It is not called the ‘climate crisis’ for nothing. Our world is rapidly changing, climate change is real, and it is assisted by humans with the capability to destroy societies, economies and cultures. The argument that ‘humans don’t cause climate change’ is proven to be false. There is no argument, there is no debate, humans contribute to climate change. We need to acknowledge that first so that we can move forward in discussing how we can help to solve the problem.

Australian government. If we don’t act now on climate change, there will be lasting consequences for future generations. On our coasts, where 85% of our population lives, rising sea levels resulting from climate change exacerbate coastal erosion, increase the risk of flooding for low-lying communities and damage coastal and natural assets. For our cities, the hotter and drier conditions can increase the risk of bushfires and heatwaves, leading to a higher risk of human injury and interrupted labour force productivity. Moreover, damage could occur in ecosystems that support social wellbeing, providing services such as clean air and fresh water, and offer protection from natural disasters. A failure in one part of a city’s social, economic or infrastructure networks can have a domino effect in creating further consequences in other areas. In rural communities, we have already witnessed over the past 12 months the impact of drought, increasing cases of mental health issues and negatively impacting the economy.

There is a climate crisis that is caused by humans. It is currently and will continue to have detrimental consequences for Australia. The logical next step is the creation of long-term solutions.

The Climate Action Tracker (CAT) is an independent scientific analysis agency which tracks climate action progress since 2009 regarding the globally agreed aim of holding warming below 2 degrees Celsius. The CAT has released some disappointing data relating to Australia’s policies on climate control:

– The Australian government has turned its back on global climate action by dismissing the findings of the IPCC Special Report on Global Warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius and announcing it would no longer provide funds to the Green Climate Fund

– Australia’s emissions from fossil fuels and industry continue to rise, now 7% above 2005 levels and are increasing by around 1% per year on average since 2014. Therefore, Australia is headed for an 8% increase of emissions above 2005 by 2030, rather than the 14-17% decrease in emissions required to meet Australia’s Paris Agreement target.

Australia is not assisting in the reduction of emissions, and the conversations in government regarding the creation of a new coal power plant further demonstrates Australia’s failure to seek the complete removal of coal by 2050.

Furthermore, Prime Minister Scott Morrison has recently come under attack regarding his actions at the Pacific Islands Forum this week, which focused primarily on dealing with climate change. Enele Sopoaga, Prime Minister of Tuvalu and host of the Forum, rallied to gain the support of Australia in signing a climate change agreement, however; no declaration was formally accepted. Mr Morrison repeated the line, “Australia alone cannot cool the planet”, highlighting another excuse of the government to do nothing. Yes, of course, Mr Morrison, Australia cannot cool the planet alone, but we, fortunately, live in a country of great wealth and power, and we must lead the way for other nations.

Dear Australian government, we need a long-term plan to phase out coal-fired power stations and prepare structures to support mining communities for a transition away from coal and into renewable energy.

Dear Australian government, we need to know precisely what our targets are and how we aim to achieve them. Have a goal and strive for it. The rest of the world are taking a stance against countries who fail to acknowledge the climate crisis, and if we continue down this trajectory, issues in free trade talks could increase in number.

Dear Australian government, let’s develop a policy on climate change. Why? We need to be focusing on ourselves, not other countries, right? Wrong. It is in our interests to fight against climate change because it threatens our own living standards. Australia is already highly susceptible to natural disasters such as floods and bushfires, these disasters affect every sector of Australian life. Let’s create a policy for Australian, and in doing so, we help the rest of the world at the same time.

The time is NOW. This is not an opportunity to ‘wait and see what happens’ or wait for other nations to start the race before us. Let’s get out of the blocks fast, set an example to the rest of the world, and champion a policy of climate change, allowing future generations to prosper in a land which abounds in nature’s gifts.

18 thoughts on “Dear Australian Government, we must ACT on Climate Change NOW

  1. Your concerns are so similar to those here in the States. While it seems as though we are breeding a world of sociopaths, there is still a great number of individuals who know we must act. The problem I’m seeing is getting those people to speak up! We have had marches here but the demands and pleas for action fall on deaf ears, or the ears of politicians being paid to look the other way. This is a terrifying time. It gives me hope, however, when I read posts from people around the world wanting the same change.

