Also important to recognize that Australia's carbon contribution is not solely limited to domestic output but also our coal industry. Australia is the largest exporter of coal in the world and this is not properly accounted for in our emissions accounting. On a per-person basis, our output is among the highest in the world and the inaction of others does not absolve us from having a moral responsibility to clean up our own mess at the very least.
Counting exports would lead to double counting: once for the exporter, once for the user.
All that matters is countries having fair targets, and meeting those targets.
Countries are free to meet their emissions reductions targets how they like, including buying cheap coal from Australia, planes from US, and cars from Germany.
It would double count emissions but it does mean that Australia could do more than just eliminate their own emissions, they could limit other countries' as well by stopping export.
Let's walk before we can run. It's difficulty enough to get countries to reduce their own emissions. Asking them to compromise their exports to reduce others' emissions is simply not viable at the moment.
Why shouldn't a citizenry decide to limit exports of certain goods when it is in their own interest to do so? We certainly do this with uranium already. Likewise with weapons technology and all manner of harmful trade vectors.
Australia's coal industry provides few jobs, is heavily government subsidized (either explicitly or through direct infrastructure funding), pays little to no tax, and creates environmental harm that the majority of the electorate disagree with.
[Sorry HN: I know I should be supporting this with annotations but am time pressed today.]
