Grant King's proposal for the Government to give carbon credits to our biggest polluters for staying below legally required pollution limits is akin to giving cash to drivers for staying under the speed limit.
In response to the review of the Emissions Reduction Fund by former oil executive Grant King, Australian Conservation Foundation climate campaigner Suzanne Harter said:
"The Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) is already an ineffective $2.55bn fund that is not up to the task of reducing Australia's rising climate pollution. The recommendations of Grant King's review would make it even weaker and less able to cut emissions.
"By releasing this plan, advised and led by a former fossil fuel executive, Energy Minister Taylor has undermined the government's Climate Change Authority, which is conducting its own review of the Emissions Reduction Fund.
"Asking a former oil industry executive to review the national climate policy is like asking a fox to review the design of the chook house.
"Australia has virtually no effective climate policy and no pathway to achieve net zero by 2050, which is required if we want to keep this a liveable continent for coming generations.
"Under Grant King's proposals two of Australia's most successful independent statutory bodies - the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation - would have their missions to support the clean energy transition in Australia corrupted by new instructions to support fossil fuel projects, including dirty hydrogen with carbon capture and storage.
"Grant King is proposing the Government give carbon credits to our biggest polluters for staying below legally required pollution limits, which is akin to giving cash to drivers for staying under the speed limit, or more accurately rewarding drivers who go 80 in a 100 zone with a free pass to later drive at 120 km/h.
"Australia faces stark choices as our leaders plan for economic recovery from COVID-19. Plans that include real action on climate change are the only plans that will protect our community's health and safety for the future.
"Renewable energy offers jobs, an economic boost and a clean transition. Undermining this critical industry and a clean recovery through climate policy decisions that advantage the fossil fuel industry would be shameful."
Since the start of 2019, ACF investigations have revealed:
- Nearly a fifth (18 per cent) of the 210 facilities covered by the Emissions Reduction Fund's safeguard mechanism exceeded their polluting limits in 2018-19.
- Rio Tinto used $2 million from the Emissions Reduction Fund to finance a diesel-fired power station at a mine in Arnhem Land.
- BHP was permitted to increase emissions from its mines, then calculate new, laxer pollution baselines.
- Centennial Coal was allowed to dramatically increase pollution from its Myuna Colliery in NSW for two years in a row without any penalty.
- Incitec Pivot exceeded the agreed emissions baseline from its plant in Moranbah, Qld, by at least 198,279 tonnes but incurred no penalty.
- Vales Point coal-fired power station successfully registered a project under the emissions reduction fund to bid for cash to upgrade equipment at the power plant.
- Anglo American was allowed to nearly double climate pollution from a major coal mine without penalty.
- South African miner Gold Fields won an Emissions Reduction Fund contract to burn gas at a project in Western Australia that would have gone ahead anyway.