    Have you read about the Green New Deal proposed here by a couple of our congressional representatives? It isn’t perfect but it’s something. I wonder if the people in Australia could push for something similar. Unfortunately you would need your government on board and that seems like the biggest obstacle. Good luck. You have allies here in the US even though we must seem like the dumbest country on the planet right now.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I completely agree with you, and I think as time continues, we will see more and more people rise up and take a stance and hopefully the government will begin to listen then. The issue is that climate change needs to be addressed now, and if we wait too long, it might be too late.

      Very interesting read. It definitely sounds like progress and understanding which is the first step in solving any issue. We unfortuantely elected a liberal governmnet at the last Federal election who don’t place as much value on climage change as other parties so that makes it very difficult.


  2. We all have to reverse our ideas on ‘progress’ . We have all been brought up to think hard work, industry, improving lives is good. The next revolution has to be using our brains to create resources differently.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. I share your concerns, Simeon. In declaring that the climate crisis is a Chinese hoax, our current American president has failed to take the lead in acting NOW to put regulations in place to end pumping more carbon and methane into our atmosphere and to transition to cleaner and sustainable forms of energy. As a result, other wealthy countries, like Australia, must now take the lead.

    I lament that the future of your generation is very bleak. The power to effect drastic change–now needed because we’ve dragged our feet for so long–is now in the hands of your generation.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. I think that is why we have seen these youth protests start all around the world campaigning for changes in climate change policy, and I love it. To see youth passionate and educated about an issue can lead to great change and I totally support their cause.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Curious what you propose to do, legislatively, about the magnetic anomaly over Perth. Make it illegal? Ban it?

    Did you even know?

    Odd. I wonder why you didn’t know.

    Do you understand the implications of it? What it means for Australia? For the world?

    This is why I am how I am.

    I’m what most of you call a “climate denier.” I’m the guy on the other side of the debate that looks at most of these environmental proposals and sadly shakes my head. I suffer the cacophony of “CO2” being shrieked at me. I listen to you all wail about receding glaciers, melting ice cream, drowned polar bears, and California burning to the ground annually.

    I just don’t understand why I’m the climate denier. Because CO2 is not the most common or effective greenhouse gas. Glaciers recede all the time. I live in an area that use to be under thousands of feet of ice. Polar bears live on land… California is a desert…

    And most of all, the shit that will really scramble our eggs is never talked about. We are overdue for a major asteroid impact. We are overdue for a major supervolcano eruption. We are overdue for a magnetic reversal. We are entering a freakishly low period of solar activity with randomly burps out gamma rays. And you guys want to..what?

    Go ahead. Ban all combustion engines. Mandate, under pain of death, perfect environmental equilibrium. Seriously. Go for it.

    It won’t matter.

    I’m not saying we are all doomed. We are resilient. We endure.

    I just think it is all superfluous compared to a Carrington Event. Or a Younger Dryas event. Or a Maunder minimum. Or…or…or…

    It is so difficult to take the left seriously on the issue. They are sitting in sprawling urban wastelands, lecturing me about environmentalism.

    Pardon? My garage runs on solar. Where I live, it is green. We still have forests and rivers and animals. We still see stars at night.

    In addition to the incessant lecturing, we are playing a social hot-potato by putting major issues on the back burner. It is like an overbearing mother lecturing me on cleaning my room, while the house is sitting in the caldera of a restless volcano.

    Really mom?


    1. I have many differences of opinion to the ones you have shared in this comment.

      Personally, I have no intention to argue with ‘climate change deniers’ because it is an ABSOLUTE waste of time. Climate change is real, it is occuring now and increased rates than ever before and it effects everyone within society. However, as you have clearly spent time in your comment I will try to cover some of the areas you have raised

      Okay we may be due for an extreme climate event? So what? What is the point in living our lives ‘in case’ a major asteroid hits the earth. It is pointless. We need to act on what we can control and what we can impact. Climate change is an area which we can positively impact. Whether you believe that it is entirely caused by humans or not, we can improve the climate. It is possible. This is not a guess like an eruption or asteroid, but proven scientific evidence.

      I would love to konw what ‘major issues’ are being put on the back burner? Climate change is rarely talked about in the government. Considering how much time it receives in the media, it is rarely talked about in Parliament. Still, what major issues are more important? If Climate Change is a real thing, which your final paragraph seems to half-suggest, it effects everyone. It is a major issue. It has consequences for everyone. If that isn’t a major issue than I don’t know what is.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. You obviously missed what I was saying. Of course climate changes. Of course we impact it, to a degree. (It also happens naturally.) Of course deforestation is horrendous. Of course pollution is destructive.

