Legal issues in carbon farming : biosequestration, carbon pricing, and carbon rights

This paper critically analyses the proposed Australian regulatory approach to the crediting of biological sequestration activities (biosequestration) under the Australian Carbon Farming Initiative and its interaction with State-based carbon rights, the national carbon-pricing mechanism, and the international Kyoto Protocol and carbon-trading markets. Norms and principles have been established by the Kyoto Protocol to guide the creation of additional, verifiable, and permanent credits from biosequestration activities. This paper examines the proposed arrangements under the Australian Carbon Farming Initiative and Carbon Pricing Mechanism to determine whether they are consistent with those international norms and standards. This paper identifies a number of anomalies associated with the legal treatment of additionality and permanence and issuance of carbon credits within the Australian schemes. In light of this, the paper considers the possible legal implications for the national and international transfer, surrender and use of these offset credits.

Issues in negotiating a Carbon Sequestration Agreement for a Biosequestration Offsets Project

Biosequestration of carbon in trees, forests and vegetation is a key method for offsetting greenhouse gas emissions. To facilitate it, the Commonwealth has introduced the Carbon Farming Initiative, a scheme whereby carbon credits can be earned for biosequestration offsets projects. The project proponent must acquire under state law a ‘carbon sequestration right’ which confers the benefit of the sequestered carbon on the land. Each State provides for an agreement associated with the carbon sequestration right between the landowner and the holder of the right (‘carbon sequestration agreement’). This article identifies some key risks and issues that must be considered in the drafting of a carbon sequestration agreement to support the successful operation of a biosequestration offsets project.

The role of property law in environmental management

Market-based environmental regulation is becoming increasingly common within international and national frameworks. In order for market-based regimes to attract sufficient levels of stakeholder engagement, participants within such schemes require an incentive to participate and furthermore need to feel a sense of security about investing in such processes. A sense of security is associated with property-based interests. This article explores the property-related issues connected with the operation of environmental markets. Relevant property-related considerations include examining the significant role that market-based regulation is playing in connection with the environment; examining the links between property rights and markets; exploring the legal definition of property; analysing the rights and powers associated with environmental interests in land; advancing theory on the need for landholder responsibilities in relation to land and examining the legal mechanisms used to recognise environmental property rights, including the registration thereof.

From rights to responsibilities : reconceptualising carbon sequestration rights in Australia

Biosequestration of carbon in trees, forests and vegetation is a key method for mitigating climate change in Australia. To facilitate this, all States have enacted legislation for carbon sequestration rights, separating commercial rights in carbon from ownership of the land, trees and vegetation in which the carbon is sequestered. Ownership of carbon sequestration rights under state law is a prerequisite for the issue of carbon credits to proponents of ‘eligible sequestration offsets projects’ under the Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Act 2011 (Cth) (‘Carbon Farming Act’). This article examines the extent to which current State carbon sequestration rights support the offsets regime established by the Carbon Farming Act. The Commonwealth Act is concerned with allocating responsibilities to ensure the maintenance of the carbon sequestration, while the State Acts confer commercial rights in the carbon and leave the responsibilities to be allocated by private agreements. The carbon sequestration rights as defined by state laws do not confer the rights of access and management over land that a project proponent needs in order to discharge its responsibilities to maintain the carbon sequestration.

Resilience and opportunity : regions and the roll-out of Australia's greenhouse gas abatement programs. A manual for Queensland's NRM regions

Voluntary and compliance markets for forest carbon and other (emission avoidance and biosequestration) activities are growing internationally and across Australia. Queensland and its Natural Resource Management (NRM) regions have an opportunity to take a variety of actions to help guide these markets to secure multiple landscape benefits and to build landscape resilience in the face of climate change. As the national arrangements for offsets within Australia’s Clean Energy Package (CEP) and emissions trading environment emerge, Queensland’s regions can prepare themselves and their landholding communities to take advantage of these opportunities to deliver improved climate resilience in their regional landscapes.

Paleoreconstruction of estuarine sediments reveal human-induced weakening of coastal carbon sinks

Human activities in coastal areas frequently cause loss of benthic macrophytes (e.g. seagrasses) and concomitant increases in microalgal production through eutrophication. Whether such changes translate into shifts in the composition of sediment detritus is largely unknown, yet such changes could impact the role these ecosystems play in sequestrating CO 2. We reconstructed the sedimentary records of cores taken from two sites within Botany Bay, Sydney - the site of European settlement of Australia - to look for human-induced changes in dominant sources of detritus in this estuary. Cores covered a period from the present day back to the middle Holocene (~6000 years) according to 210Pb profiles and radiocarbon ( 14C) dating. Depositional histories at both sites could not be characterized by a linear sedimentation rate; sedimentation rates in the last 30-50 years were considerably higher than during the rest of the Holocene. C : N ratios declined and began to exhibit a microalgal source signature from around the time of European settlement, which could be explained by increased nutrient flows into the Bay caused by anthropogenic activity. Analysis of stable isotopic ratios of 12C/ 13C showed that the relative contribution of seagrass and C 3 terrestrial plants (mangroves, saltmarsh) to detritus declined around the time of rapid industrial expansion (~1950s), coinciding with an increase in the contribution of microalgal sources. We conclude that the relative contribution of microalgae to detritus has increased within Botany Bay, and that this shift is the sign of increased industrialization and concomitant eutrophication. Given the lower carbon burial efficiencies of microalgae (~0.1%) relative to seagrasses and C 3 terrestrial plants (up to 10%), such changes represent a substantial weakening of the carbon sink potential of Botany Bay - this occurrence is likely to be common to human-impacted estuaries, and has consequences for the role these systems play in helping to mitigate climate change. © 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Bioeconomic modelling of woody regrowth carbon offset options in productive grazing systems

Agricultural land has been identified as a potential source of greenhouse gas emissions offsets through biosequestration in vegetation and soil. In the extensive grazing land of Australia, landholders may participate in the Australian Government’s Emissions Reduction Fund and create offsets by reducing woody vegetation clearing and allowing native woody plant regrowth to grow. This study used bioeconomic modelling to evaluate the trade-offs between an existing central Queensland grazing operation, which has been using repeated tree clearing to maintain pasture growth, and an alternative carbon and grazing enterprise in which tree clearing is reduced and the additional carbon sequestered in trees is sold. The results showed that ceasing clearing in favour of producing offsets produces a higher net present value over 20 years than the existing cattle enterprise at carbon prices, which are close to current (2015) market levels (~$13 t–1 CO2-e). However, by modifying key variables, relative profitability did change. Sensitivity analysis evaluated key variables, which determine the relative profitability of carbon and cattle. In order of importance these were: the carbon price, the gross margin of cattle production, the severity of the tree–grass relationship, the area of regrowth retained, the age of regrowth at the start of the project, and to a lesser extent the cost of carbon project administration, compliance and monitoring. Based on the analysis, retaining regrowth to generate carbon income may be worthwhile for cattle producers in Australia, but careful consideration needs to be given to the opportunity cost of reduced cattle income.