But there was good news too. Changing the world is a big lift, and slowly but surely we are turning this enormous ship around – thanks to the tireless efforts of many individuals, communities, businesses and governments. 

Here are some of the biggest climate news stories this year that give us hope.

The seven biggest climate stories from Australia

2. For the first time, renewable energy overtook fossil fuels to power Australia’s main energy market. Clean energy in the National Energy Market (including every state and territory except Western Australia and Northern Territory), supplied a record 51% of electricity in October (and even went as high as 79% at one point on  11  October).

3. The new national battery rebate powered into action. In only six months the scheme has almost doubled Australia’s home battery capacity, and is on track to have helped 175,000 households and small businesses cut their power bills by the end of December. It’s now being expanded to help install two million household batteries by 2030.

4. Australia finally caught up with most of the world by implementing vehicle fuel efficiency standards – i.e stopping the most polluting cars from entering our market. These cleaner standards kicked into gear at the start of the year and will prevent 20 million tonnes of climate pollution by 2030. Meanwhile, the share of electric vehicles among new car sales in Australia has accelerated from 0.8% in 2020 to 12% in 2025.

5. Australia announced a new climate target (a commitment most countries have made to cooperate in cutting global pollution). The government has committed to cut pollution by 62-70% by 2035. To help achieve our new target, the government announced new programs to increase renewable generation, help industry decarbonise, roll out more EV chargers, and more.

6.  Australia’s nature laws have been strengthened for the first time in half a century. Thanks to a deal with the Greens, the new laws will strengthen protection for native forests and accelerate environmentally responsible renewable power. 

7. We didn’t win the bid to host the world’s largest climate conference (COP31) next year, but we did join a growing list of countries signing up to a roadmap to phase out fossil fuels. It’s the strongest language we’ve seen from the Australian Government yet about the need to switch away from fossil fuels.

The five biggest climate stories from around the world

1. For the first time, renewables provided more of the world electricity than coal, marking a turning point for the global power system. Solar and wind are now growing fast enough to meet the world’s growing appetite for electricity, and so clean power is keeping pace with demand growth.

2. In a landmark case in July, the International Court of Justice ruled that all countries have a legal obligation to protect and prevent harm to the climate and can be held liable for climate change damage. While the court’s advisory opinions are non-binding, they can still have a powerful impact, both legally and politically. 

3. China’s carbon emissions have been flat or falling for the past 18 months, indicating the world’s largest greenhouse gas emitter may reach peak emissions earlier than anticipated. This is attributed to China’s rapid increase in solar and wind generation, even with increasing demand for electricity.
   There was twice as much investment in renewable energy compared to fossil fuels. Globally, there is more investment than solar than there is in any other type of energy technology. 
   
4. South Korea has committed to phasing out most of its coal fired power plants by 2040. It operates the seventh largest coal fleet in the world but the share of coal generation has decreased from 42.5 per cent in 2015 to 30.5 per cent in 2024. As one the world’s top coal importers, and one of Australia’s largest coal customers, this signals a major shift for the industry. 
   

And that’s just the shortlist!

We’re looking forward to more good news in 2026.

The post 2025 wrapped: the best climate stories from Australia and the world appeared first on Climate Council.

1. What If We Get It Right? – Ayana Elizabeth Johnson

Sometimes the bravest thing we can do while facing an existential crisis is imagine life on the other side. This provocative and joyous book maps an inspiring landscape of possible climate futures. If you haven’t yet been able to picture a transformed and replenished world—or to see yourself, your loved ones, and your community in it—this book is for you. 

2. Firestorm – Greg Mullins

‘Firestorm’, told through the eyes of a firefighter – and one of our very own Councillors, not to mention the founder of Emergency Leaders for Climate Action – with more than 50 years of experience, combines thrilling stories of what it’s like to be on the front line of Australia’s first giga-fire with the hard truths of human-caused climate change.

3. Humanity’s Moment – Dr Joëlle Gergis

Former Climate Councillor Joëlle Gergis shows us that the solutions we need to live sustainably already exist – we just need the social movement and political will to create a better world. This book is a climate scientist’s guide to rekindling hope, and a call to action to restore our relationship with ourselves, each other and our planet.

4. Plug In! – Saul Griffith

We all know that renewable energy is the future, but how can we ditch coal and gas in our own lives and homes? Plug In! is full of pro tips and essential information for your electrification journey.

5. The Climate Cure – Prof. Tim Flannery

In his book, The Climate Cure: Solving the Climate Emergency in the Era of Covid-19, Climate Council’s Chief Councillor – Professor Tim Flannery – explores how 2020 flipped the climate debate on its head and exposed who was left standing in the way of action.

6. Together we can – Claire O’Rourke

Together we can by Claire O’Rourke uses inspiring real-life examples to demonstrate how each of us can use our own unique strengths to tackle climate change. While it can be difficult to avoid being bogged down by extreme weather events and bleak reports, we know the solutions and incredible and inspiring people are lining up to tackle the issue.

7. Juice – Tim Winton

Tim Winton like you’ve never read him before. A near future world if global warming’s worst case scenario comes true, this dystopian novel is a call to change the status quo for future generations who could inherit a dangerous world because of environmental collapse.

8. Windfall – Ketan Joshi

This book, by renewable expert Ketan Joshi, explores “a future where communities champion equitable new clean tech projects, where Australia grows past a reliance on toxic fuels, and where the power of people is used to rattle fossil fuel advocates from their complacency.”

