According to new research, the Albanese government may have to decide whether to authorize up to 28 coal mine projects that would make it more challenging to reach the goals outlined in its recently approved climate policy.
The committee calculated that the country’s annual carbon dioxide emissions would increase by up to 16 million tonnes if all 28 of the coal projects that have been referred proceeded as planned. If the coal was exported and burned in Asia, up to 564 million tonnes per year may be discharged into the atmosphere.
If the mines were to run for the whole of their projected lifespan, they might add roughly 18 billion tonnes of emissions.
The website emphasizes that the environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, will have to make decisions regarding a sizable list of fossil fuel projects that are at odds with the warnings of the world’s climate scientists, even though it is doubtful that all 28 proposals will be implemented in their entirety.
The China Stone coal mine (related to an estimated 4.9 billion tonnes of emissions), Peak Downs coalmine (3.2 billion tonnes), and Alpha North coalmine project are the most significant projects on the list, all of which are located in Queensland (3.1bn tonnes). China Stone reportedly abandoned its application for a mining lease in 2019 when its plan languished, according to a 2017 report from Australia.
The discussion over a proposed revision to a regulation known as the safeguard mechanism has focused heavily on new coal and gas production prospects.
The administration rejected the Green Party’s call for a moratorium on new fossil fuels, which was what leading international organizations and climate experts have warned is required of OECD nations if nations are to fulfil their commitments to prevent a worsening global crisis.
However, it accepted a deal that calls for a rolling five-year cap on total onsite industrial emissions, expected to begin at a level equivalent to about 140 million tonnes annually and decline over time. It also stipulates that some gas developments must spend more money than initially planned on carbon offsets. According to the Greens, both actions might halt specific fossil fuel development.
Rod Campbell, the head of research at the Australia Institute, claimed that the coalmine tracker gave the government more comprehensive information about the coal plans. He said that Plibersek had the absolute authority to accept them or not.
According to a Plibersek spokeswoman, all pertinent projects would be subject to the new protection process. The agreement between the government and Greens made public on Monday stipulates that the climate change minister must determine whether every new project that emits more than 100,000 tonnes of CO2 annually is consistent with the scheme’s objective of reducing industrial emissions.
The minor parties and independents have supported the government’s changes throughout the legislature because they are essential to reducing emissions and putting Australia on a path to net zero, according to a representative for Plibersek.
On Tuesday, independent senator David Pocock declared that he would support the modifications to the safeguard mechanism. He expressed his appreciation for the government’s decision to impose a pollution cap, which he claimed would provide Australians “confidence that the policy will result in a reduction in emissions.”
But, he claimed that a more radical reform—including a price on carbon and a cap on the number of carbon credits that particular companies could use—would have been preferable.
More than 200 industrial facilities, including mines and production sites for fossil fuels, will be required by the safeguard measures to reduce their emissions intensity by up to 4.9% per year by either paying for onsite reductions or purchasing carbon offsets. The modifications will begin on July 1 if the legislation is passed this week, according to the administration.
