News

 

Will Australia’s emissions waiting game pay off?




With the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) having just passed its first anniversary, it is a good time to look at whether a market-based ETS is likely to have any impact on our country’s emissions. After all, while New Zealand has forged ahead with the ETS as its primary response to climate change, our closest neighbours, who have a bigger emissions reduction target, have yet to implement any emissions reduction measures.

After just 12 months, it is, of course, too early to draw any meaningful conclusions. However the Minister for the Environment, Dr Nick Smith, outlined the scheme’s performance in his recent speech at the Climate Change and Business Conference.

According to Dr Smith, the emissions levels reported in the deforestation, energy and industrialised sectors were 30% lower than forecast, whereas transport, or liquid fuel emissions, were about 25 percent higher than expected.

Dr Smith also reported behavioural changes, particularly amongst the forestry sector, as every year since the ETS started, the sector has seen a growth in afforestation and a reduction in deforestation, a trend that is forecast to continue. Applications for renewable energy sources also continue to grow.

This view needs to be treated with caution as the figures for 2010 are projections only. New Zealand’s current position is that we are in credit – net emissions are below Kyoto commitments. Measured reductions in total emissions have occurred prior to the implementation of the ETS and for 2009 could be due to the high rainfall in that year increasing hydro electricity generation, the economic downturn, and low log prices delaying harvesting. In 2009 NZ emissions were 11.9 Mt higher than 1990 (our target) and NZ can only meet its Kyoto commitments due to the forest sector removing CO2 from the atmosphere. It also needs to be remembered that the forest sector will not always lead to net removals.

New Zealand’s ETS is a market-based system which aims to create a financial driver to reduce emissions by imposing a cost on carbon. Participants have an emissions allocation which is converted into carbon credits. Those companies that emit more than their allocation have to purchase additional credits from those participants who have an excess due to their activities that absorb greenhouse gases.

By not taking an early stance, Australia has the opportunity to benefit from the experience of other countries to design a system that works best for its situation. The emissions profile of Australia is very different to that of New Zealand, for example there is a much smaller agriculture sector. Therefore its emissions reduction response needs different actions.  A comparison of the Australian and NZ schemes, as they currently stand, is shown below.

  New Zealand Australia
Name Emissions Trading Scheme Clean Energy Future
Progress Implemented but under review To go to senate for approval
Price Capped at $NZ 25 per tonne CO2 ($AU 19.90) Fixed Price period to July 2013 $AU 23.00 - 25.40 per tonne CO2
Coverage All sectors but some have allocations and phase in period 60% of emissions
Sectors Energy, fishing, forestry, horticulture, agriculture, waste, synthetic gas, liquid fossil fuels  and industry 500 of the largest emitters in a number of sectors
Sectors Excluded No significant sectors but this is subject to the results of the current review Agriculture and Land Use Change
Phase in Period

Payment for 0.5 emission units for every 1 unit emitted until Dec 2012.

Agriculture enters in 2015 with 90% allocation.

Waste and Synthetic gas enter in 2013.

Fixed price period July 2012 to July 2015, then a cap and trade system
International Linkages Units can be bought from approved international sources. NZ forestry can sell units internationally Cannot trade international units until after the fixed price period (July 2015)
Other Relevant Policy Energy Efficiency and Conservation Strategy

Carbon farming initiative

Renewable Energy Target

If Australia was to follow New Zealand’s example with a similar ETS, costs related to direct inputs, such as electricity, diesel and fertiliser, would force prices up in the produce sector. Transportation and packaging would be additional impacts to the supply chain. It then begs the question of how these costs would be recovered, whether consumers would foot the bill, and if that would actually work against the desired result of behavioural change.

Whether the ETS is a primary driver for emission reductions is yet to be proved, but the jury is out on whether the carrot (incentives to buy “greener” products) or the stick (regulation and taxation against emitters) is more productive. Australia can benefit from watching and waiting to learn from everyone else first, but it must be backed by strong analysis.

The need for emissions reductions to prevent human induced climate change has prompted emission reduction programmes across the globe that aim to change consumer purchasing behavior towards goods with lower embodied emissions and efficient modes of transport. It remains to be seen if such changes will reduce emissions enough. Other changes that reduce consumption and population are also likely to be required.

Page 1 of 8  > >>

Aug 31, 2017

August 2017 Newsletter
View our August 2017 newsletter. Read more...

May 31, 2017

May 2017 Newsletter
View our May 2017 newsletter. Read more...

Apr 26, 2017

Export Regulations Compliance Workshop

About 15 regulatory managers from a wide range of sectors spent a stimulating morning sharing and learning about exporting regulations in the complex world of food.

Read more...

Dec 16, 2016

Promoting healthy foods without falling foul of the Fair Trading Act

There is a real focus in the food industry on producing food that is enjoyable, convenient and healthy for consumers. It’s important to know how to promote healthy foods without falling foul of the Fair Trading Act. We recently worked with Viberi, a producer of New Zealand organic blackcurrant berries, on the labelling of their product.

Read more...

Dec 14, 2016

When is a good idea a viable business opportunity?
We all have good ideas – but how do we know if they will make a viable business? This article explains what a feasibility study involves, and how one could help you assess the viability of your idea. Read more...

Dec 9, 2016

First Access Floor EPD in Australasia

Catalyst is excited to have worked with ASP Access Floors Pty Ltd to undertake a full life cycle assessment of its flooring system, gaining the first Environmental Product Declaration (EDP) for a flooring system in Australasia.

Read more...

Dec 9, 2016

Catalyst team news

The Catalyst team has been busy, from participating in Climathon to working on agricultural aid in Pakistan and being invited to peer review country GHG inventories for the UNFCCC, this item will update you on what we’ve been up to.

Read more...

Dec 9, 2016

Sustainability reporting for NZX listed companies

Sustainability reporting is encouraged, or mandatory, for listed companies on many overseas stock exchanges, and it looks like New Zealand will soon be following suit. We take a look at the state of play in NZ and what it means for listed companies in NZ.

Read more...

Oct 3, 2016

Farewell to Malcolm

After 15 years with Catalyst Malcolm is moving to the Bay of Plenty and back to his roots in horticulture to take up a role as general manager with PlusGroup Horticulture.

Read more...

Oct 3, 2016

Blackcurrants make Korean TV

Catalyst applied our food expertise to a unique project when a Korean television crew landed in New Zealand at short notice to make a programme about blackcurrants.

Read more...
Subscribe to RSS

Join our newsletter

Click here to join our free, regular, electronic newsletter.

Read the News

Use the menu on the left to select the item of interest, or view the latest newsletter on the link below.

Last Newsletter

November 2017

Previous Newsletters

August 2017
May 2017
October 2016
July 2016
May 2016
April 2016
February 2016
Christmas 2015

News (7)