52nd Pacific Island Forum Leaders’ Meeting mentioned fossil fuels. Let’s assess the Good, the Bad, the Ugly.
Leaders of Pacific governments released the Communique of the 52nd Pacific Island Leaders’ Forum in the Cook Islands today.
While the statement includes a historic first mention of a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific, there are a number of qualifiers and loopholes added to allow fossil fuel producers in the region to continue opening new coal mines, gas wells and oil drilling facilities.
This memo intends to identify those loopholes for governments, journalists and civil society so they can be more aware of the tactics being used to delay and distract from the urgent need to phase out fossil fuels.
Clause 14: “Leaders aspire to a Just and Equitable Transition to a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific, acknowledging that the pathway is not immediate nor is it one-size fits all.”
THE GOOD
Explicitly mentions the phrase “Fossil Fuel Free Pacific”
Mentions the transition must be just and equity
THE BAD
Uses the “aspire” loophole, a weasel word pushed by New Zealand, after they first used the term in a recent cabinet paper released in September. We urgently need governments to actually phase out fossil fuels, not frame this as a distant aspiration. The recently elected New Zealand government is currently considering canceling its ban on offshore drilling for oil and gas – this loophole allows them to justify that.
Adds “the pathway is not immediate” – text not discussed at any regional Ministerial forum in the region this year. While a phase-out of fossil fuels will not happen overnight, all governments in the region could pass an immediate ban or moratorium on approving any new fossil fuel projects.
Clause 15: “Leaders committed to the transition away from coal, oil and gas in our energy systems, in line with IPCC pathways for limiting global average temperatures to 1.5°C above preindustrial levels with a peak in fossil fuel consumption in the near term.
THE GOOD
Uses “committed”
Explicitly mentions “coal, oil and gas”
Explicitly mentions “in line” with 1.5ºC
THE BAD
Adds “in our energy systems” – this was a last-minute qualifier added that had not been mentioned at any other regional Ministerial meetings this year. It shifts the focus and burden of the transition onto the Pacific energy grid when it is the extraction, production and exportation of fossil fuels by a select few states (namely Australia) that undermine the pathway to 1.5ºC the most
“Peak in fossil fuel consumption” is also deliberate wording to avoid committing to a peak in fossil fuel production, essentially allowing Australia to continue expanding their coal and gas extraction and exports.
Clause 15: “Leaders agreed to establish a regional ‘Energy Commissioner for a Just Transition to a Fossil Fuel Free Pacific’ to be reviewed under the Review of the Regional Architecture.”
THE GOOD
Strong text, accepting a key recommendation of Port Vila Call for a Just Transition to a Fossil Free Pacific.
WATCH THIS SPACE
Attention will now turn to the Review of the Regional Architecture to define the detail and scope of the Energy Commissioner, with the hope that fossil fuel producers don’t further weaken this commitment.
The Ugly: Australia’s attempt to cover it all up
Lastly, it is noteworthy that as Australia watered down text with qualifiers to allow them to not have to commit to any changes in their plans to continue expanding coal and gas production, they did make a major announcement offering Tuvalu residents the right to resettle in Australia to seek refuge from the impacts of climate change and rising sea levels.
While Australia’s support for Tuvalu is urgently needed, the most important thing they can do is stop making the problem worse by phasing out their fossil fuel production, the primary cause of the crisis causing Tuvalu’s citizens to lose their homes and seek refuge.
Australia also announced it would give Tuvalu $16.9 million to reclaim land from the sea and expand Funafuti by around 6%. This is just 0.15% of the $11.1 billion worth of subsidies and tax breaks Australia gave fossil fuel companies in the last year alone. That’s right, less than 1/6th of a percent.
Like a tobacco company opening a cancer clinic, the outcome – resettlement pathways and resilience funding – is an inherently good and important thing, but the use of the announcement to cover up Australia’s resistance to phasing out fossil fuels is extremely problematic and must be called out.
This all happened at the exact same moment that the Australian Government tried to push a controversial bill to allow for dumping carbon dioxide into the ocean through the Senate. The law would allow fossil fuel companies claim they are meet emissions reductions targets while exporting those emissions to foreign waters, while continuing to make sea level rise worse for the residents of Tuvalu. Australian Foreign Minister even went as far as saying that anyone opposing the bill was saying “no to Santos… no to Woodside” two of Australia’s largest gas producers.
The Australian government needs to move from attempts at slick PR to look like climate leaders, to actually planning to keep their coal and gas production in the ground.