9. Design Emergency – Alice Rawsthorn, Paola Antonelli

Alice Rawsthorn and Paola Antonelli, two of the world’s most influential design figures, meet the visionary designers whose innovations and ingenuity give us hope for the future by redesigning and reconstructing our lives, enabling us to thrive. Design Emergency tells the stories of the remarkable designers, architects, engineers, artists, scientists, and activists, who are at the forefront of positive change worldwide.

10. Woodside vs the Planet – Marian Wilkinson

A story of power and influence, pollution and protest. How does one company capture a country? How convincing is Woodside’s argument that gas is a necessary transition fuel, as the world decarbonises? 

11. Hot Mess – Dr Matt Winning

Dr. Matt Winning is a stand-up comedian and environmental economist with a PhD in climate change policy. Hot Mess aims to both lighten the mood and enlighten readers on climate change. This is a book for people who care about climate change but aren’t doing much about it, helping readers understand what the main causes of climate change are, what changes are needed, and what they can (and cannot) do about it.

12. Better Things Are Possible – Jack Toohey

Better Things Are Possible is Jack Toohey’s case for choosing hope over apathy. It’s a rallying cry to replace defeatism with resilience and start channelling our energy into innovative solutions to the challenges we’re facing.

The post 12 inspiring summer reads on climate appeared first on Climate Council.

The five reasons a Coalition deal on environment law would fail on climate:

1. Climate accountability gutted: climate impacts would be completely ignored in approval decisions – even though climate change is the greatest threat to Australia’s environment. 
2. Free pass for polluting fossil fuel projects: By rejecting any inclusion of climate, the Coalition’s approach effectively gives new coal and gas developments a free ride through approvals. Under this deal, mega-polluting fossil fuel projects would continue to be approved unchecked by climate considerations and no guardrails would be put in place to prevent the fast-tracking of fossil fuels. 
3. Undermines an independent EPA reducing accountability of project impacts.
4. Dilutes key guardrails and safeguards designed to protect our environment: including the ‘net gain’ and definition of ‘unacceptable impact’, that are crucial to stopping irreparable environmental damage and ensuring developments leave nature better off.
5. Fails to fix logging loopholes and land clearing exemptions that are currently contributing to the destruction of our native forests and critical habitat.

In contrast to the Coalition, the Greens’ key demands have been reported as:

• A strong, independent EPA
• An end to native forest logging – such as closing existing loopholes
• Adequate protections for critical habitat, including from land clearing
• Consideration of climate impacts to some degree (even if a ‘climate trigger’ is off the table)
• No fast-tracks for polluting coal or gas projects
• No wholesale handover to states of approvals – including the water trigger

Rapid analysis of Coalition deal

Watering down climate pollution information provided by companies and the requirement for companies to make plans to reduce climate pollution

Climate accountability gutted: A Coalition deal would explicitly exclude emissions disclosure and consideration of direct climate pollution from projects. This would represent an abject failure to address climate change or climate harms in any way, and risk undermining Australia’s climate targets, policies like the Safeguard Mechanism and Australia’s international commitments.

Emissions disclosure requirements and plans to reduce pollution would either be gutted completely, or left toothless – in direct contradiction to the recommendations of the Samuel Review of the EPBC Act, which recommended disclosure of “the full emissions of the development”.

This would leave our national environment law completely out of step with existing emissions disclosure requirements (that include Scope 3) in many states i.e. Environmental assessments in both New South Wales and Queensland, Environmental assessments from the Federal offshore oil and gas regulator NOPSEMA, and the Albanese Government’s own climate-related financial disclosure framework.

Fossil fuel projects given a free pass: By rejecting climate safeguards, the Coalition’s approach effectively gives new coal and gas developments a free ride through approvals. There would be no obligation to assess whether a proposed mine or gas field undermines Australia’s climate targets, nor any ban on fast‑tracking polluting projects

No guardrails against fast tracking of fossil fuels

There are currently several approval pathways in the bill that could inadvertently enable this – such as the streamlined assessment pathway, the bioregional plans, state accreditation pathways and NOPSEMA. A deal with the Coalition doesn’t set any guardrails at all to ensure polluting coal and gas projects aren’t fast-tracked, alongside the environmentally responsible clean energy and housing projects Australia needs.

The Minister retaining responsibilities, particularly around the assessment and approval of projects, and weakening the EPA’s ability to enforce the rules

Undermining an independent EPA: A core Coalition condition is to weaken the new independent Environmental Protection Agency. They want to extend political control over the EPA’s leadership – for example, by giving the minister power to sack the EPA’s CEO. This undermines the whole point of an independent watchdog. Effective oversight requires a strong, arms-length EPA. The new EPA must be free to enforce the rules without fear of political interference, otherwise environmental protections will be hollow.

Reinstating streamlined approval pathways that industries are demanding

This prioritises approval pathways and efficiency for business and industries over environmental protection.

It is noteworthy that the Coalition supports the creation of more approval pathways, when this law is supposed to reduce complexity and avoid duplication. 

This is about industry trying to have a foot in both camps: if the fast lane doesn’t work for them, then they want to keep a back door open.

Redefining or watering down the “unacceptable impact” safeguard

Dilution of the ‘unacceptable impact’ safeguard: The reforms propose a new test to block projects that would cause “unacceptable impacts” on protected matters – a crucial safeguard to stop irreparable environmental damage. The Coalition appears to be attempting to water this down by weakening the definition or making it easier for decision-makers to bypass. 

This test needs to be strong and objective, not weaker: it should clearly condition or prevent projects that would irreversibly harm critical ecosystems or drive species extinctions.

Redefining or diluting the concept of “net gain”

The Coalition also objects to provisions requiring developments to leave nature better off. Notably, they oppose the “net gain” requirement – a rule that any environmental damage from a project must be more than offset by repairs or improvements elsewhere.

