Connect with us
https://tickernews.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/AmEx-Thought-Leaders.jpg

Ticker Views

Getting rid of fossil fuels is really hard and we’re not making much progress

Published

on

Getting rid of fossil fuels is really hard – and we’re not making much progress

Jason Edwards/Getty

Martin Brueckner, Murdoch University; Charles Roche, Murdoch University, and Tauel Harper, Murdoch University

If miners, the media, policymakers and renewable energy companies are to be believed, Australia is in the midst of a green energy transition aimed at preventing the worst effects of climate change.

This appealing narrative suggests we are progressively reducing greenhouse emissions by replacing fossil fuels with clean alternatives such as wind and solar power, batteries and electric vehicles.

But there’s a real problem in accepting this idea without question. To date, the green energy transition has largely added more energy to the mix, rather than actually replacing fossil fuels. In other words, our decarbonisation is yet to begin in earnest.

For countries with a laser focus on economic growth such as Australia, this means shifting away from fossil fuels is particularly challenging. Growth and fossil fuel use have long been linked.

As one of the world’s top three liquefied natural gas (LNG) exporters, Australia exports much of the problem. Tackling climate change would mean picking a fight with powerful industries that have dominated Australia’s economy and politics for decades.

Confronting the true scale of the decarbonisation challenge is daunting. We need to challenge fossil fuel interests in politics and consider whether continual economic growth can ever be compatible with climate stability.

Is the transition a mirage?

For at least two decades in Australia, much effort has gone towards making the green energy transition a reality. Solar panels are now on a third of Australian houses, while wind farms and large-scale solar funnel ever more energy into power grids, reaching new heights of 43% in the main grid this year. Electric vehicles are becoming more common on Australian roads, and the production of green steel is nascent but promising.

Australia’s direct emissions are slowly beginning to fall, due mainly to changes in land uses and, more recently, to renewables replacing coal plants. The latest figures show a 1.4% drop over the past year. But if the emissions of Australian gas and coal burned overseas are considered, Australia’s emissions would still be rising.

Positive trends foster assumptions that less and less fossil fuels will need to be burned.

This, however, isn’t guaranteed. Energy historians have pointed out new forms of energy don’t necessarily replace the older ones. Instead, they are getting added to the mix.

The world economy now uses more wood, coal, oil and gas than ever before. As a result, greenhouse gas emissions are still rising as fossil fuels continue to be used alongside renewables.

Hungry for energy

Energy use, carbon dioxide emissions and economic growth have long gone hand in hand. While some richer countries are managing to decouple economic growth from carbon emissions, these countries often effectively export emissions to poorer nations. It’s proving far harder to make absolute emissions cuts while still growing the economy.

In economics, it’s long been believed that energy consumption is determined by how fast an economy is growing.

Energy economists have since learned the opposite may be true: that only when energy is available, economic growth follows. When new energy sources emerge, they will be used to build more, drive technological change and other economic activities.

While green growth advocates hope new technology will make it possible to keep expanding the economy at minimal environmental cost, these hopes are misplaced.

In theory, renewable energy resources are near-infinite. If the world ran on 100% renewables, continual economic growth might be possible. But adding renewable energy to the mix while we exploit all available carbon-based energy won’t be enough to stop climate change or save species from extinction.

The way we think about the economy has to change from a focus on infinite growth to a restorative approach.

Fossil fuels won’t go without a fight

China’s recent success in stabilising emissions through very rapid renewable energy deployment suggests low-carbon development is still possible. But even this historic effort may not be enough to make the rapid, deep emission cuts needed to stave off the worst of climate change. China’s decades-long focus on economic growth has come at huge cost to its environment more broadly.

China’s massive renewables expansion was possible only because its government has actively pursued decarbonisation as a national priority, alongside building clean energy industries.

It’s a different story in Australia. While the nation has taken up solar at world-beating speed, successive governments have also worked to rapidly expand the LNG industry and keep coal alive.

From the Howard era onward, fossil fuel lobbyists have fought against the adoption of strong emissions targets, downplayed the urgency of climate action, and worked to stop measures such as the short-lived carbon price.

