Climate experts have criticised the Australian government's modelling underpinning its plan to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.
The , 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.
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.
"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.
Australian National University professor Frank Jotzo told SBS News the assumptions need to be questioned.
“The report assumes an extremely low marginal cost of carbon, rising to just $24 per tonne in 2050.
“The report also posits that any emissions reductions achieved are voluntary. These assumptions are clearly motivated by political considerations, namely the legacy of the Coalition’s strong political rejection of carbon pricing.”
Professor Jotzo also criticised the Morrison government's timing to release the report, saying "it seems designed to minimise scrutiny", on the final day of COP26.
"The government’s net zero ‘plan’ document was released two weeks ago and selectively quoted the modelling report, but the modelling was withheld until the Friday afternoon of the end of the COP conference.
"There was no apparent consultation with key stakeholders or experts during the preparation of the modelling."
Labor leader Anthony Albanese also weighed in, telling reporters on Saturday that Prime Minister Scott Morrison has "no plan or no vision for Australia's long-term future".
"The fact is that this government can't be trusted on climate change."
Greens MP Adam Bandt has called the modelling a “recipe for climate collapse”, warning increased natural disasters to come as a result of the government’s plan “built on more coal and gas”.
The modelling anticipates Australia's major export markets to increase in value by 2050 and foreshadows the creation of more than 100,000 jobs, including up to 62,000 in mining and heavy industries.
But it has also forecast a global temperature warming of 2C, as opposed to the 1.5C that Australia had committed to under the Paris Agreement.
This has triggered criticisms from the Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS), who warns the Great Barrier Reef will be lost at a 2C temperature increase, putting the ecosystem and 64,000 jobs at risk.
“We know that 1.5C of warming is the threshold for coral reefs around the world. For Australia to want to delete a key reference to this is astounding,” AMCS Great Barrier Reef campaign manager Dr Lissa Schindler said.
“The Morrison government needs to stop trying to wriggle out of their World Heritage commitments and get on with the job of protecting the Great Barrier Reef and the tens of thousands of jobs that rely on it.”