If this requirement is watered down or scrapped, companies could tick a box with token efforts that don’t actually make up for the harm done. The result? Big projects go ahead, while our wildlife and ecosystems continue to decline.

Weaker penalties

A watered down penalty regime: Reduced accountability and compliance – letting industries/projects that break the rules or cause environmental damage off lighter by reducing penalties.

Nothing on the table regarding native forest logging, or land clearing

A deal with the Coalition would leave a gaping hole in the law by keeping native forest logging exempt from federal oversight. Right now, logging conducted under Regional Forest Agreements (RFAs) isn’t subject to the EPBC Act at all – and the Coalition is not prepared to change that. This means destructive logging of our native forest could continue without meeting national environmental standards or scrutiny by the new EPA. 

This decades-old loophole must be closed to protect wildlife and carbon-rich forests. A deal with the Coalition would perpetuate business-as-usual logging, undermining the credibility of any “once-in-a-generation” reform. Graeme Samuel himself strongly critiqued these exemptions for forestry, describing them as “untenable loopholes” in the context of strengthening Australia’s environmental laws. The deal also preserves a free pass for continued land clearing – exactly the kind of loophole that has contributed to Australia’s nature emergency.

Learn more about the Government’s proposed environment law reforms here.

The post Five reasons why a Coalition deal on environment law would fail on climate appeared first on Climate Council.

Australia’s Prime Minister Anthony Albanese sought to strengthen security ties with Pacific island nations and counter China’s growing influence during a trip to the region this week. If he walks away with one lesson, it’s that Australia’s climate policy remains a significant sticking point.

The main purpose of Albanese’s visit was to attend annual leaders’ talks known as the Pacific Islands Forum. On the way, Albanese stopped in Vanuatu hoping to sign a security agreement – but he couldn’t ink the deal.

I am in the Solomon Islands this week to observe the talks. I saw firsthand that Australia clearly has its work cut out in its quest to lead regional security – and our climate credibility is key.

Pacific countries say unequivocally that climate change – which is bringing stronger cyclones, coastal inundation and bleached coral reefs – is their single greatest threat. If Australia’s geo-strategic jostling is to work, we must show serious commitment to curbing the dangers of a warming planet.

Australia’s strategy tested in the Solomons

The location of this year’s talks – Solomon Islands’ capital, Honiara – is a stark reminder of Australia’s geopolitical stakes amid rising Chinese influence in the region.

The Solomon Islands signed a security deal with China in 2022, which set alarm bells ringing in Canberra. Penny Wong – then opposition foreign minister – described it as the worst failure of Australian foreign policy in the Pacific since World War II.

Since then, the Albanese government has sought to firm up Australia’s place as security partner for Pacific countries by pursuing bilateral security agreements with island nations. So far, it has completed deals with Tuvalu, Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

On his way to the Solomon Islands, Albanese stopped in Vanuatu hoping to sign a security agreement which reportedly included A$500 million over ten years to address worsening climate impacts. But that deal was postponed. Members of Vanuatu’s coalition government were reportedly concerned about wording that could limit infrastructure funding from other countries, including China.

Albanese had more success in Honiara, where he advanced talks with Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka for a new bilateral security pact.

Working with island nations to tackle climate change has become key to Australian strategy in the region. This week Albanese also joined Pacific leaders to ratify a regional fund intended to help island communities access international finance to help adapt to climate impacts. Australia has already pledged $100 million for the project, known as the Pacific Resilience Facility.

Australia is bidding to host the COP31 United Nations climate talks in partnership with Pacific countries in 2026. Pacific leaders formally restated support for Australia’s bid this week.

Palau President Surangel Whipps Jr said an Australia-Pacific COP had broad support from the rest of the world:

We deserve to host COP31, and given the breadth and depth of support, it would be seen as an act of good faith if others would clear the way. We don’t want to let this major international opportunity slip by us.

Whipps also championed an initiative for the Pacific to become the world’s first region to be powered 100% by renewable energy.

Pacific Island countries spend up to 25% of their GDP on importing fossil fuels for power generation and transport. As the costs of renewable energy and battery storage quickly fall, Pacific countries could save billions of dollars by making the clean energy shift.

Albanese this week appeared to acknowledge regional concerns about climate change, saying taking action was “the entry fee, if you like, to credibility in the Pacific”.

But the real test is whether Albanese can follow words with meaningful action.

The work starts at home

Albanese’s Pacific visit comes amid heightened scrutiny of Australia’s efforts to curb emissions.

The government must set Australia’s 2035 emissions reduction target this month. The latest reports suggest the commitment may be less ambitious than Pacific leaders, and many others, would like.

Pacific leaders also expect Albanese to curb fossil fuel production for export. Australia’s biggest contribution to climate change comes from coal and gas exports, which add more than double the climate pollution of Australia’s entire national economy.

However, in coming days the federal government is expected to approve Woodside’s extension of gas production at the Northwest Shelf facility off Western Australia, out to 2070. The decision could lock in more than 4 billion tonnes of climate pollution – equivalent to a decade of Australia’s annual emissions.

All this comes in the wake of a landmark legal ruling in July this year, when the International Court of Justice (ICJ) issued an advisory opinion confirming countries have legal responsibilities for climate harms caused by fossil fuel exports.

Vanuatu led the legal campaign. In Honiara this week, Vanuatu’s climate minister Ralph Regenvanu reiterated that Australia must heed the ruling, saying:

The advisory opinion of the ICJ made it clear that going down the path of fossil fuel production expansion is an internationally wrongful act under international law. The argument Australia has been making that the domestic transition is sufficient under the Paris Agreement is untenable. You’ve got to deal with fossil fuel exports as well.

