Archive for May, 2009
Greensense partner tradeslot, has just won the Sustainability and Green IT category at the Australian Information Industry Association (AIIA) iAwards for 2009. Their product Carbon Navigator was selected as the winner and is a web-based Software-as-a-Service offering that allows organisations to easily navigate through the compliance, audit, abatement and financial forecasting of carbon management.
e-Waste is any electronic equipment that is no longer useful as originally intended. e-Waste includes computers, mobile phones, televisions, fax machines, etc. This waste may be donated or sold for re-use, recycled, or disposed of, ending up in landfill.
When e-waste ends up in landfill, many different environmental issues are encountered, due to the materials it contains. International studies show that 70% of heavy metals (e.g. lead, mercury, cadmium) in all landfill come from e-waste. By recycling the equipment, the toxic substances can be removed, and resources can be collected for use in new equipment, saving energy in mining and manufacturing, and therefore reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
The e-waste problem is compounded by the relatively short life-span of electronic equipment and the fast growing volume of electronic devices in the market.
In Australia approximately 140,000 tonnes of e-Waste is currently generated per annum, with only 4% being recycled. Therefore, much more effort needs to be made to re-use this equipment to extend its life, and recycle it at the end of its life.
New recycling plants are being established within Australia to process this waste safely and effectively, and programmes are building momentum. Some electronics manufacturers, such as Apple and Dell, are embracing ‘product stewardship’ and taking responsibility for the environmental impacts of the full life-cycle of their products.
Apple are sponsoring a free event with local councils in Perth on the weekend of 6-7th June 2009 (website, poster) to recycle e-waste from consumers and small businesses. We encourage people to participate in this event, especially if you have been stockpiling any old equipment at home.
These voluntary efforts are to be commended, however, with many electronics manufacturers operating with low margins, an industry-wide self-regulated approach is not viable.
Therefore, governments are working towards introducing regulation. In April 2009 EPHC released a consultation paper titled A National Waste Policy: Managing Waste to 2020, with e-waste on the agenda. Earlier this month, at the 18th Meeting of EPHC:
“Council renewed its support for the development of an ambitious national waste policy by the end of 2009. It agreed to release a draft framework for the national policy, which will draw on the input of stakeholders, for public comment during June and July. The Waste policy will be finalised at the Council Meeting in November. The policy will establish a new national vision and direction for waste for the first time since 1992.”
Local councils, who are burdened with the majority of responsibility at present, welcome such moves.
In the meantime, businesses should think about the steps they can take to tackle this issue. Some action items to consider are:
- Measure the environmental impact of current ICT assets in the corporate asset register.
- Establish an e-waste policy, as part of a Sustainable Procurement Policy.
- Budget for disposal of e-waste during the procurement process.
e-Waste is just one consideration in the practice of Green IT. If you would like assistance in establishing Green IT policies and procedures in your business, please contact Greensense.
Greensense, in partnership with tradeslot, recently completed a CPRS Auction Masterclass for Horizon Power. The recently announced delay to the start of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) has given liable organisations the opportunity to better prepare themselves participation in the scheme. The sessions focused on the background to the CPRS, the supporting legislation, the format of the auction, the alternative permit and abatement options, the roles that will be required and different auction strategies that may be adopted. The day ended with a simulated online auction.
Feedback from Horizon Power was extremely positive. The session gave them an opportunity to explore the impact of the auction process, the data required to effectively participate and greater insight into the scheme and how it will fit into their overall carbon management and emissions trading strategy.
With the original timeframes for the CPRS, many organisations were struggling to effectively prepare themselves, but the current delay has allowed the time to have a more strategic approach to emissions trading. These sessions are a great way of kicking off this process. If you are interested in having a tailored CPRS auction simulation in your organisation then contact Greensense.
From The Australian: Rudd signs off on emissions trading scheme compromise.
