Caltex Scanning the Energy Horizon

As the world moves towards cleaner fuels in coming decades, Caltex CEO Julian Segal said natural gas, renewable power and biomass would become the ”new oil” in decades to come, posing a threat to many traditional refiners. But the company believes the CPRS as it stands could actually lead to an increase in petrol emissions.

Clancy Yeates in Sydney Morning Herald (6 November 2009):

CALTEX’S chief executive, Julian Segal, has conceded the traditional business of oil refining is likely to lose its relevance as the world’s energy mix changes.

In an outline of how Caltex plans to survive under climate-change policies, Mr Segal also said the company was ”scanning the horizon” for opportunities, as big oil producers exit the retail market.

As the world moves towards cleaner fuels in coming decades, Mr Segal said natural gas, renewable power and biomass would become the ”new oil” in decades to come, posing a threat to many traditional refiners.

Companies that looked beyond oil refining would be the main winners, Mr Segal said. He nominated growth in biofuels as a potential growth area for the company.

He called on the Government to back biofuels such as ethanol, and said the company was concerned about the impact of future excise changes.

”There is no coherent policy framework for biofuels development and we hope the Federal Government’s energy white paper will address this issue,” Mr Segal said in Sydney.

He said the carbon pollution reduction scheme would send only a weak signal to drivers, and called on the Government to encourage people to buy more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Another response by Caltex to the changing environment has been to expand its share in the retail end of the market, where it is awaiting the competition watchdog’s approval on a deal to buy more than 300 petrol stations for $300 million from ExxonMobil.

Caltex shares fell by 1 per cent, to $9.95.

Source: www.smh.com.au

Here’s Caltex position on CPRS, from its website:

Caltex Australia believes the treatment of emissions intensive trade exposed (EITE) industries under the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) needs to be reviewed, while its treatment of motorists is flawed and could actually increase petrol emissions. Instead, Caltex believes an emphasis needs to be placed on complementary measures for motorists.

Does Caltex support an emissions trading scheme?

Yes, Caltex sees an emissions trading scheme of some kind as an important tool for reducing point source greenhouse gas emissions. However, the proposed CPRS is flawed and needs major changes before being implemented.

How long does Caltex think the scheme should be delayed?

The scheme should be delayed until the design is right and until economic conditions return to normal. There should also be time for a trial period so businesses can test the operation of scheme and their business systems.

What is wrong with the scheme’s treatment of EITE industries?

Caltex would need to purchase $25 to $40 million of permits for carbon emissions from its two refineries each year, and that’s assuming we receive 60 per cent of our permits for free. Yet our direct overseas competitors, such as refineries in Singapore, would have no carbon costs, so we could not pass on our carbon costs. This would mean a loss of international competitiveness and effectively impose a new tax on business.

What are Caltex’s refinery emissions?

Caltex’s two oil refineries directly and indirectly emit about 2.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO 2e) each year, about 0.4% of Australia’s total emissions.

What does Caltex propose for EITE industries like oil refining?

Caltex proposes that activities such as refining receive a 100 per cent allocation of free permits until such time as our international competitors face equivalent carbon costs.

What are the emissions from the use of petroleum products, such as transport?

In2006, a total of 115 Mt or 20% of Australia’s total emissions was from the use of petroleum products, including petrol, diesel and jet fuel. Transport use was 14%.

Why does Caltex believe motorists should be removed from the CPRS?

Caltex will have to buy permits for customers’ carbon emissions, then charge them back to the customer. However, the government has proposed a reduction in the fuel excise related to carbon cost which effectively removes private motorists and some small businesses from the scheme. In fact, emissions from petrol would increase be higher until 2025 than without the CPRS.

How much would Caltex have to spend to buy customers’ carbon permits?

Based on the CPRS design, Caltex would have to purchase between $0.9 and $1.6 billion in permits for our customers’ emissions each year.

How would the CPRS actually increase petrol emissions?

For the first three years and several years beyond that, the excise reduction for petrol will actually be greater than carbon price being imposed. That means petrol prices will actually go down and emissions will go up. By 2025, petrol suppliers will have churned $20 billion in permits for no environmental gain.