Albanese may have taken on board some of the Pacific’s concern about climate – and made a little progress at this week’s Pacific Islands Forum. But there is work to do if Australia is to be seen as a credible security partner in the Pacific – and that work starts at home.

The post Australia’s quest to be key Pacific security partner hinges on climate credibility appeared first on Climate Council.

Under the Paris Agreement, countries are required to submit increasingly strong targets every five years, enabling them to “ratchet up” (or ramp up) their effort over time to cut climate pollution. 

National targets need to be backed by plans and policies to allow those planned reductions to be achieved. 

This year marks a critical moment for our climate future. Under the Paris Agreement, nations are required to submit new 2035 climate targets. Collectively, these targets must slash global climate pollution fast enough to keep temperatures within internationally agreed limits designed to prevent catastrophic harm to people and ecosystems.

The central goal of the Paris Agreement is “holding the increase in the global average  temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels” and pursuing efforts “to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”

Australia’s 2035 climate target is an opportunity to set Australia on the right path, one which keeps our kids safer from the impacts of climate change and sets our economy up for success in a fossil fuel-free world. Climate Council’s report, Stronger Target, Safer Future: Why Australia’s 2035 Climate Target Matters, provides a framework for setting the strongest possible targets.

Securing a safer future means hitting the brakes on accelerating climate change

Climate science is clear: humanity is now releasing huge volumes of heat-trapping greenhouse gases into our atmosphere, primarily from the burning of coal, oil, and gas. This layer of gas acts like a blanket, trapping more heat every year. That heat fuels worsening extreme weather events and is dramatically damaging the ecological systems that sustain human life. In other words, we are living through a climate crisis.

In the future, the scale and severity of the climate crisis will depend on:

• How quickly we cut climate pollution; and 
• How much global temperatures rise as a result.

Every fraction of a degree of global temperature rise leads to more frequent and ferocious extreme weather events, ecosystem damage, and impacts on lives around the world. On the other hand, avoiding even a fraction of a degree of global heating is extremely significant in reducing risks to communities worldwide. 

Global average temperature rise is now 1.3°C above the pre-industrial average and, in 2024, global average temperatures hit 1.6°C over a full year, breaking through 1.5°C for the first time. Importantly, these temperature thresholds cannot be breached in a single year – climate science, and the Paris Agreement, take a longer-term view of global average temperature over decades. But this is a clear warning sign that we are moving closer and closer to exceeding the 1.5°C temperature threshold. 

We are currently on a trajectory towards drastic global temperature rise and catastrophic climate impacts that could undermine the foundations of our society, prosperity, and security. Swift action to slash climate pollution from the burning of coal, oil and gas is the only solution which can protect those most vulnerable to the catastrophic impacts.

“Climate history is playing out before our eyes. We’ve had not just one or two record-breaking years, but a full 10-year series. This has been accompanied by devastating and extreme weather, rising sea levels and melting ice, all powered by record-breaking greenhouse gas levels due to human activities.” – WMO Secretary-General Celeste Saulo. 

The rate of global warming is now 0.27°C per decade and, without urgent efforts to cut climate pollution, we will overshoot the Paris Agreement’s goal of holding warming well below 2ºC in less than two decades. Climate change is accelerating and the risks are escalating at a much quicker pace than we previously thought.

The UN’s latest assessment concluded that the “current national climate plans fall miles short of what’s needed to stop global heating from crippling every economy, and wrecking billions of lives and livelihoods across every country”. 

It is in this context that countries are required to submit their 2035 target under the Paris Agreement later this year.

What climate target should Australia commit to?

Australia will submit our new 2035 climate target, a Nationally Determined Contribution, under the Paris Agreement this year. The current target, to reduce Australia’s climate pollution 43% on 2005 levels by 2030, was legislated in 2022.

The Climate Change Authority has been charged with providing advice to the Australian Government on setting and achieving its 2035 target. This advice is expected to be shared imminently. In 2024, the Authority released an issues paper, ‘Targets, Pathways and Progress’, which considered a target range of 65-75% below 2005 levels by 2035.

In anticipation of this advice being provided to the Australian Government, Climate Council commissioned Climate Resource to assess the global warming implications of an Australian 2035 climate target. The analysis uses the latest emissions data and shows what an Australian target means for global average temperature risk.

This new analysis shows the only Australian target that’s compatible with holding global warming below 2°C is net zero by 2035. The closer the Australian Government’s 2035 climate target gets to net zero, the less climate risk Australians face. 

The analysis also shows that a 2035 climate target of -75% or more (on 2005 levels) is aligned with more than 2°C of global heating, but likely less than 2.3°C*. Weaker targets are aligned with even higher levels of global heating. Each fraction of a degree of global heating is associated with more catastrophic impacts to communities and ecosystems. A -65% target is aligned with below 2.4°C of global heating.

The Australian Government must set the strongest possible 2035 climate target. A stronger target will keep Australians safer. A weaker target risks more disasters, more damage and more danger.

Climate consequences if the world fails to set strong targets

As our climate has warmed, Australia has been being hit hard. Where long-term global warming is currently about 1.3°C above pre-industrial levels, Australia has warmed by an average of around 1.51°C since national records began in 1910.

This increase in temperature is fuelling more frequent and intense extreme weather events, including extreme heat, heavy rainfall, coastal inundation, dangerous bushfire weather and drought. Many communities have now experienced back-to-back disasters that would have previously been considered a 1-in-50 or 1-in-100 year weather event. 

The IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5°C (IPCC 2018) shows the risks for both human and natural systems are lower if global temperature rise stabilises at 1.5°C. There are substantial increases in extreme weather events (e.g. extreme heat, heavy precipitation events and drought) between 1.5°C and 2°C. Impacts on land-based biodiversity and ecosystems are less at 1.5°C than 2°C, but overshooting the 1.5°C target could have irreversible impacts on some species and ecosystems. 

Climate change is accelerating, and current global efforts – including Australia’s – are dangerously inadequate. The future scale and severity of the climate crisis will depend on how quickly and deeply we slash global climate pollution. Each fraction of a degree of global heating is associated with more catastrophic impacts to communities and ecosystems.

For more information see our Stronger Target, Safer Future: Why Australia’s 2035 Climate Target Matters report.

Climate Council has launched a petition calling on the Australian Government to set the strongest possible 2035 climate target – and take urgent action to meet it!

*Assuming other countries adopt the same per-capita share of the global carbon budget.

The post What is the Paris Agreement and why does Australia need to set a Nationally Determined Contribution? appeared first on Climate Council.

The Albanese Labor Government’s imminent decision on Australia’s 2035 climate target will shape the lives of every Australian. Climate Council’s latest report, Stronger Target, Safer Future: Why Australia’s 2035 Climate Target Matters, warns the safety, security and prosperity of our communities and environment is at stake as the government finalises their decision.

The science is clear. To do our fair share to hold global warming to well below 2°C, Australia needs to reduce climate pollution to 75% below 2005 levels by 2030, and reach net zero by 2035. Every fraction of a degree of warming avoided matters. While some climate impacts are getting progressively worse, like heatwaves or bushfire risk, beyond 2°C scientists warn that we will see abrupt, irreversible changes or tipping points that supercharge global warming and cause widespread system collapse, like:

• The loss of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets, leading to multi-metre sea level rise.
• Frozen soils in the Arctic melt, releasing vast quantities of heat-trapping gases. 
• The Amazon rainforest experiences massive dieback – where plants die off en masse – releasing huge volumes of heat-trapping gases.

Why is Australia setting a 2035 climate target?

The Paris Agreement, adopted by 195 countries in 2015, represents the world’s collective approach to tackling climate change. Under the agreement, nations submit targets to cut climate pollution – described as Nationally Determined Contributions – every five years, enabling them to ramp up efforts over time to cut climate pollution. Together, these targets chart a global pathway to slash climate pollution and prevent global temperatures from exceeding agreed limits.

Like countries world-wide, Australia is expected to submit our 2035 climate target this year. The current target, to reduce Australia’s climate pollution 43% on 2005 levels by 2030, was legislated in 2022

Australia’s 2035 climate target is an opportunity to set Australia on the right path, one which keeps our kids safer from climate change and sets our economy up for success in a fossil fuel-free world. 

What climate target should Australia commit to?

Climate Council commissioned Climate Resource to assess the global warming implications of an Australian 2035 climate target. The analysis uses the latest emissions data and shows what an Australian target means for global average temperature risk.

This new analysis shows the only Australian target that’s compatible with holding global warming below 2°C is net zero by 2035. The closer the Australian Government’s 2035 climate target gets to net zero, the less climate risk Australians face. 

The analysis also shows that a 2035 climate target to reduce pollution by 75% or more puts the world on track to heat by more than 2°C but likely less than by 2.3°C, if other countries adopt the same per capita share of the remaining global budget from 2024 onwards.

Weaker targets are aligned with even higher levels of global heating. Each fraction of a degree of global heating is associated with more catastrophic impacts to communities and ecosystems. A 2035 target to reduce pollution by 65% is aligned with below 2.4°C of global heating.

At the end of the day, the stronger the climate target, the safer Australians are from climate risks. On the other hand, the weaker the target, the more vulnerable we become.

What targets are possible for Australia to achieve over the next decade?

Several significant Australian-based research projects have demonstrated that deep cuts to climate pollution in the next 10 years are possible. 

• The CSIRO’s pathway to reduce emissions by 75% on 2005 levels by 2035 and reach net zero by 2040. Under this scenario, average real GDP growth from 2020 to 2050 would only be 0.03 percentage points lower than the net zero by 2050 scenario, a cost significantly less than the economic, social and health benefits of cutting emissions.
• ClimateWorks Centre’s decarbonisation modelling, which shows how Australia can reduce emissions by 85% by 2035, demonstrates that a stronger 2035 target is achievable. 
• Climate Council’s Seize the Decade report shows that, by going all-in on proven clean technology that’s already available, Australia could reach a 75% climate pollution cut this decade. This suggests much more is possible by 2035, with further time available for technology development, the rollout of solutions like batteries, electric vehicles and electrification, and the wider availability of zero-emissions fuels like green hydrogen and sustainable aviation fuels.

What changes would Australia need to make to deliver a strong 2035 climate target?

Achieving stronger climate targets will require more action across our economy to double down on what is already working, and build the clean industries of the future. Australian households and businesses will need to change the way they power themselves, make things, and get around. Australian governments will face changes to revenue sources as coal and gas exports decline, and new industries emerge. 

We’re already making progress in Australia, with existing policies and efforts projected to cut climate pollution by almost 43% on 2005 levels by 2030 – a 13 percentage point improvement from 2021 projections. Already, a 51% climate pollution cut is projected by 2035 just by implementing current policies.

To protect Australians from the consequences of the climate crisis, Australia can also consider tackling its global carbon footprint by:

• Developing clean industries that contribute to global pollution reduction. For example, by developing green metals, cathode and battery manufacturing, sustainable shipping and aviation fuels;
• Supporting developing countries in their transition through climate finance or other mechanisms; and 
• Reducing our exported climate pollution, particularly by not approving new fossil fuel projects.

