Advice to the Australian govt on international offsets should probably acknowledge the failure of carbon trading to decarbonise economies for the last 30 yrs. Or at least suggest how the use of offsets now will bring about a different outcome. #auspol 🧵
Proponents always talk about offsets increasing/unlocking climate 'ambition'. Actually, the climate outcomes of carbon markets are dependent on the ambition of the countries buying & selling the offsets. To date, this ambition has been low and emissions have increased. 2/
In practice it is hard to establish a relationship between the existence of carbon offsets and a willingness to commit to more climate action at a project/system level. Offsetting often gives the appearance of doing something about climate change, while increasing emissions. 3/
In fairness the review consultation docs did ask "Are there lessons to be learned from experience with international carbon markets to date?" But these lessons didn't really make it into the report. 4/
That is they have failed to provide developing countries with income, low emissions infrastructure/ technology transfer that was meant to create cleaner, prosperous economies . Developed economies are – by choice – still reliant on fossil fuels too.5/
Many developing countries are still dependent on fossil fuels & lack the infrastructure/funding to decarbonise their economies, yet they are now expected to meet their own climate targets AND keep selling their offsets to rich countries that want to keep producing gas & coal.6/
Again, in fairness, the current govt is not as gung ho on international offsets as the Coalition, but Australia has around 114 new gas and coal projects in the pipeline. Offsets are the key to 'meeting' climate targets and increasing emissions. 7/
In fact the existence of offsets is facilitating an increase in fossil fuel production. The UNFCCC says participation in carbon markets can't lead to a net increase in emissions. It is difficult to see how Australia’s approach to offsetting will not lead to a net increase.8/
I find it amazing that none of this is acknowledged or addressed. Surely the fundamental question by govt/market participants/stakeholders claiming to want climate ambition should be 'will the use of offsets lead to a net reduction in emissions?' not 'which ones will we use?' 9/
.@TheAusInstitute made a submission to the Climate Change Authority on Australia's use of international offsets, raising the concerns above and more. It's worth reading to get a better understanding of this issue. australiainstitute.org.au/report/hot-air… 10/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The Climate Change Authority is an independent statutory authority tasked with giving advice to the Australian Government on climate policy. It is hard to see how this advice will be independent when there appear to be conflicts of interest in the governance of the CCA. 🧵#auspol
Disclaimer: I am making no allegations of impropriety by any individual. However, there is clear potential for perceived conflicts by the appointment of industry interests to a government body shaping Australian climate policy. 1/
Section 28 of the the Climate Change Authority Act 2011 clearly states board members must not engage in any paid employment that conflicts or may conflict with the proper performance of his or her duties. #auspol 2/
This is a bit disingenuous of Telstra. They're a telco that chose to become a fossil gas and electricity retailer and are now making a 'good news' story out of offsetting the subsequent emissions. #climate google.com/amp/s/amp.abc.…
In fairness I think they were on the right path with reducing their organisational emissions. But I'm not sure selling 'carbon neutral' fossil fuels aligns with the urgency or higher moral purpose they have been alluding to.
Also @Telstra is only suggesting growing trees on a 240ha block of land. That's really not going to store very much Co2.
The government’s solution to all policy issues – no matter how disparate - is gas expansion: COVID, climate change, national security...Looking forward to gas pitched as the answer to the aged care crisis or improving public education outcomes. #auspolafr.com/companies/ener…
Support for the gas industry won't address an imaginary gas shortage in Australia b/c most of the gas extracted here is not even for domestic use. War has provided another cover story for what govt was going to do all along: protect the revenue stream of the fossil fuel industry.
Exploiting people’s anxiety & suffering during a war to promote gas expansion is so unbelievably low. But it's the MO of this government. Fear was leveraged to secure gas as key to 'economic' prosperity during COVID and a 'reliable', 'low emissions' fuel to address climate change
In case there's any doubt that Angus Taylor is actively increasing the supply of carbon credits available to the secondary market he said it yet again this morning. #auspol#climate
What's the easiest way to increase supply of a product? Lower the quality. What happens when supply of product increases? The price drops. What's the inevitable result? Enough affordable credits big emitters can use to 'offset' emissions rather than change their business model.
The biggest buyers on the market are big emitters buying up credits to meet future compliance demands & speculative investors. It's a misconception that its a flurry of well-meaning corporates setting net zero targets (most of them are just buying cheap international units).
The Australian government is on the hunt in the Indo-Pacific region specifically for carbon credits that Australian businesses can buy (that will also count towards Australia's climate targets) 2/
This project is in PNG under a framework called @VerraStandards. It covers 400k ha and intends to generate 800 m carbon credits over 100 yrs by stopping logging & land conversion in the region. 'Avoided deforestation' is a problematic concept in itself:
The govt has announced a carbon offset method for 'blue carbon'. Blue carbon is basically the 'soil carbon of the sea'. Lots of hype but its capacity to permanently and infinitely store CO2 is being wildly overinflated.1/ #climate#auspol
via @livcasben canberratimes.com.au/story/7586235/…
Blue carbon is the storage of CO2 by coastal ecosystems. Mangroves mostly. This offset method gives projects carbon credits for removing barriers to tidal flows so coastal veg and soil regenerate. The carbon credits can then be sold to businesses to offset their emissions. 2/
I say blue carbon is the 'soil carbon of the sea' because the govt has wildly inflated the capacity of soil to store carbon with no regard to Aus' changing climate or soil science. The same is happening with blue carbon. theguardian.com/australia-news… 3/