How much climate change action do you get for $1 billion?
OPINION: How much climate change action do you get for $1 billion? It's a question which matters because public consultation is about to begin on Auckland Councils proposed, ground-breaking targeted rate , intended to accelerate the reduction of climate-harming emissions. The Climate Action Targeted Rate (CATR) would raise $574 million from ratepayers over a decade, with the rest hoped to come from Government funding, and, a modelled $127m fare revenue boost from additional public transport services. The work it would fund is must-do stuff. Faster replacement of diesel buses and ferries , with low or zero carbon versions, many more frequent services, more walking and cycling routes and planting trees where they are needed most. READ MORE: * Most Aucklanders not planning to drive less, despite climate fears survey * Covid-19: Omicron and the threat it poses to Auckland climate action * Climate change: Bigger Auckland plan won't reduce emissions by 2030 The thing is, how much does CATR help towards the goal of halving carbon emissions by 2030 , and with transport emissions needing to fall by 64 per cent? More importantly, will the introduction of CATR lull Aucklanders into thinking the emissions-reduction job is done, and that their lives - and habits can continue as they are? The answer to whats the impact of CATR? at the moment is a sobering one, and not something the council has bandied about in public. Based on current modelling assumptions, it is estimated that the transport components of the package could reduce emissions by 47,000 tonnes of CO2 over 10 years and 12,000 tonnes CO2 a year in 2032, council said in a statement to Stuff . That might sound like a lot of carbon, even over 10 years. But its not. Auckland needs to reduce transport emissions annually, by millions of tonnes. Council has emphasised the modelling used to come up with those numbers may be inadequate, more work is being done and that CATR is by no means the total of its emission reductions work. It is challenging to estimate emissions reductions as a result of transport interventions due to the complex nature of the transport system and behaviour change, said the council. But one risk of CATR is that it might distract both the politicians, as well as Aucklanders, from what really needs to be done. People simply need to drive a lot less. That will require swift, bold and possibly unpopular political action, and Auckland will need to get on with everything within its power not necessarily wait for Government action. The scale of the challenge has been highlighted in an opinion survey carried out by council agency Auckland Transport (AT). Respondents believed in climate change (82 per cent), backed immediate action (78 per cent) and agreed it would impact their lifestyle (59 per cent). Only 43 per cent said they would reduce driving in the coming year, or at least consider it even though one estimate is that private motoring will need to shrink by 40 per cent by 2030. Questions about the impact of CATR have been raised publicly by councillor Wayne Walker, who believed there might be faster, better and cheaper ways of cutting emissions and changing behaviour. Aucklanders and the choices they make are a huge part of us reducing our emissions, he said. There is more to come on how this might be achieved, with the council and AT working on a Transport Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP) , a more nuts-and-bolts exercise on action and timing. The targetted rate and what it can achieve are an important step. But the really big work is elsewhere, and ultimately, in the hands of Aucklanders.