Government thinks its climate policy is planting too many trees - Stuff

Government thinks its climate policy is planting too many trees | Stuff.co.nz

Government thinks its climate policy is planting too many trees

The Government isn’t happy that its key climate policy is planting oodles of carbon-absorbing trees instead of driving clean energy.

It has released ideas to get its Emissions Trading Scheme (or ETS) to more effectively reduce pollution.

Currently, a large emitter can buy carbon units from forests to cover its entire greenhouse footprint, which effectively offsets the pollution rather than affecting how much is produced in the first place. That could change, as part of the official review.

When it was first designed in the late 2000s, the ETS aimed to drive down net emissions – which counts the release of greenhouse gas from coal, oil and gas plus any removals from carbon-sequestering forests.

If it was cheaper for companies to fund tree-planting than to ditch fossil fuels, the ETS would incentivise lots of new forests.

That’s currently what’s happening, according to the Government’s adviser the Climate Change Commission. It estimated more than 60,000 hectares of exotic forest were planted last year.

The commission has repeatedly recommended the Government address this issue. If left as is, commission chair Rod Carr said, “it will ultimately put our economy at a competitive disadvantage relative to a decarbonised global economy and shift cost burdens onto future generations”.

Climate Change Minister James Shaw and Forestry Minister PeeniHenare presented four ideas and launched a public consultation on Monday morning.

Under one proposal, large emitters would only be allowed to use a limited number of forestry credits to offset their pollution. This echoes the Californian Emissions Trading Scheme – which allows between 4 and 6% of a companies’ footprint to come from approved “offsets”.

Other limits – including an idea that companies would need to buy two forestry credits for every tonne of pollution – are also outlined in the consultation.

Another proposition could mean polluters are no longer able to use any forestry units at all – similar to the British and European Emissions Trading Schemes.

There would still be other avenues for businesses to buy and trade units, for example the four “ pollution auctions” held each year. Since the Government has control over the number of units for sale at auction, it could exercise more control to reduce gross emissions.

Forestry would be incentivised separately. The Government could become the sole purchaser of carbon units from trees, potentially “buy[ing] removals from indigenous forests at a premium price”, boosting biodiversity.

Two of the four proposals came from the public. Neither limit forestry.

The Government and offshore organisations could purchase some forestry units to increase demand, which could in theory reduce gross emissions.

Alternatively, the Government could reduce the number of units for sale in the pollution auctions.

However, officials provided scepticism – including issues raised by the Climate Change Commission – about these two options within the consultation document.

Minister Shaw said, in a statement, the current carbon price within the ETS is not expensive enough to promote a significant switch away from fossil fuels. “We want to make sure the ETS is doing the job, as well as it can be, for the work it was created for.”

Speaking about wider consultation on the ETS, Minister Henare said some Māori landowners want the scheme to support exotic tree planting. Māori foresters successfully fought against a proposal last year to ban permanent non-native forests from the scheme.

Forests boost the economy, Henare said in a statement. “But encouraging afforestation should not replace or delay gross emissions reductions,” he said.

The public can provide feedback on the ideas from Monday until Friday August 11.

Our weekly email newsletter, by the Forever Project's Olivia Wannan, rounds up the latest climate events. Sign up here.