In recent years, climate solutions have been delivered at a speed and scale that has surpassed expectations. The last decade has seen incredible progress, with the cost of many climate solutions reducing dramatically. The key lesson here is our ambitions should not be constrained by what we currently consider to be the limit of our clean energy potential. Just as progress in renewable electricity outstripped all expectations over the last decade, progress in industrial decarbonisation and harder-to-abate sectors can far exceed our current projections over the next. 

By aiming high we give ourselves the best opportunity at fulfilling our true potential. The climate crisis demands that we do everything we can, everywhere we can, as fast as we can.

Climate consequences if the world fails to set strong targets

As our climate has warmed, Australia has been hit hard. Where long-term global warming is currently about 1.3°C above pre-industrial levels, Australia has warmed by an average of around 1.51°C since national records began in 1910.

This increase in temperature is fuelling more frequent and intense extreme weather events, including extreme heat, heavy rainfall, coastal inundation, dangerous bushfire weather and drought. Many communities have now experienced back-to-back disasters that would have previously been considered a 1-in-50 or 1-in-100 year weather event. 

Climate-driven extreme weather events in Australia are already becoming more frequent and intense, with devastating impacts. 

The future scale and severity of the climate crisis will depend on how quickly and deeply we slash global climate pollution. Each fraction of a degree of global heating is associated with more catastrophic impacts to communities and ecosystems.

For more information see our Stronger Target, Safer Future: Why Australia’s 2035 Climate Target Matters report.

Climate Council has launched a petition calling on the Australian Government to set the strongest possible 2035 climate target – and take urgent action to meet it!

The post Why Australia needs to set a strong climate target this year appeared first on Climate Council.

What began as a group of 27 Pacific Island law students is now a turning point that strengthens a struggling multilateral system for climate action. The Vanuatu government was also a driving force behind this first ever legal opinion on climate change. With these proceedings, we are seeing a familiar storyline play out in the international arena, one that the Pacific is all too familiar with – that if we want to survive the climate crisis, it is up to us to chart the path of least destruction. Whether or not the world follows our lead has differed over history.

Ten years ago, those of us present in Paris cried tears of resolve and pride when Republic of the Marshall Islands Foreign Minister, Tony De Brum, masterfully led the High Ambition Coalition to negotiate and secure what we now know as the Paris Agreement. The world then followed suit with their national emissions targets, some worthy of the phrase “climate action”, and some not. In 2022, Tuvalu became the first country to call for a Fossil Fuel Non Proliferation Treaty, with 135 cities and subnational governments today backing that same call. Over the years, Pacific Island states have attempted to set high bars for climate ambition and prayed that those with the power to impact global emissions saw our survival as worth fighting for.

Today, this call-and-response is again at play for the Pacific. When we became aware of Australia’s intentions to host COP31 as an Australia-Pacific COP, we saw the opportunity to chart a path encouraging Australia’s climate leadership. But it has been no easy feat. When the Australian government signalled its addiction to gas expansion in Canberra last May, a group of Pacific Islanders took to parliament lawns calling for a renewable energy transition instead – both domestically and within the Pacific region. Climate Minister Chris Bowen’s recent visit to the Pacific indicated that Australia’s direction, at least in terms of a Pacific energy transition, could be looking positive. On this four-nation tour, Australia committed $16.4 million to upgrade Palau’s electricity network and shift to renewable energy. This includes the 15MW Palau Solar Farm, one of the Pacific’s largest solar power projects. However, President Surangel Whipps Jr of Palau has made it clear that a “Pacific COP” would require more than renewable energy investments. It would call on Australia to address its gas addiction and position as one of the top-three fossil fuel exporters in the world.

The issue of Australia’s coal and gas exports is the stain on Australia’s potential climate legacy. Even as Australia courts Pacific leaders in their bid for COP31, Environment Minister Murray Watt recently approved the extension of the Woodside’s North West Shelf gas plant, one of the world’s biggest fossil gas projects, prolonging its life from 2030 to 2070. The extension is expected to be responsible for about 87.9m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent every year in the decades ahead. Acts of hypocrisy like this make it increasingly difficult to trust Australia as a partner to Pacific peoples, as continued fossil fuel exports exacerbate climate disasters across our islands.

So as we skate dangerously close to the 1.5 degree target set in Paris, we cannot allow the next five years to be where we lose our fight against the climate crisis. Australia’s current emissions reduction target of 43% by 2030 is woefully short of what’s required to keep global heating below 1.5 degrees, and predictions of its revised emissions target due this year are still unclear. As a potential COP host within this critical timeframe, Australia has the opportunity and responsibility to up its climate game significantly – but only by listening to Pacific co-hosts and following our lead.

We have dreams and pathways for a Pacific free from fossil fuels and climate catastrophe, and we are actively trying to secure the resources and relationships to make that a reality. We have employed everything at our disposal to realise this dream, from diplomacy to litigation to grassroots activism. It is clear that both history and international law are on our side. What remains to be seen is how Australia responds to the role they’ve been cast in the story of our survival.

Author: Fenton Lutunatabua, 350.org Deputy Head of Regions and founder of the Pacific Climate Warriors.

Photo: ABC News

The post An international court ruling, proof that the world can follow the Pacific’s lead on climate action appeared first on Climate Council.

Climate Council Preliminary Analysis, “Obligations of the States in Respect of Climate Council”.

The advice shows:

1. Countries have very strong obligations under international law to cut climate pollution and prevent significant harm to the global climate that sustains human life. 

The Court refers both to climate treaties and other bodies of international law.