It seems unthinkable for an Australian government to deny a fossil fuel producer anything. Federal approval for Woodside’s giant North West Shelf project to continue is only the latest example of a political system unable to make the changes necessary to meaningfully cut emissions.

It doesn’t have to be this way, of course. Australia is rich in sun, wind, metals and critical minerals. Prominent figures from Rod Sims to Ross Garnaut to Alan Finkel have laid out how Australia could create large new green industries as the sun sets on fossil fuels. Big Australian companies say rapid emission cuts would spur huge new industries. But our attitude towards exploiting existing energy resources needs to change.

Grasping the true difficulty of keeping Australia’s fossil fuels safely in the ground is an essential first step before we can begin a more honest discussion about how to achieve a prosperous and safe future. Cutting emissions fast enough to avoid the very worst of climate change will require far greater ambition and far-reaching structural change to the economy.The Conversation

Martin Brueckner, Pro Vice Chancellor, Sustainability, Murdoch University; Charles Roche, Lecturer in Sustainability and Development, Murdoch University, and Tauel Harper, Associate Professor in Communications and Media, Murdoch University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Ticker Views

U.S. ambassador responds to NATO criticism at Munich Security Conference

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.

Published

on

At Munich Security Conference, U.S. NATO ambassador discussed defense autonomy, hybrid warfare, and transatlantic cooperation amid rising tensions.


At the Munich Security Conference, the U.S. ambassador to NATO faced tough questions on global order as European allies explored greater defense autonomy amid rising geopolitical tensions. The discussion highlighted the challenges NATO faces in maintaining unity while responding to evolving threats.

The ambassador addressed criticisms directly, emphasizing the importance of transatlantic cooperation and NATO’s role in ensuring international security. European nations voiced concerns about independent defense capabilities and the impact of hybrid warfare from Russia on regional stability.

Oz Sultan from Sultan Interactive Group provides analysis.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker

#MunichSecurityConference #NATO #GlobalSecurity #DefenseAutonomy #Geopolitics #TransatlanticAlliance #HybridWarfare #USForeignPolicy


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

Israeli President Herzog visits Australia amid rising antisemitism

Israeli President Herzog’s Australia visit strengthens solidarity and shared values amid recent attacks on the Jewish community.

Published

on

Israeli President Herzog’s Australia visit strengthens solidarity and shared values amid recent attacks on the Jewish community.


Israeli President Isaac Herzog’s visit to Australia marks a significant moment of solidarity between the two nations, especially following recent tragic attacks affecting the Jewish community. The visit underscores shared democratic values and a commitment to combating antisemitism.

Professor Tim Harcourt from UTS discusses the deeper significance of the visit, including the Australian government’s message and the broader implications for Jewish Australians. The timing, following the Bondi attack, highlights the sensitive context in which this diplomatic engagement occurs.

Subscribe to never miss an episode of Ticker – https://www.youtube.com/@weareticker


Download the Ticker app

Continue Reading

Ticker Views

Rebuilding Gaza: Lessons from the Phoenix Plan

Published

on

What will a rebuilt Gaza look like? The competing visions for the Strip’s future

A girl walks along a street in Gaza to get food during the war between Hamas and Israel.
Jaber Jehad Badwan / Wikimedia Commons, FAL

Timothy J. Dixon, University of Reading; University of Oxford

Following a visit to Gaza in January, the UN undersecretary general, Jorge Moreira da Silva, called the level of destruction there “overwhelming”. He estimated that, on average, every person in the densely populated territory is now “surrounded by 30 tonnes of rubble”.

This staggering level of destruction raises urgent questions about how, and by whom, Gaza should be rebuilt. Since 2023, a variety of reconstruction plans and other initiatives have tried to imagine what Gaza could look like when the conflict ends for good. But which of these visions will shape Gaza’s future?

The Israeli government’s Gaza 2035 plan, which was unveiled in 2024, lays out a three-stage programme to integrate the Gaza Strip into a free-trade zone with Egypt’s El-Arish Port and the Israeli city of Sderot.

AI renderings show futuristic skyscrapers, solar farms and water desalination plants in the Sinai peninsula. The plan also shows offshore oil rigs and a new high-speed rail corridor along Salah al-Din Road, Gaza’s main highway that connects Gaza City and Rafah.

