Credit: EveryStockPhoto
- Advertisement -
Sydney recently hosted the Carbon Solutions conference, which brought together industry, business and government players.
The big message was that a carbon market is one complex beast.
One interesting points that came out of the talks was the future of voluntary offsets - that is, carbon offsets that anyone can buy, as opposed to those that are wrapped up in an emissions trading scheme (ETS).
It seems the government has been so focussed on creating an ETS that it hasn't had time yet to contemplate what would happen to the offsets available to the average person.
Presently, it's tough enough wade through the mire of carbon offsets available, given that there's no regulation.
If you want to offset your flight from Brisbane to Sydney, say, you need to tread carefully to know that you really are buying offsets that will take the equivalent of carbon out of the air that you add to it by flying.
As a buyer, you want to make sure that the offsets you buy will not be sold again to someone else, that the carbon is offset now (as opposed to years later when trees grow up), and that your offset credit hasn't just moved the problem from one forest to the other.
Websites like Carbon Offset Guide and Carbon Offset Watch are helpful, but you might not need to worry so much about offsets if you try and reduce your carbon footprint in the first place, says RMIT's global sustainability director Caroline Bayliss.
This will be a whole lot more important once the ETS is implemented in 2010.
The carbon offsets available now will end up in the ETS for big businesses to purchase. So where does that leave the average consumer?
Some industries, such as forestry, might choose to opt out of the ETS, so the rest of us can buy offsets from them, Bayliss says. And there's also going to be the smaller providers - your local organisation which regenerates land, for example.
But, argues Bayliss, an easy solution is to have a separate voluntary system so average consumers know the offsets they're buying are above and beyond the ETS and that they're quality credits.
"The government see [the carbon solution] as a silver bullet. I see it as a silver buckshot," she says.
Comments
This offset thing is going to make a number of swindlers very rich without producing anything worthwhile. Summits, conferences and meetings are not worthwhile, except if one gets sent to exotic locations for them to live it up in luxury, all at the tax payer's expense.
A complex beast - absolutely, but not untameable, that is as long as we don't rely on the Government to be the Ring Master. Voluntarily buying offsets is an incredibly personal decision, and one best made when good information is available.
Whether you buy offsets that support renewable energy; are generated through the plantation of trees; methane gas-flaring; bio-diversity or avoided deforestation; deciding which offset to buy comes down to personal preference. That's where things like the Carbon Offset Watch really help consumers make informed decisions as well as encourage Offset Providers to maintain standards and ensure high levels of transparency - something that the Australian Government seems not so good at.
Since ratifying the Kyoto Protocol, carbon credits generated through the Government's Greenhouse Friendly Program cease to be truly additional; that is, the emissions reductions Greenhouse Friendly carbon credits achieve go toward helping the government meet its emissions reductions targets - something they are required to do anyway. Should people taking voluntary action really be buying offsets that help-out the Goverment? Personally, I think not - I want to know that my money goes toward making a difference beyond what Government do. Surely, K Rudd and the DCC have realised that Australians take climate change seriously and expect Government to be doing all they can to reduce emissions.
So let's hope that the 'confused mentality' surrounding offsets; their use; and their intended effect gains more focus when White Paper is released. And hope that Government realises that the point of offsets is provide an economic incentive to reduce greenhouse gas emissions through renewable energy and other projects as well as create disincentives for environmentally damaging practices. The voluntary carbon market has consistently grown during the last few years, indicating that 'yes', Australians want to take action on climate change, but we need to make sure that this groundswell of support is converted into real emissions reductions. Offsets should NOT: allow companies to continue to their business as usual practices; encourage environmental complacency; or direct funds to project that would and should have occurred anyway.
The Australian Government need to get this right and quickly, there is a lot to learn from our counterparts overseas and industy leaders. Offset standards already exist to ensure transparency and the effectiveness of carbon offset programs - but these can obviously be improved: Imagine, Australian taking a leaderhsip ont this one?
Voluntary carbon offset markets need not be complex - its about mitigating climate change through more clean energy and less greenhouse gas emissions.
Jess works for Climate Friendly