2. Australia is obligated to set strong, science aligned climate targets.

The Court makes clear that it “considers the 1.5°C threshold to be the parties’ agreed primary temperature goal for limiting the global average temperature increase under the Paris Agreement.” It states that countries “Nationally Determined Contribution” (NDC),  which includes the 2035 climate target, must be in line with the Paris Agreement goal to limit global temperature increase to 1.5°C. The advice further emphasises that each country must “do its utmost to ensure that the NDCs it puts forward represent its highest possible ambition in order to realize the objectives of the [Paris] Agreement.” 

Yesterday, the Climate Council released the latest scientific data showing that this goal is almost out of reach for Australia due to a decade of delayed action (2013-2022). That research shows net zero by 2035 is the only climate target available to Australia with a strong chance of contributing to holding global warming below 2°C.  However, the Court makes clear that to be aligned with Paris obligations a country’s actions should be consistent with holding warming to 1.5°C. Therefore Australia may be obligated to contribute to global efforts to slash climate pollution as well as take steps at home – for instance building new industries (e.g. green iron) and preventing new fossil fuel projects.

The Federal Government has accelerated climate action in the last three years, including reaching 43% renewable power in Australia’s main grid. The action must now be strengthened to meet our international obligations.

The Australian Government is expected to make its decision on Australia’s 2035 climate target in the coming months. The Court’s advice makes clear that a target should be as strong as possible and accompanied by plans and policies to implement that target. It can further be argued that, to comply with international law, this judgement requires Australia to both set a strong national target and take action on exported emissions to help hold global heating to 1.5°C.

3. On-going production, consumption and granting of licenses and subsidies for fossil fuels could constitute wrongful acts under international law. Wrongful acts may trigger obligations to compensate other countries suffering from climate harm. 

The Court states that: “What constitutes a wrongful act is not the emissions in and of themselves, but actions or omissions causing significant harm to the climate system in breach of a state’s international obligations.”

The Federal Government has argued that Australia is not responsible for the emissions from Australia’s vast exports of coal and gas. The Court disagrees. Australia is one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels, therefore there is a strong case that ongoing support and expansion of Australia’s export industry constitutes “significant harm to the climate system”.

The Court finds that individual countries can still be found responsible, even if it is hard to identify a specific share of harm they have caused. The Court notes that it is “scientifically possible to determine each State’s total contribution to global emissions, taking into account both historical and current emissions.” 

Given Australia has consistently been one of the highest per capita polluters in the world and one of the world’s most prolific fossil fuel exporters, it can also be argued that Australia’s relative share of harm is significant. This will also likely be argued in respect to other countries that are major polluters and fossil fuel exporters.

The Court states that wrongful acts – which could include breaching treaty obligations or failing to regulate climate pollution – under international law could trigger repatriation obligations, including obligations to compensate other countries harmed by climate disasters. 

The Court also finds an obligation for countries to limit climate pollution from private actors in its jurisdiction. This appears to be a broad definition that would apply to fossil fuels production for international or domestic use.

The Court’s advice gives the Australian government reason to consider the totality of Australia’s contribution to climate harm, including our exported climate pollution. In particular, the Court’s decision is pertinent to the Federal Government’s review of Australia’s national environment laws. Currently, when the Federal Environment Minister considers whether to approve new fossil fuel projects there is no provision in the act to consider the climate pollution from that project. Given the Court’s very strong findings, it will be difficult for the Australian government to argue that it has the “highest possible ambition in order to realize the objectives of the [Paris] Agreement”, if it does not reform the environment laws and/or take other substantive measures to prevent the expansion of Australia’s fossil fuel industry.

The post Implications of the International Court of Justice decision for Australia appeared first on Climate Council.

Read the original article. Written by Professor Lesley Hughes

One of the most significant achievements of the 26th United Nations climate conference in Glasgow (COP26) three years ago was the launch of the Global Methane Pledge. The goal is to reduce global methane emissions at least 30% by 2030.

Methane (CH₄) is the second most significant climate pollutant after carbon dioxide (CO₂). In the words of one of the architects of the pledge, then US Special Presidential Envoy for Climate, John Kerry, “tackling methane is the fastest, most effective way to reduce near-term warming and keep 1.5°C within reach”.

Australia signed up to the methane pledge in October 2022. It was a good start, but a promise is not a plan. To date, Australia has no official methane reduction targets, nor an agreed strategy to deal with this dangerous pollutant.

The Climate Council’s report, released today, sets out actions Australia can take right now to cut methane emissions. We need to get on with it.

Why should we care about methane?

Methane in the atmosphere is rising at a record rate: up about 260% since preindustrial times to a high not seen for at least 800,000 years.

Research just released shows if we don’t act, the problem will only worsen. It suggests increases in atmospheric methane are outpacing projected growth rates – threatening the global goal of reaching net-zero emissions by 2050.

The gas is likely responsible for at least 25 to 30% of warming Earth has experienced since the Industrial Revolution.

Methane is a “live fast, die young” gas, persisting in the atmosphere for a relatively short amount of time. But while it’s there, it punches above its weight in warming. Over 20 years, methane is about 85 times more effective at trapping heat than the equivalent amount of carbon dioxide.

After 100 years, it’s still about 28 times more effective at trapping heat.

This means methane has an outsized impact on warming in the short term, turbocharging unnatural disasters such as floods, bushfires and heatwaves.

Where does methane come from?

Roughly half of global methane pollution comes from human activities. The rest comes from natural sources such as wetlands and soils.

Australia produces more than its fair share of methane because we have such large fossil fuel and agriculture industries. We are the world’s 12th largest methane polluter, producing four to five times as much methane as would be expected based on population alone.

