By Michael Burt
The Great Koala National Park (GKNP) is a step closer to reality after the federal government approved a scheme allowing state governments to earn carbon credits from public native forests.
Australian Assistant Climate Change Minister Josh Wilson approved the Improved Native Forest Management in Multiple-use Public Native Forests Method last week, meaning the Commonwealth and polluters could purchase carbon credits generated in the GNKP.
NSW Environment Minister Penny Sharpe has said that the GKNP funding model relies heavily on federal approval of a carbon crediting method.
However, the federal approval has come under fire from environmental and timber industry groups.
The Bob Brown Foundation said the federal and NSW Governments have just signed off on a “carbon credit scam and are now holding the long-promised Great Koala National Park hostage to it.”
“Carbon credits are a greenwashing tool through which fossil fuel companies can buy credits – also known as offsets – to count toward their own emissions cuts while continuing to pollute.”
“Native forests should be protected for their climate, biodiversity and Aboriginal cultural values. Their protection should not be contingent on this dodgy scheme.”
Forestry Australia has also raised concerns following, warning that the method creates risks that could undermine confidence in Australia’s carbon market.
Forestry Australia President Dr Michelle Freeman said the organisation is supportive of high-integrity carbon crediting for native forests, but that the method as approved had significant problems.
“Our concern is that this method, as approved, falls short in a number of areas, including additionality, leakage and low ability to generate carbon outcomes.”
“At a time when media reports are highlighting that native hardwood previously sourced from Victoria is now being supplied from Tasmania, it is deeply concerning that the method will substantially underestimate the real leakage that occurs when harvesting stops.”
“If approved methods fail to fully account for leakage, or do not properly distinguish between genuine carbon abatement and policy-driven land-use change, such as in the case of the Great Koala National Park, then confidence in the ACCU Scheme is put at risk. Carbon markets must be grounded in science, transparency and integrity.”
Forestry Australia also has concerns regarding the future stewardship of these forests.
“Although the method allows for broader management activities in principle, the relevant provisions are so restrictive that they would, in effect, largely prevent active forest management for fire risk mitigation, forest health and long-term resilience. Despite the name, the method does not represent genuinely improved native forest management.”