The US government has proposed a similar futuristic vision for Gaza. Its August 2025 Gaza Reconstitution, Economic Acceleration and Transformation Trust plan shows a phased series of modern, AI-powered smart cities developed over a ten-year time frame. The plan, which would place Gaza under a US-run trusteeship, suggested that poor urban design lies at the heart of “Gaza’s ongoing insurgency”.

Jared Kushner presenting the ‘Gaza Riviera’ Project at World Economic Forum in Davos, January 2026.

The latest iteration of this vision was unveiled by Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, at the recent World Economic Forum in Davos.

He presented slides showing Gaza reconstructed as a “Riviera” of the Middle East, with luxury beachfront resorts, gleaming tower blocks, residential zones and modern transport hubs. Kushner suggested it was “doable” to complete the construction of a “new” Rafah city in “two to three years”.

It has been reported that the US and Israeli visions are heavily influenced by US-based economics professor Joseph Pelzman’s economic plan for Gaza. This plan, Pelzman said on a podcast in 2024, would involve destroying Gaza and restarting from scratch.

In contrast to the US and Israeli visions, the February 2025 Gaza “Phoenix” plan includes input from the people of Gaza. It has a much stronger focus on maintaining and reconstructing the existing buildings, culture and social fabric of the enclave.

The plan was developed by a consortium of international experts together with professionals and academics from Gaza, the West Bank and the Palestinian diaspora, and suggests a reconstruction and development phase of at least five years.

Other plans from the Arab world take a more technocratic view of reconstruction, but still have a short timescale for reconstruction. These include a five-year plan by the United Arab Emirates-based Al Habtoor Group, which promises to grant 70% of ownership in the holding company that will manage Gaza’s reconstruction to the Palestinians.

Feasibility of rebuilding Gaza

So, how feasible are these different visions and how inclusive are they for the people of Gaza? Rebuilding cities after war takes time and money, and also requires local resources. Even in China, a country with plentiful resources and abundant skilled labour, major new cities are rarely completed in less than 20 years.

And in Gaza rebuilding will be complicated by the fact that there are now 61 million tonnes of rubble there, as well as other hazardous debris such as unexploded munitions and human remains. This will need to be removed before any reconstruction can commence, with the UN estimating that clearing the rubble alone could take as long as 20 years.

For comparison, the Polish capital of Warsaw experienced a similar level of destruction during the second world war and it took four decades to rebuild and reconstruct the city’s historic centre. The time frames for reconstruction outlined in all of the plans for Gaza are far shorter than this and, even with modern construction methods, are unlikely to be feasible.

The US and Israeli visions also fail to include Palestinians in the planning of Gaza’s future, overlooking any need to consult with Gazan residents and community groups. This has led critics to argue that the plans amount to “urbicide”, the obliteration of existing cultures through war and reconstruction.

Reports that suggest Gazan residents will be offered cash payments of US$5,000 (£3,650) to leave Gaza “voluntarily” under the US plan, as well as subsidies covering four years of rent outside Gaza, will not have alleviated these concerns.

At the same time, the US plan does not propose a conventional land compensation programme for Gazan residents who lost their homes and businesses during the war. These people will instead be offered digital tokens in exchange for the rights to redevelop their land.

The tokens could eventually be redeemed for an apartment in one of Gaza’s new cities. But the plan also envisages the sale of tokens to investors being used to fund reconstruction. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organisation in the US, says the “mass theft” of Palestinian land through the token scheme would amount to a war crime.

With their emphasis on community engagement and the repair and renewal of existing structures, the Phoenix plan and the other Arab-led visions are at least a step forward. But without a fully democratic consensus on how to rebuild Gaza, it is difficult to see how the voices of the Gazan people can be heard.

Whichever vision wins out, history shows that post-war reconstruction succeeds when it involves those whose lives have been destroyed. This is evidenced somewhat ironically by the US Marshall Plan, which funded the reconstruction of many European economies and cities after the second world war, and involved close engagement with civil society and local communities to achieve success.The Conversation

Timothy J. Dixon, Emeritus Professor in the School of the Built Environment, University of Reading; University of Oxford

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Continue Reading

Trending Now