What about larger diesel vehicles?

We don’t propose changing the CPRS carbon cost proposals for on-road vehicles over 4.5 tonnes or off-road vehicles in various industries.

What should be done instead of including motorists in the CPRS?

Caltex proposes voluntary targets for carbon emissions from vehicles, government incentives for consumers to purchase low-emissions vehicles through a “cashback” (feebate) scheme, funding for cleaner vehicle technology together with greater reliance on alternative fuels, and investing further in public transport and better land use planning.

 Source: www.caltex.com.au

Dire Risks for Icy Waters & Reefs

World leaders in Antarctic marine conservation this week sent a strong message to Copenhagen negotiators concerning the dire risks facing the southern continent, while WWF-Australia also says the Great Barrier Reef still faces enormous threats from coastal developments. On 11 November there’s at a high level briefing in Brisbane on the Reef.

In Brisbane on 11 November, WWF Australia has organised for Dr Russell Reichelt, CEO, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority will provide a high level briefing on the latest science in the recently published Great Barrier Reef Outlook Report 2009.

Dr Russell Reichelt was appointed as Chairman and Chief Executive of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority in November 2007. He is presently a board member of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, the Great Barrier Reef Foundation and the Reef and Rainforest Research Centre. He has a PhD in marine science from the University of Queensland (1980) and has served as Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Institute of Marine Science,

Chairman of the Fisheries Research and Development Corporation and as a member of Australia’s State of the Environment Committee and the Queensland Government’s Smart State Council.

Nick Heath will explain the key threats to the Reef and WWF’s campaign to save it.

CEO of WWF Australia Greg Bourne will be there to outline to business leaders and Government the full extent of the problem and what needs to be done for the Great Barrier Reef.

On 2 November 2009, WWF reported:

Environment Minister Peter Garrett’s decision not to allow a massive resort development on Great Keppel Island is welcome news at a time when the Great Barrier Reef faces enormous threats from coastal developments and wildlife across the country continues to decline.

There are currently 110 proposed marine infrastructure areas planned along the Queensland coast with 45 of these in or adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area. Meanwhile the Federal Government has released a report today that reveals all of Australia’s threatened species are in continued decline.

“It’s very welcome news that Minister Garrett has knocked back the proposal for an unacceptably large tourist resort on Great Keppel Island,” said Lydia Gibson, WWF’s Marine Policy Manager.

“We hope this is an indication that the government will show a similar level of consideration for the future development proposals in the area.”

However, Minister Garrett’s decision to protect Great Keppel Island comes amidst continuing and precipitous species declines across Australia, as recognised by the Australian Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment released today.

The report notes that “There were no cases of real improvement in the status of listed (terrestrial) taxa at the national level.”

“Today’s Terrestrial Biodiversity Assessment Report clearly shows that Australia’s wildlife is still in massive decline. We must clearly do a better job of protecting our marine life than we have of protecting our terrestrial species,” said Averil Bones, WWF’s Biodiversity Policy Manager.

Coastal development was considered one of the major threats to the reef in the recent Reef Outlook Report, which painted a grim picture for the reef’s future unless such pressures were reduced.

The report also identified a lack of integrated planning, resources and enforcement in managing coastal development that was seriously compromising the protection of the Great Barrier Reef.

The massive GKI Resort Pty Ltd proposal included a 300-room hotel and day spa, 1700 resort villas, 300 resort apartments, a 560 berth marina and yacht club, ferry terminal, retail village, golf course and sporting oval.

“What is urgently needed is a fundamental strategic approach to avoid the mass industrialisation of the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area,” Ms Gibson said.

“The impacts of this scale of development on coral communities, coastal wetlands and marine species when combined with the additional pressures of climate change and farm run-off, would push the reef to the point of no return.”

WWF reports on 5 November 2009):

World leaders in Antarctic marine conservation gathering in Hobart this week must send a strong message to Copenhagen negotiators concerning the dire risks facing the southern continent as a result of climate change, WWF-Australia warned today.