        I’m not a climate change denier. I’m just accused of being one because I disagree with the policies. To be fair, I’ve never even MET a climate change denier. Everyone agrees the climate changes. Everyone.

        Also, things like major asteroids are not some random “in case” event. Or a “guess.” Are you that moronic? We MEASURE volcanic activity, subterranean pressure, seismic activity. Asteroids like 4953 (1990 MU) for example is due to be close on June 6th, 2027. Exactly. But if it were to be miscalculated…could we stop it? (That’s just one, by the way, of MANY neo’s.)

        You can ONLY ethically mitigate human impact on climate. But you’ll never stop climate change. It is impossible. You can’t stop climate change. And what you mean by “Improve” is highly subjective. It is impossible to create a perfect environment on Earth that has flawless equilibrium. Someone will suffer.

        Major issues? What about antibiotic resistance? What about a massive population in the most advanced societies, that are basically completely dependent on the state? Literal social engineering, and at what cost?

        Climate change is a major issue, but the bottom line is, you are powerless to stop it. Even if all humans evaporated from the face of Earth….it would still happen. Species would still thrive/perish. It is the way. It has always been the way.

        I’m not saying rape our mother of her resources and just go ape-shit. But we need to acknowledge the the reality of the situation. We can’t stop the worst of it.


      2. Firstly, do not ever resort to an ad hominem strategy of debate, otherwise I will no longer respond. Argue through the rebuttle and introduction of ideas but never attack me as a person. This is the exact reason why there is so much conflict in our world today, we have lost the ability to respectfully disagree. If you are interested, I have written an article on this exact issue called the Art of Disagreement.

        I am not saying that we need to ‘fix’ climate change to a point where there is a perfect environment on earth. That is a complete exaggeration of my viewpoint and you have taken it to an unneccessary extreme. We can make changes to reduce CO2 emissions, protect our environment and limit the impacts of climate change upon society. Nothing is ever going to be perfect, but that does not mean that we just sit back and let it get worse.

        Sure antibioitic resistance is a major issue but so is climate change. And more importantly, climate change effects all and has long lasting effects. If our climate deteriorates at its current rate any investment in antiobiot resistance is useless.

        I get a sense that you have a ‘give-up’ attitude. The problem is too big so let’s just give up. Yes, the problem is large. But that doesn’t mean anything unless you make it. Like any problem, when people join together, it doesn’t seem as big as it did before. If we join together as people and nations change can occur. Why do you have this attitude? What help does it serve to society? How is it beneficial?

        Liked by 1 person

      3. I don’t think I ever used an ad hominem.

        I agree we COULD reduce C02 emissions. But why C02? And why lower? C02 is far from the only atmospheric gas. It has been higher in the past. And lower. It also isn’t the most effective greenhouse gas. What about atmospheric methane? Which has far outpaced C02, and is a much more powerful greenhouse gas (meaning absorption of infrared.) What about other oxides? Halogens? Microplastics?

        Of the gases we are dealing with C02 has BENEFICIAL affects to plant growth. Seriously, just check out a gas called carbonyl sulfide (COS) NOAA has a fantastic team of atmospheric researchers (I know Dr. Montska personally.)

        Look at the effects. We are seeing prolonged blooming periods (sunflowers, for example.) We are seeing planting zones spreading, rates of plant growth accelerating. Globally. Tons of studies on this.

        I agree that, by changing the settings on the planet…we change stuff on the planet. But why are we focused on the one setting that, given decreased solar irradiance (especially after solar cycle 24), might actually save our asses? C02 increases might actually be aiding crop yeilds. In fact, I’d bet on it.

        I’m not sure what you argument is, I guess. If we decrease C02, we…what? What will that do? Because, though these increases certainly constitute a change, this particular climate change might actually be good.

        I haven’t “given up.” There are changes the Earth will undergo that you are powerless to stop. Billions will die from catastrophic events. I will probably be among them. You might be sooner, considering the magnetic anomaly slowly spreading over Australia.

        So…you want me to “join together.” That is sophistry. It means nothing. I can’t join with you on this because we don’t have a consensus. I am unsure whether C02 emissions are negative or positive to my people. You seem to obsess over mitigating our emissions of that one particular molecule.

        So joining together makes change? You understand that is an empty statement, right? It has no actionable directive. I can’t take that whimsy and do anything with it.

