The Australian Conservation Foundation believes the Federal Government will need to consider greater emissions cuts than those assessed in Professor Ross Garnaut’s report if future generations are to experience iconic Australian places currently under threat from climate change.

The Garnaut report (released July 4), models a range of emission reduction plans, but appears to fall short of mentioning any actions needed to stabilise concentrations of greenhouse gases at safe levels. A CO2 concentration of around 400 parts per million is widely agreed as safe in preventing the so-called run-away temperatures predicted at higher greenhouse gas levels.

ACF executive director Don Henry said Professor Garnaut delivered a credible yet conservative report.  The most ambitious emission reductions assessed by the Garnaut Review only give a 50-50 chance of saving the Great Barrier Reef from complete decline.

“We cannot afford to take such a big gamble with climate change if we want our kids to be able to see the Barrier Reef in real life, not just in a documentary,” said Mr Henry.

“If the Government wants to avoid Australian families facing permanent water restrictions in the future and Australian farmers enduring longer and worse droughts, it will need to take even stronger action than Professor Garnaut’s report recommends.

To avoid the financial burden falling on the most vulnerable and poor, any scheme designed to reduce emissions will need to take on the big polluters. This includes focusing upon the two top polluting sources, coal-fired electricity and transport.

“Emissions from transport cannot simply be ignored – they must be part of the emissions trading scheme,” said Mr Henry.

He suggests a weak or delayed start to the task of reducing emissions will not do the job.

“Cutting emissions at the scale required is a big challenge, but it is a job we must take on and our children and grandchildren are worth it.”