Representatives of more than 30 nations, including Australia, New Zealand, Russia, China, the European Union and the United States are meeting in Hobart from October 26 to November 6 as part of the annual Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR).

The convention is one of the last opportunities on a global level to send a strong message to world leaders as the countdown to climate change talks in Copenhagen in December begins.

“It’s not only the species living in this extremely cold environment that will be impacted by climate change in Antarctica and the Southern Ocean. Changes to the southern polar regions could create devastating cascade effects felt throughout the world,” said Mr Rob Nicoll, WWF Antarctic and Southern Ocean Initiative Manager.

“Antarctica and the ocean currents that surround it have a profound effect on the world’s climate. A change to any one of the major systems on this continent will be felt by us all.

“It is critical that delegates meeting this week at CCAMLR make their voices heard in Copenhagen: we need a strong agreement in December if we are to effectively deal with the dangers posed by climate change to this pristine and most precious of environments.”

Alarming research recently published in respected journal Science indicates that carbon levels today are only slightly lower than they were 20 million years ago, when temperatures were 3-6C higher, the Antarctic ice caps had completely melted and sea levels were 25-40 metres higher.1 “In short, we could be very close to a major climate tipping point and not even be aware of it,” said Mr Nicoll.

Despite the far-reaching effects climate change in Antarctica could have on the rest of the planet, research into how quickly the continent is changing has been limited by its isolation and extreme weather conditions.

To combat this lack of knowledge, WWF and the Antarctic Climate and Ecosystems Cooperative Research Centre is supporting the Australian Antarctic Division’s effort to establish the Southern Ocean Sentinel climate change monitoring program.

“The 2007 IPCC Report indicated our current understanding of climate change in Antarctica and the Southern Oceans has made it difficult to predict with certainty when key climate change tipping points will be reached in this region and how quickly those changes will affect the rest of the world,” Mr Nicoll said.

“The Sentinel program aims to facilitate a long term collaborative international program to gather data on climate change and its effects on the Southern Ocean.

“This information can be used to improve management practices and predict future climate change impacts on the Southern Ocean and the rest of the world.

“With recent research indicating climate change is proceeding more rapidly than was predicted by the IPCC, the Sentinel program is an urgently needed component in our understanding of climate change.

“Not only does the Antarctic’s future depend on it, so does our own.”

Source: www.wwf.org.au

A Vote for Sustainable Growth

British diplomat and former European commissioner Chris Patten says climate change is the biggest problem we face – the unforeseen result of increased economic activity and prosperity – so we need to promote the right sort of growth, which won’t ravage our future prospects.

Chris Patten writing for The Australian (30 October 2009):  

HAVING reached pensionable age, I qualify to be a grumpy old man. I should be boring my children, and the students at Oxford University where I am chancellor, with grumbles about how everything is going to the dogs. But that is not quite how I see things.

I went to university myself in 1962. My first term coincided with the Cuban missile crisis. The world seemed to be teetering on the brink of nuclear catastrophe.

Those were the days when global peace was sustained by a concept known suitably enough by the acronym MAD – Mutually Assured Destruction.

Was that world a worse and more dangerous one than today, where our main nuclear concerns are how to prevent proliferation and strengthen the treaty that has deterred it for the last generation?

At the end of my years at Oxford, I went as a student to the US and visited Alabama. You may recall the story of Richard Nixon attending the independence celebrations in Ghana.

At a gala reception, he went up to one guest, mistaking him for a local, and asked what it felt like to be able to vote and enjoy freedom under the rule of law. “I wouldn’t know,” the man replied, “I’m from Alabama.”

Within my adult lifetime, we have moved from the murder of civil-rights campaigners in the US to the election of a black president. Nothing to be grumpy about there.

Elsewhere, some of our biggest problems have a sort of Hegelian quality. They are the result of solving past problems or of past success. Consider, for example, the biggest challenge facing us, which deserves to be called existential: global warming and climate change.

In the last century, the world got richer; its population quadrupled; the number of people living in cities grew thirteen-fold; and we consumed more of everything. Water consumption rose nine-fold and energy use thirteen-fold.

