Climate risk report is old news. Australia needs transition … to reality

The national climate risk assessment of this week made headlines, but it adds very little to other such reports of recent years. David Mcewen What’s missing.

. NCRA REPORT A long series of specially assigned and participates in the government report. Garnaut Climate Change Review It was released in 2008, and it contained 317 references to risk.

Garnaut’s 680 -page review also refers to “fossil fuels” 118, which requires an annoying thing that requires three -quarters of climate pollution in the first place. Even 17 years ago, Garnaut clearly stated that coal, gas and oil are the largest and the fastest growing emissions source at that time, and that production, exports and non -stop using does not write good news for planetary health.

One of the main suggestions was an emissions trade plan to promote discounts throughout the economy.

How did things change. While the terminology of climate risk evaluation develops, the foundations remain the same. There are two main risk categories: it includes the effects and transition risks of our physical, rapidly changing climate (including associated naval level rise and ocean acidification).

Fatal and expensive: climate threats faced by Australians

Transition risks

Transition risks deals with the effects on economies associated with responses, companies, communities and households to reduce emissions. The winners and losers will be the need to significantly eliminate fossil fuel consumption and the production emissions associated with it. Currently, fossil fuel companies are digging their hands and all of us lose.

If governments show signs of taking climate risks seriously, the situation will have to be reversed.

And so, NCra has a lonely reference to fossil fuels, which is quietly something that he accepts that he ignored the elephant in the room:

“National assessment focuses only on the risk of physical climate. However, physical risk arising from the effects of climate hazards on climatic transition elements (the effect on the effect of increased temperatures on the solar infrastructure aimed to help pass through relying on fossil fuels).”

While explaining this prominent neglect, the report rapidly adds that it is consistent with the approach developed by other OECD countries such as the United Kingdom and New Zealand ”.

So what? Unlike the UK and the NZ, Australia is a major petrostat as the third largest fossil fuel exporter. Meanwhile, some of our biggest export partners, especially China quick transition to be “Electrostats”(To obtain renewable electricity produced in a renewable way when removing the increasing rates of total energy needs from fossil fuels).

Considering wide renewable resources (Sun, Wind, Land and Know),

Australia may also be an electrostat, but not if it continues to continue the fossil lobby.

Renewable installations accelerate

It took 68 years to establish the first Terrawatt of the sun capacity and Only two (2023-24) For the next Terrawatt. In the first half of 2025, 38 % The Third Terrawatt was founded, and the deployments in China formed more than half of this.

China, since the invention of the solar panel in May 2025 in just a month just a month of Australia was established.

Technology adopt the “S curve ına to the steep part of the renewable generation with a critical battery storage to balance the variable nature of the renewable generation, we reach a series of renewable technology and electric vehicles go to gangsters.

Although the physical risks of climate change are economically frightening, we do not manage the transition risks-and we are currently failing badly, as the north-west shelf approval of the last week-we are faced with the risk of being a washed petrostat without any customer, and for installation of physical climate, we simply prevent financial resources.

Environmental Minister Murray Watt approved 4.3 billion tons of carbon emissions

What should we do?

A good start will be to squeeze the disinformation torrents of the disinformation spread by malicious actors – some you can guess. This week, NCRA was released, and the trolling torrent in relevant social media broadcasts reached a torrent fire site. Here, we can use the tobacco precedent starting with sponsorships that purchase social licenses, starting with an extended “fossil advertising ban ılmış with schools and ideally prevent political donations and lobbying procedures.

Considering the important climatic risks, Australia has made a very silent observation in accordance with Article 12 of the Paris Agreement, “Climate Change Training, Education, Public Consciousness, Developing the Access of the Public to the Public, and Accepting the Great Actions within the scope of this Agreement”.

There is a need for a large -scale information campaign: a “shift slap”, who is opposed to common myths for our time and speaks about many benefits of the transition.

Such a campaign, the fossil industry Native is not giant Many can believe. As a employer, approximately 1% of the Australian labor force is well documented that there is a comparative minency (but it was assumed that coal and gas workers tend to be well charged).

While the sector produces praised export receipts, a relatively small part of the government accuses taxes reaching their hands or copyrights (not taxes, but for price governments, sometimes for each coal or gas unit, sometimes $ 0).

The entire fossil fuel sector only contributes 2.5 % The total federal and state government revenues, and this is before taking back a pile of generous subsidies.

ECONOMIC EFFECT WAS EXTENDED

An analysis Australia Reserve Bank concluded,

The overall effect of reduced fossil fuel exports on GDP is expected to be relatively small and gradual.

“The direct contribution of fossil fuel exports to the annual GDP growth will be 0.1 points lower in the net zero scenario compared to the base line. In addition, flow effects will have flow effects in the associated activity; However, it is likely to partially balance these effects with opportunities in other sectors.. “

Australia’s “climate wars veri was ruthless and since Garnaut’s turning point report, many of our prime ministers have contributed to the death of most of our prime ministers. But now – now we can move towards a more realistic debate about the risks and opportunities of humanity, with some main antagonists in turmoil and the more prominent effects of climate change – the risks and opportunities of humanity’s greatest challenges?

Here we hope.

ICJ Climate Action Consultancy Australian Government meets Doublelespee