Richard Steele with governor general Dame Cindy Kiro.
I’m a fan of the Emissions Trading Scheme and I’ll tell you why straight away – I don’t want anyone to be under any illusions.
Richard Steele
We have lots of reverting scrub that qualify for ETS funding, and some small forest plantations that sequester lots of carbon, that we all produce, and whether you believe in climate change or not – I do – and I’m very happy to be making what I think, is a contribution, to a cleaner planet.
The trouble with the ETS, though, is not with the science, which I think is reliably based, but with political tinkering, which seems to me to have undermined confidence in the way the scheme was designed, to make a difference to the climate.
That doesn’t mean I agree with planting good farmland in trees. I don’t.
The type of country we are retiring or planting is remote land that should never have been cleared for farming in the first place. It is erosion prone, unstable in a wet season, actually not even suited for pine trees, as they grow too fast, and drag the hills down even faster, than they did, as grasslands.
It seems that while some politicians agree with the ETS, some don’t, and therein lies my problem. The scheme left to its own devices would reach a buyer-seller equilibrium, which would be sustainable, and that would over time encourage all the big carbon producers to change their ways. Then along comes some uncalled for comments from a political person and the price crash undermines the confidence.
Everybody who buys fuel for any vehicle, and everybody who uses electricity, has been paying a levy per litre of fuel, per unit of power, for many years. That levy was destined toward the ETS when it was implemented . We all forget that, and rightly moan about the price of both these essential items, forgetting the tax implications on both of them.
And governments have always loved those taxes, as we all blame the oil companies, the fuel companies, easily forgetting that a dollar in the price of every litre is tax.
I’ve also written to my local Member of Parliament, to ask for a small rule change. Trees planted or grown before 1990 don’t qualify for the emissions trading scheme, and I think they should – if only to encourage more landowners to retire more pieces of bush remnants. It would be a small incentive to retire more land. I’m talking about the Queen Elizabeth trust. set up to protect remnants of native forests, and has done a marvellous job of doing so.
In matters more boring, the hunters I’m paying to keep on top of the pest control, in my July 2024 plantings are up to 62 deer and 250 goats shot. The pests make a beeline for anywhere you retire land to plant trees.