Industrial output soared to 40 times its level at the beginning of the 20th century.

But – and here comes the real hit – carbon-dioxide emissions grew seventeen-fold.

That is the biggest problem we face; the unforeseen result of increased economic activity and prosperity.

Looking at preparations for the Copenhagen summit in December, when we will try to broker a new global agreement to combat climate change, does not make me grumpy. At last, the big players are taking the issues seriously.

The US is no longer in denial on the question. President Barack Obama and his advisers do not deny the scientific evidence of what is happening to us all.

In China, political leaders seem genuine in their commitment to reduce the carbon content of their runaway economy.

The big problems, of course, are how we take account of past responsibility for the carbon in the atmosphere, how we balance aggregate national emissions and per capita figures – China leads in the first category; the US, Australia and Canada are the biggest culprits in the second – and how we manage technology transfer from developed to emerging and poor economies.

There will be plenty to moan about if we don’t solve these problems sooner rather than later.

This is where old men seem past their political expiration dates.

Let me explain. For all of our lives, my generation has defined success in terms of rising GDP growth: more money in more pockets, more resources for public programs, and more jobs. None of these will necessarily be a measure of future success. We need to talk more about the quality of growth. French president Nicolas Sarkozy has raised this issue, and he is right to do so.

I am not arguing that growth is bad. Try telling that to the poor. But what we should want to promote is the right sort of growth, growth that won’t ravage our future prospects.

We have to define the sustainability of growth in ways that create an attractive narrative for our citizens.

At the moment, people applaud sustainable growth, but they don’t vote for what it means in practice.

German voters baulk at any suggestion that we should limit the environmental damage caused by big and expensive cars.

British voters line up behind the truck drivers when protests are launched against hikes in the price of petrol, not least through the introduction of higher energy taxes.

Ideas for carbon taxes run into resistance everywhere.

I have five grandchildren below the age of four. By the time they qualify for pensions and the licence to grumble, the century will be into its seventh or eighth decade. We hope!

How much will they have to get angry about then because of the way that we are behaving today?

Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is chancellor of Oxford University

Source: www.theaustralian.com.au

Red Hot Centre for Eco Tourism

The Northern Territory’s solar city, Alice Springs, will host the brightest sparks of the ecotourism industry at the Asia Pacific ecotourism conference, Global Eco, from 9-11 November. Australia’s Red Centre hosts a 3.1million centre which showcases the largest range of solar power technologies in the southern hemisphere.

Report on 4 November 2009

Australia’s Red Centre Solar City hosts Global Eco Tourism Conference  

The Northern Territory’s solar city, Alice Springs, will host the brightest sparks of the ecotourism industry at the Asia Pacific ecotourism conference, Global Eco, from 9-11 November.

As travellers continue to display their growing appetites for all things green, the conference program will introduce tourism operators and industry participants to new technologies, research, product partnerships and policies, and showcase the “full gamut” of challenges, and potential solutions, facing the industry.

The impressive list of speakers includes chief executive of Ecotourism Australia, Kym Cheatham; Federal Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts, Peter Garrett; president of non-profit organisation Sustainable Travel International, Brian T. Mullis; director of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority’s Tourism and Recreation Group, Lisha Mulqueeny, and Frank Hubbard, director of corporate responsibility for IHG (InterContinental Hotels Group).

IHG includes the Crowne Plaza Alice Springs, which has set the green benchmark for the Australian business sector and hotel industry, by covering its roof in solar panels, creating the largest building-mounted solar photovoltaic (PV) system in the southern hemisphere. This ground-breaking $3.3 million installation will reduce the hotel’s energy consumption by between 40 and 80 percent.

The most anticipated speaker will be Costas Christ, the global travel editor of National Geographic Adventure, and an internationally recognised expert on sustainable tourism. An ecotourism pioneer, he is also the lead author of Tourism and Biodiversity: Mapping Tourism’s Global Footprint and a contributing author in Wilderness: Earth’s Last Wild Places.

