harm caused by its fossil fuel exports. This approach is at odds with the growing body of scientific research that can now quantify the impact of these emissions on global climate outcomes.
The context of this debate is the increasing scrutiny of Scope 3 emissions, which include emissions generated from the use of products sold by a company or country. In Australia's case, a significant portion of its fossil fuel exports contribute to Scope 3 emissions when burned overseas. The country's reliance on fossil fuel exports makes it a significant player in the global energy market, and its approach to addressing these emissions has implications for global climate goals.
What's next to watch is how Australia's climate policies evolve in response to growing international pressure to take a more comprehensive approach to addressing emissions. As countries prepare to submit more ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the Paris Agreement, Australia's stance on Scope 3 emissions will likely face increased scrutiny. Will the Coalition reconsider its position, or will Australia's climate policy continue to lag behind international best practices?
Originally reported by theguardian.com. ClimateNews adds analysis for climate & energy readers.