Climate stability will require carbon removal on a large scale — are the existing methods up to the task? - ABC Religion & Ethics
If countries are to meet the Paris Agreement goal of holding 'the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels' and pursing efforts 'to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels', we're now told that reducing greenhouse gas emissions alone will be insufficient. Given our energy needs and the time it will take to transition to fully renewable sources of energy, Carbon Dioxide Removal (CDR) will also be needed, on a large scale.
But there is considerable scepticism about CDR. In May, power company EnergyAustralia apologised to its customers after settling a Federal Court case launched by advocacy group Parents for Climate. In a statement published as part of the settlement, the company said: 'Burning fossil fuels creates greenhouse gas emissions that are not prevented or undone by carbon offsets.'
There are several reasons why that might be true. One that critics frequently cite comes from the fact that the removals certified by carbon offsets can't be guaranteed to last as long as the emissions they are supposed to offset. Is this a good reason for dismissing CDR?
CO₂ removal methods and the risk of reversal
Broadly speaking, there are two types of CDR methods. 'Nature-based methods' use natural processes — like photosynthesis — to trap CO₂ in ecosystems such as forests, wetlands and farmlands. 'Engineered' methods, on the other hand, typically use advanced technology to capture CO₂ directly from the atmosphere or industrial sites.
Both of these methods have drawn criticism. Some argue against investing in new carbon capture methods due to their high costs and technological uncertainties. Others argue that the benefits of nature-based solutions are profoundly limited, not least because of the short time horizon over which forests and other natural sinks can store carbon.
The critics of nature-based methods are on to something. If the core idea of net zero emissions is balancing greenhouse gas additions and removals, we need the removals to last as long as the additions. However, the CO₂ we release today can persist in the atmosphere for centuries or even millennia. In contrast, many nature-based methods, like planting trees, might only store carbon for a few decades. This criticism highlights a genuine concern: merely planting a tree cannot be considered a valid offset if it eventually releases its absorbed CO₂ back into the atmosphere when it dies. This carries a 'reversal risk' — a risk that CO₂, once stored, will be re-released.
However, while reversal risk is undoubtedly important, this doesn't mean that nature-based methods should be dismissed — instead, it means that they need to be managed well. Individual trees die, but provided a forest is properly maintained and managed over the long term, it can still act as a carbon sink. It's the continuous, deliberate maintenance of forests that ensures carbon is consistently captured, even if individual trees within the ecosystem die and are replaced.
Additionally, reversal risk is not exclusive to nature-based methods. Engineered carbon removal methods and novel storage technologies also carry their own reversal risks. Storage facilities could fail, or novel technologies might prove less effective or reliable than initially expected.
Investing all our resources in engineered CDR is problematic for another reason. Keeping within the 2°C carbon budget requires increasing the use of CDR now — and these technologies are not, even on an optimistic picture, going to be available at the scale required soon enough.
Rather than being taken as grounds for dismissing these different CDR methods, we think these criticisms support a different conclusion. Each method on its own faces a serious problem — but they can complement each other, when used together. We must combine them strategically, using the strengths of each to offset the weaknesses of the other.
Nature-based methods, if employed sensibly, offer the rapid, large-scale deployment that is needed now to help reduce peak global temperatures and slow warming trends. Engineered solutions, coming on stream later, have the potential for more secure long-term removals. These technologies, once fully developed, offer the prospect of more stable CO₂ storage options, significantly reducing the risk of reversal.
What climate mitigation requires
A number of companies recently announced they are leaving the Australian government's Climate Active carbon credit scheme amid concerns about its integrity. Some critics of carbon credit markets suggest that they operate simply as a way of allowing companies to buy the illusion of climate action, while continuing with business as usual.
However, if the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is right, we will need emission reductions to be accompanied by CDR into the foreseeable future, and we will need well-functioning carbon markets to deliver it. Stabilising the consequences of human activity on the climate will require reducing emissions — but alongside this, it will also require both nature-based and engineered methods of CDR, situated within a well-governed carbon credit market.
Christian Barry is Director of the Research School of Social Sciences at the Australian National University.
Garrett Cullity is Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Centre for Moral, Social and Political Theory at the Australian National University
Together with a team of international climate scientists and policymakers, they are authors of a new paper discussing these themes at greater length, 'Considering Durability in Carbon Dioxide Removal Strategies for Climate Change Mitigation', forthcoming in Climate Policy.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News.com.au
5 hours ago
- News.com.au
US share exodus: Aussies sell their US stocks on Trump fears
Australian retail investors are ditching the United States and moving their money to 'stable' economies on the back of US President Donald Trump's 'Liberation Day.' New retail data from investing platform eToro, who asked 10,000 retail investors across 14 countries, including 1,000 from Australia showed a sharp trend away from America. According to eToro's data the downturn in enthusiasm for US markets reflects broader economic uncertainty, with 37 per cent of Aussie investors citing the global economy as the biggest threat to their investments – the highest figure recorded since Q2 2022. Inflation follows as the second biggest concern at 17 per cent. Instead of investing abroad, local investors are increasing their exposure to Australian markets. eToro managing director Robert Francis told NewsWire a combination of US policies and high valuations have retail investors sceptical of investing in the world's largest market going forward. 'People are beginning to realise the US exceptionalism isn't what it was a year or two ago with the inauguration of Trump has meant a lot of uncertainty,' he said. Rayeiris Maduro Rondon, an investor based in Sydney after relocating from Venezuela told NewsWire it is her opinion that the days of the US exceptionalism has 'paused' as she shifts to Europe and China. 'I view this more as a period of recalibration rather than decline,' she said. 'Historically, when markets trade at elevated valuations for extended periods, investors begin to see high multiples as 'the normality' and price in unrealistic growth expectations. 'That's where the U.S. stands today.' While she still holds some US investments on a 'reasonable valuation,' she said there are better opportunities abroad. 'In Europe and Asia, I'm finding businesses with higher returns on capital and strong cash flows trading at deeply discounted valuations, making them far more attractive from a risk-adjusted perspective,' she said. Alert not alarmed Australian investors are split on what the current market volatility means for them. eToro's survey data showed 35 per cent of Aussies are more vigilant about their portfolio while a further 28 per cent are feeling anxious. On the flipside, 24 per cent are actually hopeful or excited about the large market swings. This optimism extends to investing strategies, with over a quarter of Aussie retail investors seeing a decline of 10 per cent or less as an opportunity to buy the dip. eToro's market analyst Josh Gilbert said investors are alert but not all of them are alarmed. 'Many see recent market dips as buying opportunities, which signals a level of confidence in long-term market resilience, he said. 'The risk of being out of the market altogether is something savvy investors are acutely aware of. 'The recent rebound in global equities since April has reinforced that view, even in uncertain times.' It has been a volatile ride for investors since Mr Trump took office for global markets initially rallying before hitting a bear market on April 2, with the announcement of Liberation Day. The wide-ranging tariffs were touted as Liberation Day for the US, with Mr Trump arguing it would level out the playing field. In a list of countries, Australia was 21st with a 10 per cent tariff on all goods imported into the US. The ASX slumped 11.4 per cent in the five days following 'Liberation Day', while the US S & P 500 fell around 12 per cent while the Dow Jones dropped 11 per cent. In both the Australia and the US shares quickly recovered after Mr Trump announced a temporary pause on his tariff policies. Mr Francis said this was a dramatic turnaround in investor confidence with the market initially rallying when Mr Trump returned to office. 'The whole market was buoyant with Trump's inauguration,' he said. 'I mean, we all thought investors, market commentators, all thought that we were going to see a continued bullish trend in the market. 'But given what we're seeing now around trade conflicts, tariffs that are being implemented, this is kind of, where is this going to go? 'All of this means that there's a level of uncertainty right now that doesn't bring confidence in investing in the US'. Some still move to safe assets Commodities have also been a favourite of Australian investors as they look to protect their positions. According to eToro's results, fears mount over a weaker US dollar and persistent inflation, Aussie retail investors are repositioning their portfolios, with nearly half of respondents having adjusted allocations or planning to. Mr Gilbert said 60 per cent of respondents said they expect gold prices to increase in the next 6–12 months, which reinforces its traditional role as an inflation hedge. 'Interestingly, we've seen Bitcoin's growing status among younger investors as a similar hedge. 'Out of local retail investors who are adjusting their portfolios based on a weaker USD, 27 per cent of Gen Z respondents said they will buy more crypto, the highest out of all generations. Indeed, 52 per cent of local Gen Z investors already hold crypto.'
News.com.au
9 hours ago
- News.com.au
How you could get $20,000 back in your tax
For most Aussies, tax time means either a nice tax refund that can boost your savings, or the sneaking suspicion you've left money on the table. According to new research from Officeworks, lots of Aussies are getting tax time wrong – and it's costing us serious money. From lost receipts to missed deductions, and even more in between, the result is the average taxpayer is donating hundreds or even thousands of dollars extra to the ATO just because they don't know better. Below I've included some of the most common tax mistakes and how much they could be costing you. And spoiler alert, if you're falling into these traps it could cost you more than $18,000 over the next decade. So whether you're a regular employee, working for yourself, or running a side hustle, here are the top tax mistakes to avoid – and how you can keep more of your hard earned money. Not claiming what you're entitled to One of the biggest mistakes made by Aussies at tax time is a simple one – not claiming all the deductions you're entitled to. According to H&R Block, people who lodge their own tax return miss out on deductions that cost them an average of $525.50 each year. And it's not even just the big things people miss. Officeworks research found that just 24 per cent of people claim deductions for office furniture, 20 per cent claim pens, and 46 per cent are deducting electronics and tech accessories. Given how many people are working from home, and buying things they use for their work, this shows there are a heap of people missing out on deductions. If you're spending money on deductible items for your work, you're entitled to claim them – but only if you're tracking them – and then actually include these expenses in your claim. Nearly 30 per cent of Aussies lose receipts and end up claiming less, according to Officeworks EOFY research. That could easily mean $500 in missed deductions (or even more), meaning $185 less in your tax refund based on a 37 per cent marginal tax rate. This mistake is an easy one to avoid, it just requires a little bit of organisation. The ATO accepts digital receipts, so you can make your life easier by filing digital receipts on your computer, using an app, or choosing a supplier like Officeworks that offers digital receipts or their own app for tracking. That way at the end of the year, you'll have everything organised and in one place, making your claim easier – and most importantly making sure nothing is missed. Not planning at EOFY Bad timing can be just as costly as bad habits when it comes to your tax return prep. The research from Officeworks shows that 44 per cent of Australians make work related purchases before 30 June to boost their tax deductions. When your deductible expenses land before 30 June rather than after 1 July, this means you'll get the deduction, and the refund a full year sooner. But if you miss the window, you could miss out on the deduction. If you have another $500 in expenses deferred or forgotten, that's potentially another $185 missed this year. Not getting the right help with your return Lots of Aussies still lodge their own tax returns, and for some people that's completely fine. But the data shows a clear benefit to getting some good help with your tax prep. People that lodge their tax returns through a tax agent receive an average tax refund of $3550, compared to $2576 for self-lodgers. This reflects a difference of $974 every year, or almost a thousand dollars you could potentially be missing out on by doing your own tax return (even after fees). And to make getting some help here even easier, the cost of a tax agent is fully tax deductible. Total cost of these mistakes These tax mistakes may seem small, but they add up. Across the four areas outlined here, you're looking at a total of $1870 less back in your refund this year. Over the course of a decade, that's a total of $18,695 – or almost $20,000 being left on the table. The wrap The tax system is full of opportunities to get more out of the money you already have, and keep more of your hard earned income – but only if you understand the rules and how to use them to your advantage. Most people aren't trying to dodge tax on purpose. It could be that you're too busy, unsure, or maybe even a little overwhelmed. But by avoiding a few common mistakes, and being just a little bit more intentional, you could be saving tens of thousands of dollars, maybe even more over the years ahead. To get the most out of your tax refund this year, and use the money as a platform to start the new financial year in a stronger position, there are a few things you need to look out for. Keeping your receipts, tracking everything (even the small stuff), being strategic with your timing, and getting good help – it all makes a big difference. If you want some help with your money and investing, you can book a call with Pivot Wealth here.
ABC News
9 hours ago
- ABC News
Carbon Questions: Navigating the complexities of carbon farming
Carbon farming has been pitched as a way for farmers to diversify their income, but it's complex, involves long contracts, and there are risks.
