Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Thursday, 26 August 2004) . . Page.. 4433 ..

the impact of the plantations on other existing ecosystems through intensive fertiliser and pesticide use.

Carbon sinks are imperfect solutions to emissions reduction. We have the opportunity, through this scheme, to provide incentives to industry to take more effective steps to reduce emissions. The emissions reduction scheme proposed by the government potentially provides a very useful vehicle for encouraging and rewarding industry investment in longer term renewable energy projects. It can and should also be used to encourage and reward demand-side management activities that have financial benefits for electricity users, as well as environmental benefits for the community.

Abatement certificates issued for carbon sequestration activities are clearly identified under the New South Wales scheme. I have been advised that it would be technically possible to exclude them as eligible abatement activities for the ACT. As members of the Legislative Assembly we have an opportunity today to do what the federal government will not: we have the opportunity to support the renewable energy industry, which is in crisis following the recent release of the federal government’s energy white paper.

It is extremely disappointing that, while the Clean Energy Future Group—an alliance of industry associations, energy organisations and WWF Australia—found that Australia’s greenhouse gas pollution could be halved by 2040 using existing clean energy technology, we have the federal government refusing to extend the mandatory renewable energy target beyond 2 per cent by 2010 and casting uncertainty on the many renewable energy projects currently in the pipeline.

As members we can and should do something to support the renewable energy industry with this bill. Renewable energy activities and demand-side management should be supported in preference to other less desirable options. As members will know, the Greens originally explored the possibility of weighting or capping certificates claimed for carbon sequestration. In the interests of the ease of administration of the scheme at this time, I did not proceed with those possible amendments.

I have serious concerns, however, about assigning equal credit to less sustainable activities that could be easily excluded, such as intensive tree planting. We should be rewarding and encouraging activities that prevent the generation of CO2 in the first place, rather than attempting to ameliorate its impacts after the fact.

MR SPEAKER: I was interested in that Ms Tucker. But I think you could have used fewer words!

MR QUINLAN (Treasurer, Minister for Economic Development, Business and Tourism and Minister for Sport, Racing and Gaming) (11.03): At this stage, carbon sequestration is an important abatement measure. Yes, we need to move on in the fullness of time, but it is one way, if you like, of ramping down while technology catches up.

Ms Tucker mentioned the requirement for 100 years. That is a reasonable requirement. Overlaying that requirement is a risk management protocol that ensures protection against any particular carbon sink that might be created.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .