Australia's stance on coal funding queried By Adam Morton The Turnbull government has been accused of supporting a "negative carbon price" by standing in the way of the United States and Japan as they try to dramatically reduce the ability of rich countries to fund coal plants in the developing world.
The move has once again prompted claims that the government is risking Australia's international reputation on climate change. 
Documents seen by Fairfax Media show Australia has opposed a US- Japan plan that would in effect limit public financing of coal-generated power by Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries to only the "cleanest" coal plants available, mostly those classed as "ultra-supercritical" generators.
The proposal is to be debated at an OECD meeting next week in Paris, amid hopes it will provide a boost to the global climate summit a fortnight later.
A source familiar with the discussions said: "There would be a very real-world, material difference under this proposal".
It is expected it could reduce the funding of coal by OECD public agencies by billions by making more polluting power stations ineligible.
Japan - the world's largest public financier of coal plants - last month reversed years of opposition and will now back the US proposal. The US- Japan plan also includes a clause that a coal plant could only win public funding if cleaner alternatives, such as renewables, were not viable.
But the deal will be scuppered if Australia and South Korea remain opposed. Australia's submission, filed in response to the US-Japan plan, would still allow large "supercritical" coal plants to be publicly financed, despite their higher emissions, and would not require an evaluation of cleaner alternatives.
Australia is one of the world's biggest coal exporters, but its export credit agency, the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation, does not fund coal plants.
The source familiar with the talks said countries supporting the current position were, in effect, supporting a "negative carbon price" - an incentive for developing countries to build coal plants rather than look for cleaner alternatives.
Australia has pledged $200million to the Green Climate Fund to help the poorest cope with global warming, so the source said the proposal to keep the current rules on coal funding was "akin to bailing water out of a sinking canoe while at the same time making a larger hole in the hull".
Through a spokesman, Trade and Investment Minister Andrew Robb said Australia's objective was to ensure developing countries had access to the "best high efficiency, low emissions technologies at the cheapest price to support development and to alleviate poverty".
"Australia is working constructively with other OECD members and negotiations are continuing," Mr Robb said.
Jennifer Morgan, global climate director at the Washington-based World Resources Institute, said Canberra's submission meant it would like the OECD to continue to support funding of coal.
"Its proposal would effectively continue the status quo," she said.
"Internationally, people are looking to see whether the Turnbull government will differentiate itself from the Abbott government and join the rest of the OECD in charting a path for clean energy."
In Australia, 10 environment and like-minded groups, including Greenpeace, WWF, the Wilderness Society and the Australian Conservation Foundation, have written an open letter to the government calling on it to back the US and Japan and ratify a deal.
The letter says it would be "deeply embarrassing" for Australia if it were the only country to not support or further weaken an agreement - "particularly when countries such as Japan and Germany, which export coal plant technology, have agreed to limit support for coal plants".