@BimbleboxNR This project has been granted State and Federal environmental approval, largely on the proviso of that impacts on @BimbleboxNR and its biodiversity will be "offset". I've described these issues here:
Apart from the issues with #offsets, can I just remind you that @BimbleboxNR is a privately owned and managed protected area, that the Queensland Government formally recognised for its biodiversity values theconversation.com/no-refuge-when…
Nature refuges, like @BimbleboxNR are not excempt from mining. Yet their values are still counted towards Australia's protected area targets under the Convention for Biological Diversity , and the Sustainable Development Goals australiasnaturehub.gov.au/action-invento…
@BimbleboxNR Thats a bit shit, right? Private landholders voluntarily protect their land and water, and the Government takes credit for it?
Back in 2013, Vanessa Adams @UTAS_ and Katie Moon @UNSWCanberra interviewed Qld nature refuge owners and documented their concerns about contradictory private protected area policies in Australia sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
@UTAS_@UNSWCanberra These are landholders who are *voluntarily* protecting biodiversity, often alongside sustainable agriculture. These are the innovators, leaders and entrepreneoours of the land and ag sectors, who we should be supporting and championing.
Instead, thanks to this country's obsession with digging stuff up and shipping it overseas to be burnt, their efforts are literally being bulldozed.
Last year, the @QldGov introduced a new class of protected areas under the Nature Conservation Act called Special Wildlife Reserves. SWRs explicitly *exclude* mining environment.des.qld.gov.au/wildlife/natur…
Could @BimbleboxNR become a Special Wildlife Reserve? Are we only going to see SWRs granted in locations that are not suitable for #coal mining?
👉The root cause of this scandal is the Clean Energy Regulator, which has allowed HIR projects to include uncleared lands when the projects started in their credited areas
📝 There are multiple lines of evidence that show the HIR method should only be applied in locations...
...that have been previously cleared.
One is the the Explanatory Statement to the method () which says: “The Determination applies to projects in which land has been cleared of native vegetation and where regrowth has been suppressed for at least 10 years.”legislation.gov.au/F2013L00162/as…
The ANU-UNSW research team has analysed the recently released CEA (carbon estimation area) for HIR #carbon projects. The results are unsurprisingly bad. 🧵Full papers and interactive data linked below: 1/
HIR (human-induced regen of permanent even-aged native forest) carbon projects have generated ~30% of ACCUs issued under the #EmissionsReductionFund; 37 million ACCUs. They cover more than 31 million ha, ~ the size of Japan. The world’s largest offset type by project area. 2/
Following the Chubb review & the #SafeguardMechanism deal, CEA (carbon estimation area) data has been made public:
Our team's analyses have repeatedly been criticized as incomplete without CEA data. Now we've analysed it, and the results are clear. 3/ https://t.co/wx5hWg1yMQcleanenergyregulator.gov.au/ERF/project-an…
The Australian Government @DCCEEW last week quietly released draft National Environmental Standards (NES) for Matters of National Environmental Significance (MNES) as part of its #EPBCAct reform.
*2 weeks consultation*, due 22 May 2023
A🧵on key issues👇 consult.dcceew.gov.au/draft-nes-for-…
Note the overarching MNES standard is the first to be released, there are others in development that will be released (hopefully) soon, including for:
- Environmental Offsets
- Regional Planning
- First Nations Engagement and Participation
- Community Engagement
2/
First, what's the overall goal? #NaturePositive! (it's mentioned 19 times in the document)
What does this mean? Apparently - a "collective outcome" where the environment is "repaired, regenerated and protected", requiring action everyone, not just government.
On Tues, @DCCEEW say Chubb made recommendations on how the HIR method should be interpreted *but* didn't say the method had been incorrectly interpreted to date.
@sarahinthesen8 "Why would you have to clarify interpretation if it [HIR] hadn't been misinterpreted?"
Oh cry me a river. How on earth could their projects be "undermined" by sharing data which could quickly an easily prove their integrity. #ACCU#climate#auspol
Also nice for GreenCollar to put this on "it's landholders" so if we call this out we're being mean to farmers, rather a multi-million dollar corporation.
The data carbon companies could freely release (the Regulator & all others are prohibited to release by law) are Carbon Estimation Areas (CEAs) - green shapes shown below
The project area shapefiles (around CEAs) are *already public* - downloadable here researchdata.edu.au/area-based-emi…