Views towards 2050 net zero emissions target
Q. In a recent speech, Scott Morrison stated Australia’s goal is to “…reach net zero emissions as soon as possible, and preferably by 2050”.
However, the Prime Minister did not formally commit to this goal or specify how the federal government plans to achieve it.
‘Net zero’ carbon emissions means a situation when Australia’s carbon emissions become less than or equal to the amount of carbon we are removing from the atmosphere.
Which of the following is closer to your view?
| Total | Federal Voting Intention | ||||
| Labor | TOTAL: Coalition | Greens | TOTAL: Other | ||
| We need to set a target for when we will get carbon emissions down to ‘net zero’, and worry about setting dates for reductions along the way later | 32% | 36% | 31% | 38% | 33% |
| It is more important that we set realistic targets for reducing our emissions by 2030, than having a target date for achieving net zero | 58% | 57% | 57% | 62% | 50% |
| We shouldn’t have targets for reducing carbon emissions | 9% | 7% | 12% | 1% | 17% |
| Base (n) | 1,109 | 359 | 428 | 101 | 131 |
- Most people prefer the government to set concrete targets for reducing emissions, rather than setting a target date for achieving net zero emissions in the future.
- Over half (58%) of people think it is more important that we set realistic targets for reducing our emissions by 2030, than having a target date for achieving net zero. This is the prevalent view across all voting intentions.
- Just over a third (32%) think we need to set a target for when we will get carbon emissions down to ‘net zero’, and worry about setting dates for reductions along the way later. 9% think we shouldn’t have targets for reducing carbon emissions.
Delay Carbon Tax
Q. Do you think Australia should delay imposing a carbon pollution tax until the US has established an equal or stronger carbon pricing system? (Question commissioned by Network Ten)
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | Men | Women | Aged
18-34 |
Aged
35-54 |
Aged 55+ | |
| Yes | 45% | 33% | 62% | 13% | 51% | 40% | 34% | 47% | 56% |
| No | 33% | 47% | 21% | 71% | 34% | 33% | 40% | 31% | 29% |
| Don’t know | 21% | 20% | 17% | 16% | 15% | 27% | 25% | 22% | 15% |
45% of respondents think Australia should delay imposing a carbon pollution tax until the US has established an equal or stronger carbon pricing system and 33% think we should not delay.
Those most likely to think Australia should delay imposing a carbon pollution tax were Coalition voters (62%), men (51%) and aged 55+ (56%).
Those most likely to disagree were Greens voters (71%), Labor voters (47%) and aged 18-34 (40%).
Download the Network Ten: Essential Question of the Week (1.1 MB pdf)
Leadership or Broken Promise
Q. Tony Abbott and the opposition claim this is a ‘backflip’ on a promise Prime Minister Gillard made before the 2010 election not to introduce a carbon tax in the next term of parliament. Which of the following statements is closest to your view:
| Total | Vote Labor | Vote Lib/Nat | Vote Greens | |
| The Prime Minister has broken an election promise and should wait until after the next election before introducing a carbon pollution tax | 59% | 33% | 86% | 26% |
| The Prime Minister is showing strong leadership on an issue of national importance | 27% | 51% | 7% | 67% |
| Don’t know | 13% | 16% | 7% | 7% |
59% agree are more likely to think that the Prime Minister has broken an election promise and should wait until after the next election before introducing a carbon pollution tax and 27% believe she is showing strong leadership on an issue of national importance.
Opinions are strongly related to voting intention although a substantial minority (33%) of Labor voters agree that the Prime Minister has broken an election promise and should wait.
COVID-19 RESEARCH
Read Essential's ongoing research on the public response to Covid-19.
Essential Report
Sign up for updates
Receive the Essential Report in your inbox.Essential Tags
Recent Comments