In the year to December 2023, Australia produced nearly four million tonnes of methane. The main sources from human activity were agriculture (52%), fossil fuel mining (25%) and waste (11%). The good news is there are plenty of ways to reduce emissions in each sector that we can and should implement right now.

Agriculture and fossil fuels produce most of Australia’s methane pollution. The Climate Council, using data from the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory Quarterly Update: December 2023 (DCCEEW, 2024).

What can we do about it?

The largest source of methane emissions in agriculture is the burps of ruminant animals – mainly cows and sheep.

Promising research suggests each animal’s methane production can be cut by as much as 90% using daily feed supplements. These include supplements from the red seaweed Asparagopsis, and the chemical marketed as 3-NOP.

Other approaches to reducing methane emissions from animals also show promise. They include vaccines that target methane-producing microbes in their guts, methane-reducing pasture species, and selective breeding.

These solutions should be scaled up and farmers encouraged to use them – for instance, by being eligible for carbon credits under the Emissions Reduction Fund.

Providing consumers with point-of-sale information about the climate impacts of their food choices could also serve to reduce the nation’s methane emissions. And the market can be encouraged to develop clear regulatory pathways for securing approval of animal-free protein and other lower-impact foods.

More than 90% of our food waste ends up in landfill where it produces methane when it rots. Composting is much better for the environment. Investing in organic collection services for food and garden waste, and tightening regulations to capture gas at landfill sites, can address much methane pollution from the waste sector.

We can’t control what we don’t measure. Currently, methane emissions are largely reported to the Clean Energy Regulator using indirect and outdated methods. The International Energy Agency estimates Australia could be under-reporting methane emissions from the coal and gas sector by up to 60%.

Fortunately, new global satellite capacity and, in Australia, the Open Methane visualisation tool, mean we can measure methane at its source far more accurately than before.

The federal government should make all coal and gas corporations directly measure and report their methane emissions from existing mines, in line with international best practice.

Every coal mine and gas plant produces methane during mining and processing. While we work towards phasing out fossil fuel mining, a few practical actions can reduce methane pollution:

• require underground coal mines to capture and destroy the methane vented into the atmosphere
• ban all non-emergency flaring and venting of gas
• require all gas mining companies to address leaky infrastructure
• ensure mining companies seal inactive mines.

Time for action

Without concerted action, global methane pollution from human activities is expected to rise 15% this decade. On the other hand, meeting the commitments of the Global Methane Pledge can reduce warming in the next few decades.

If the goals of the pledge are met, we could shave about 0.25°C off the global average temperature by mid-century, and more than 0.5°C by 2100.

The federal government should establish a national methane reduction target and a dedicated action plan. This should be part of our updated national emissions reduction target, due to be set in 2025.

We can’t take our foot off the pedal in cutting carbon dioxide. But at the same time, in the words of United Nations head Antonio Guterres, we have to do “everything, everywhere, all at once”.

The post Methane is turbocharging unnatural disasters – Australia must get serious about reducing emissions appeared first on Climate Council.

As we approach the mid-point of this make-or-break decade for our climate, the stakes have never been higher. In 2023 – the world’s hottest year on record – Australians experienced ‘climate whiplash’, hurled from flooding rains to heatwaves to fierce fires, and back again. This is our new reality, underlining the urgent need to slash  climate pollution from coal, oil, and gas further and faster right now.

Momentum is building, and we’re making important progress in some areas. Today, about 40% of the electricity in our main national grid comes from clean wind and solar, while around one in three Aussie households have taken power into their own hands by putting panels on the roof. Now, we need to accelerate this momentum to keep cutting climate pollution across every part of our economy. 

The Climate Council has mapped out a pathway to slash Australia’s climate pollution by 75% this decade and get us on the right track for net zero by 2035. We can do this by harnessing the power of proven and available technologies to electrify the nation and empower communities. 

At the heart of our plan is a bigger, cleaner grid – so we can overwhelmingly power ourselves without pollution and build an industrial base that’s fit for the 21st century. We can use a mix of existing clean technologies to build a reliable, diverse and resilient energy system that’s  94% renewable by 2030, and enable two in three families to drive down their costs of living by installing solar on their rooftops. This clean energy will lay the foundation for our next era of prosperity with thriving, globally competitive businesses in clean industry, manufacturing and more. The Federal Government’s recent $1 billion commitment towards manufacturing solar technology here at home aligns with this vision, reducing climate pollution and creating clean jobs across regional Australia.

So many of the solutions we need are already here. From supercharging renewable energy to electrifying transport, and from cleaner ways of making things to better building efficiency, technologies and techniques are proven, available, underway and ready to be scaled up. Our work underscores the importance of governments, industry and communities working together to deliver these changes because this is a plan everyone will have a part in. Most importantly, it shows millions more Australians will enjoy the benefits of a cleaner, safer future when we do this.

There is no safe level of climate pollution and everything we do now to slash it matters. The decisions we make today will shape our shared future and the lives of every young Australian. We now have a clear plan to embrace Australia’s unique opportunities in renewable energy and clean industries during this critical window for action. A plan to cut climate pollution at the speed and scale the science demands, while sharing the benefits more widely than ever before. 

This is our moment to act decisively, to set Australia up for success with a stable climate and a thriving clean economy. Let’s seize this decade so that when our kids look back on it, the stories they tell are about how we turned the tide on climate change and delivered them a safer, more prosperous future.

Watch the Climate Council’s latest video on the plan to cut climate pollution:

The post Seizing the Decade: Australia’s path to a safer, cleaner and more prosperous future appeared first on Climate Council.