Alice Springs was deemed the most suitable location for the conference in light of the extensive ‘green’ initiatives that have been instigated by its local government and tourism operators, in an attempt to create the most sustainable tourist destination in Australia.

Tourism NT Environmental Tourism Development Officer Natasha Smith said that the Alice Springs businesses and community had shown tremendous initiative in making Alice Springs the solar capital of Australia.

“Tourists travelling to Alice Springs now have a fantastic opportunity to learn about solar technologies at the new, world class Desert Knowledge Solar Centre,” Ms Smith said.

“This 3.1million centre showcases the largest range of solar power technologies in the southern hemisphere, through commercial-scale installations.

Within the town of Alice Springs, the local community and businesses are also heavily engaged in embracing sustainable technologies. Since the Alice Solar City was launched in March 2008, 1121 households and 75 businesses have got on board to reduce their energy consumption.

Source: www.globaleco.com.au, www.alicesolarcity.com.au, www.dkasolarcentre.com.au and www.australiasoutback.com

Climate Change Not Good for Surfers!

The topic was hot and controversial. The atmosphere was light and casual. The result was perhaps predictable. In spite of a spirited presentation by the affirmative team of Colman Ridge, Liz Cantor and Ken Hickson, the audience voted against the motion that “climate change will be good for surfers”.

Debate Topic: “Climate change will be good for surfers”

On Saturday 7 November, as part of the 2009 Surfrider Foundation National Education Conference at  the Southern Cross University, Riverside Campus at Tweed Heads, there was a battle involving some of the brightest minds on the twin subjects of climate change and surfing.

The adjudicator was Wendy Harmer, one of Australia’s best-known humourists, which set the scene and made it imperative that all was not to be taken seriously.

Wendy lives on Sydney’s Northern Beaches with her husband, two young children, and (at last count) fifteen chickens and three ducks.

The team for the NEGATIVE was made up of:

Tim Baker is the author of four best-selling books on surfing, including “Bustin’ Down The Door,” “High Surf” and “Occy”. He is a former editor of Tracks and Surfing Life magazines, and former editorial director of Morrison Media Services. He has twice won the Surfing Australia Hall of Fame Culture Award and been nominated for the CUB Australian Sports Writing Awards.

Narelle Sutherland works in the Office of Climate Change, where she supports the Premier’s Council on Climate Change to advise the Queensland Government on a wide range of climate change issues. Narelle is a keen surfer and has a social work and sociology background. She previously worked, for nearly 2 decades, with NGOs on a range of social justice challenges including homelessness, the rights of prisoners and income inequality – but believes that climate change is the mother of them all.

Darrell Strauss is a researcher at the Griffith University’s Centre for Coastal Management. Darrell was previously an IT Officer at The National Tidal Facility Australia and contributed to the activities of the South Pacific Sea Level and Climate Monitoring Project. Darrell is currently completing his PhD which is focused on the surf zone dynamics of sandy beaches.

The highly charged team for the POSITIVE was led by:

Colman Ridge is the director of Greenfest, Australia’s largest free green festival commencing on World Environment Day.

In support was:

Liz Cantor is a television presenter who currently reports for Channel Seven Queensland lifestyle programs, Great South East and Creek To Coast; and also presents the Golden Casket Lotto draw segments. She also files weekend beach and surf reports for Seven News Brisbane.

Ken Hickson is author of The ABC of Carbon and CEO of ABC Carbon, a climate change consulting business. Ken supports the World Wide Fund for Nature, acting as their honorary representative in Singapore for 4 years and now serving as a Governor of WWF Australia, also providing business, communications and fund-raising support

Of course the event had a serious side and created greater awareness for all the issues relating to climate change and its impact on our coastal communities, as well as beaches. In spite of a telling case that surfers would gain (albeit selfishly) from rising seas, wild weather and tourist-deserted beaches, the environmentally minded surf lovers swayed the vote and the greater community good was the winner.

This event – debate and conference was also environmentally managed and the greenhouse gas emissions generated have been calculated & balanced by Climate Wave Enterprises, EcoFund and Southern Gold Coast.

Source: www.surfrider.org.au