The highlights:
- Start delayed for 12 months
- Carbon permits will cost $10 per tonne of carbon in 2011-12
- Emissions reduction target of up to 25 per cent of 2000 levels by 2020 (subject to a broad global agreement)
- Additional support for Emissions Intensive Trade Exposed Industries — a “Global Recession Buffer”
- Establishment of the “Australian Carbon Trust” to better support voluntary action
The Australian Carbon Trust seems to have two parts; the Energy Efficiency Savings Pledge Fund and the Energy Efficiency Trust.
The Energy Efficiency Savings Pledge Fund will take the form of a web site that enables individuals to buy and surrender CPRS pollution permits (AEUs) by making ‘pledges’. These pledges will be tax deductible. It will be interesting to see what effect this has on the existing voluntary offset market.
The Energy Efficiency Trust will provide funding for businesses to undertake energy efficiency projects. “For example, the Trust could identify lighting improvements in a business that would cost $2 million to undertake. The Trust would cover this $2 million cost, with the business contributing nothing upfront. The business would then pass the energy cost savings from the lighting improvements back to the Trust at a commercial rate until the full $2 million with interest is paid back to the Trust. Once the upfront capital is paid back, the business keeps the ongoing cost savings.”
The Energy Efficiency Trust will be run in conjunction with The Carbon Trust, a UK-Government funded business that runs a similar scheme for the UK Government.
The legislation for the CPRS will be introduced when parliament resumes later this month. Given the changes above, it seems likely that it will be supported by the Coalition, but not the Greens, which will mean the Government will also need the support of independents Nick Xenephon and Steve Fielding.
In early March, the Senate referred the exposure draft of the legislation to implement the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) to the Senate Standing Committee on Economics. The committee published it’s report a couple of weeks ago.
The bottom line is that the committee recommended the bills be passed, largely in their current form. However, the Coalition, the Greens and Senator Nick Xenephon all published their own findings expressing different views.
The Committee made five recommendations in the report:
Recommendation 1
- The Committee recommends that the bills should be passed without
delay.Recommendation 2
- The Committee recommends that the Government coordinates and
advances a whole of government approach to jobs and skills in emerging low
pollution industries.- The Committee further recommends that a process be developed which
ensures effective implementation of all Government programs and policies which
support green jobs and skill development throughout all sectors of the economy.- The Government should also develop Australia’s current and future
skills base to ensure it has sufficient skills to take advantage of emerging
employment opportunities driven though the CPRS and other complementary
climate change policies.Recommendation 3
- The Committee recommends that the government develop policies
complementary to the CPRS to encourage voluntary action.Recommendation 4
- The Committee recommends that the wording of section 14(5) of the
CPRS Bill 2009 be amended so that in making recommendations on emissions
caps the Minister “shall have regard” rather than “may have regard” to
“voluntary action”.Recommendation 5
- The Committee recommends that the Government continues to seek ways
to assist the commercial scale development of renewable energy sources and
sequestration technology as a priority.
The transcripts from the hearings are also available. For example, here in Perth, The Chamber of Minerals and Energy, Griffin Energy, Australian Council of Social Service, Carnegie Corporation, WASEA, Professor Ross Garnaut, and Alcoa all made submissions.
I found these transcripts quite interesting, particularly for their local context. For example the representatives from Griffin Energy talked about the differences between the energy market in Western Australia and the National Electric Market on the east coast.
Perhaps the most troubling comments in the Perth transcripts, for me at least, were made by Professor Garnaut. We already know that most of the revenue from the sale of permits is being redistributed to households and industry as compensation — in some respects defeating the purpose the ETS in the first place.
But, Professor Garnaut suggested that the CPRS might not actually be self-funding and so this compensation could be at the expense of the tax-payer: “It depends on the targets. If you tighten the targets [e.g. from 5% to 15%, then a] higher proportion of the permits will go to the trade-exposed industries if the trade-exposed industries are growing relatively fast. So there is at least a reasonable possibility that the scheme will not be self-funding.”
Reading this report won’t necessarily give you any more insight into when and in what form Australia will start an emissions trading scheme, but I came away feeling more positive that something will happen, and hopefully sooner rather than later.
