At sea lake in Western Victoria, Bob McClelland is harvesting wheat — and grateful to be doing it. Thanks to a little rain and a pipeline from the Murray River, McClelland’s farm is surviving the six-year drought that’s parched much of southeast Australia. He isn’t sure if it’s just one of the region’s periodic dry spells or if, as some scientists say, it’s been worsened by global warming. But “I’m a bit of a believer in climate change,” he says. “All those Arctic glaciers melting — there must be something happening.”
In poll after opinion poll, about 7 in 10 Australians say climate change and water are issues important enough to influence their votes at the Nov. 24 election. “Climate change is a big problem,” says McClelland. “Just what the answer is I’m not sure. But whoever is in government, they’ve got to address it.” It’s not just farmers who are feeling the heat; water restrictions are now a fact of life for the 80% of Australians who live in cities. In Adelaide, Peg Wilson and her neighbors cannot hose their gardens for more than three hours a week. “You just get used to it,” she says. In a country that’s already 40% desert, scientists say climate change could make many areas hotter and drier. Says David Trebeck, of the national Water Commission: “It now seems clear that climate change and global warming — whether natural or man-made — will result in less water on average for all of us.”
One of the few points of difference between the Labor Party and the Liberal-National government is over whether Australia should ratify the Kyoto Protocol, thereby committing the nation to reducing its greenhouse-gas emissions. Labor leader Kevin Rudd calls climate change “the moral challenge of our generation” and says he will sign on to Kyoto “without delay” if his 10-point poll lead translates to victory. Prime Minister John Howard has refused to ratify Kyoto because it limits the emissions only of developed nations. For him the top election issue is the economy: “I don’t think the world is going to come to an end because of climate change.”
Australia generates 1.4% of global carbon emissions — mostly from coal-fired power stations — and that share is shrinking as Chinese and Indian emissions soar. No matter what Canberra does, the effects on the world’s climate “are likely to be extremely small,” says Australian National University economist Alex Robson, “almost certainly zero.” Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull argues, with Howard, that climate change cannot be addressed without coordinated action by all major emitters. But Labor, he says, takes the view that “we must purify ourselves, regardless of how poor it makes us to become pure.”
Australians rally readily to green causes; in a 2006 survey, 65% said they were “environmentalists at heart.” But there are limits to how much they’re willing to pay for virtue. Emissions-cutting measures that save money — like low-energy light bulbs and more efficient appliances — have been widely adopted. But costlier items, like gas and solar hot water heaters, solar power panels, and rainwater tanks, have needed government subsidies to win consumer support. And while 60-70% of Australians approve of renewable energy, only 8% have signed up to GreenPower schemes, in which they pay extra to get part of their electricity from wind, solar or water generators. The Liberal-National coalition has promised to phase out incandescent light bulbs and increase rebates for green appliances; Labor is offering voters low-interest loans of up to $9,000 to help climate-proof their homes.
Both parties are at pains to reassure voters that whatever they do to address climate change, it won’t harm the $1 trillion economy that’s grown up during Howard’s 11-year tenure. For Labor, that priority has meant some less-than-pure-green policies. Rudd stunned many supporters last week when he abruptly embraced Howard’s position on a post-Kyoto climate treaty. It would be “an essential prerequisite” for a Labor government’s support, Rudd said, that developing nations also make binding commitments to rein in their carbon emissions. Explaining the now-mutual policy, Howard said: “We can’t have a situation where Australian industry is bound to take steps to curb greenhouse gas emissions, but competitive countries like China are not bound.” That, he said, would effectively export Australian emissions and jobs to China.
Green as their hearts may be, for most Australians the environment seems to be a less pressing election issue than the economy or health care. Howard and Rudd are offering voters big tax cuts, and financial help with everything from first-home purchases to children’s dentistry. Their rhetorical flourishes differ, but both are staking their political future on the belief that for now, at least, Australians fear storm clouds on the economic horizon more than their absence from the skies.