        My attitude is this: We need to look at everything, in every detail imaginable. STEM classes need to be mandatory for all people. We need to aggressively prioritize and award scientific advancement. Use propaganda if need be.

        Most importantly we need to avoid taking complicated science and reducing it down to…well…a single molecule. There is so much more going on than C02. So MUCH MORE. Most of which we have no power over. But we are ignoring it, and any possible survival solutions, because it isn’t profitable or sensational enough. CLIMATE CRISIS sells more ad space than radiation-induced cyclobutane pyrimidine dimers. Which, by the way, is a perfect thing for you to research!

        My attitude is skepticism. Which is the default position of every academic and scientist I work with. And thank goodness.

        Because if I wasn’t a skeptic, I’d have no idea about a lot of the dangers around me, and I would be almost exclusively focused on C02 emissions.


      4. Obviously I can’t comment on every detail you have raised in this comment but I will try and respond to a few.

        Firstly, I would disagree that the climate crisis ‘sells’. The climate crisis which we are now talking about has been going on for years. It is only now that people are starting to see the effects of global warming and climate change that they are starting to become passionate about the topic. 10 years ago, people did not care about global warming, I am not convinced that the climate crisis ‘sells’. I agree that it is starting to, but it hasn’t been that way for long.

        I 100% agree that there should be a focus on STEM. I think it is vital and should be prioritised in schools.

        Yes, the conversation often boils down to CO2. But that is because everyone who is talking about it, often isn’t fully educated on the scientific nature of climate change. That is okay. Yes, people use the word CO2 loosely and maybe don’t fully understand aspects of the environment completely but you have to sit back and realise that people are ACTUALLY CARING about the environment. That blows my mind! Young people, spending time to look away from their screen, stop acting self-centred and actually care about the world around them! I find that exciting, and I am assuming you are some form of scientist, so I hope that is exciting for you to!

        I agree, joining together is a wishy washy term and I should have expanded. It involves two stages. Making changes individually and supporting others collectively. Individually, that may include not eating beef, not driving your car around as much, if we talk about the environment in general, reducing the use of plastics and reusing items. These a small changes we make in our own lives. Then by encourages others collectively to do the same that is what I mean by join together.

        Liked by 1 person

      5. Of course the climate “crisis” sells. Not just monetarily, but in the most profound way. Political Power.

        And no, I disagree. People aren’t actually caring about the environment. Caring means to take care. Not repeat television talking points. If they cared, they would know about all the things I told you. They aren’t looking away from screens…trust me. They are sitting there like good little lemmings, absorbing exactly what they are told to say.

        I am a scientist, which is why all of this is so distressing. Imagine you are the king of a castle, and you see a vast army marching, ready to invade you. You walk through your kingdom and you hear the peasantry talking frantically about the horses… many horses. Well, that isn’t the entirety of it. And if they prepare and make defenses for ONLY the horses…the result is inevitable. Complete and total defeat. People are ONLY talking about C02, and not intelligently either.

        And if anyone dares suggest “Hey…maybe C02 isn’t the only problem. Maybe climate change happens anyway…” They get immediately attacked. That isn’t caring. That is a deadly form of zealotry.

        All the changes you talked about sound fantastic, and I can agree with every single one. I converted partially to solar a long time ago, and have experimented with energy harvesting and hydrogen generation.

        But I promise you, again… As wonderful as your ideas are…it will only mildly impact some factors. There are bigger ones happening right now. Solar output and magnetic reversal are both impossible for us to fix, and will cause significant death in the next few decades.

        Liked by 1 person

      6. Well it didn’t sell in Australia. The Labor Party in Australia prioritised climate change in their election campaign and they suprisingly lost to the Liberal Party who don’t prioritise climate change. It was definitely not the case in Australia.

        They are looking away from their screens. Have you seen the millions of youth protesting around the world? Now, I don’t think protests are the best form of changing policy, but that is millions of YOUTH protesting, actually standing up, off their device to try and understand more of and care about the environment. That is astounding!

        Would you agree that climate change happens, but CO2 is currently a valid factor that people are talking about? And the increase in emissions is leading to global warming? Can you agree with those statements?

        I am more than happy to try to positively impact what I can control. Solar output and magnetic reversal I can’t control so I am not going to try to.

        Liked by 1 person

      7. I would agree that climate change happens. That is all. C02 might be beneficial. And without you specifying what emission exactly, I can’t provide you with a conclusion. Water vapor is an emission. Light is an emission.

        I have to have specifics!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s