A GREENHOUSE trigger, which could stop or amend key infrastructure projects if they emit to much carbon, is being considered by the Federal Environment Minister.
A trigger would mean Peter Garrett, who announced a review of his powers in late October, would expand his ability to place environmental conditions on projects such as the north-south pipeline and Tasmanian pulp mill.
Mr Garrett said yesterday he would first wait for the results of a review into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999, headed by ANU Chancellor Allan Hawke, and the compliance provisions in the emission trading scheme (ETS) before seeking to gain the trigger power.
“The upcoming carbon pollution reduction scheme white paper (released on Monday) will outline the Government’s framework for action on climate change and the role, scope and operation of a climate change trigger in the EPBC Act would need to be considered in light of the final design of that scheme,” Mr Garrett said.
An insider in the EPBC this week said they would be very keen to see a greenhouse trigger included in the minister’s powers, but wouldn’t pre-empt submissions to the review due next week.
The panel is due to submit its final recommendation in the second half of next year.
Last week Victoria’s Sustainability Commissioner Dr Ian McPhail called for a “climate change test” to be applied to all cabinet decisions on policy, infrastructure and spending in his “State of the Environment Report.”
An environment law expert at ANU, Andrew Macintosh, said a greenhouse trigger would also be useful in reigning in carbon emissions from industries given exemptions from the ETS.
“But the problem with any environmental law is it requires political will to carry out its power which is unlikely to happen,” Mr Macintosh said.
“Rather than a greenhouse trigger it is far more important the emissions trading system has strong financial penalties and criminal powers against companies that go over their annual carbon permits.”
Mr Macintosh said if strong financial penalties are not included in the carbon trading market major companies could consider fines “as a cost of doing business,” rather than keeping to permits.
“As anybody familiar with environment law know there is some really strong legislation out there, but if there isn’t the financial pressure behind it tends to be flouted,” he said.
Labor insiders yesterday confirmed news reports that details of the ETS have already been signed off on by caucus, including the 2020 target range and an “extensive” range of concessions to be given to high polluting trade exposed industries.
It is expected the Federal Government will announce a 2020 target reduction range of 5-15% of 2000 levels, depending on the outcome on an international agreement.
The final decision will be signed off by the ”core three’ Climate Change Minister Penny Wong, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan.
NOTE: The original version of this story appeared here, albeit in its tiny format. For more information about the history of a greenhouse trigger I recommend Andrew Macintosh’s chapter in Climate Law in Australia (ed. Tim Bonyhady and Peter Christoff, Federation Press 2007) titled ”A greenhouse trigger: Where did it go and what of its future?”
