Latest news with #ClimateActive
ABC News
5 days ago
- Business
- ABC News
Logan City Council to pull out of federal government Climate Active program due to financial pressure, transparency concerns
Queensland's only certified carbon neutral council is set lose that title, blaming the rising cost of delivering services and successive natural disasters for its inability to fund the process. Logan City Council, south of Brisbane, said it also had concerns around transparency and where the funds it was paying to be certified were going. The council is one of 14 local governments around Australia registered with the federal government's Climate Active program. To achieve carbon neutrality through the Climate Active program, businesses or organisations calculate their emissions from their operations and then seek to reduce them through technological or operational changes. The remainder is offset by buying carbon credits. Logan Mayor Jon Raven said leaving the program would save the council about $1.5 million, which it is spending on overseas carbon credits each year. Mr Raven said the council did a lot of carbon offsetting itself, through running rooftop solar on its building, generating natural gas from landfill and hydrogen from wastewater treatment. "[But] no one's been able to confirm where that money goes or show us any concrete evidence it is actually being spent to improve the environment. "I don't believe we were carbon neutral when we were just sending money overseas to projects no one could confirm existed. Carbon credits are a way for organisations like governments or businesses to pay for emissions-reducing projects, both in Australia or overseas, and use credits generated by these projects to offset their own emissions. Climate Active does not trade carbon credits. Instead, organisations go through online marketplaces and third parties to purchase eligible offsets. But the certification scheme has seen an exodus of companies leaving it in recent years. More than 100 companies, including Telstra, NRMA, Australia Post and major super funds have left Climate Active in the last 19 months. There have been calls to shut down the program over concerns about the efficacy of offset schemes. Australian National University regulatory and environmental markets expert Professor Andrew Macintosh said there was a lack of integrity when it came to both national and international carbon credits. Professor Macintosh is a non-executive director of Paraway Pastoral Company, which operates a number of carbon offset projects. "People have got carbon credits for making changes or reductions in emissions that would've occurred anyway," he said. He said there has been concern over some types of carbon credits being used on projects like wind farms in India that were already fully viable, while in Australia there were concerns another type of credit was being bought for natural forest regeneration in areas where there were no trees. "Talking to clients, talking to friends, I recommend they don't be certified under Climate Active because of the concerns about carbon offsets, because of transparency," he said. "This is one of the real tragedies, there are good projects out there and they're being tarred by the fact that both our government and other schemes around the world have allowed bad projects and rotten credits to be issued," Professor Macintosh said. "Logan City Council was certainly trying to do the right thing, but they probably can't tell the difference between good and bad credits." A spokesperson from the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water — which oversees Climate Active — said the government was "actively considering the future direction of the Climate Active program". "We recognise that Climate Active needs reform and that work is under way as a priority that will involve proper consultation," they said. "The Climate Active program continues to operate, certifying entities that have met the program requirements." The spokesperson said the federal government continues to work to ensure the integrity of the Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) Scheme following recent reviews by the Climate Change Authority, independent experts and the Australian National Audit Office. "These reviews have found the ACCU Scheme is well designed, well administered, and contributing to Australia's transition to net zero by 2050," they said. The ABC understands six local governments have voluntarily withdrawn from the program in the past five years. Professor David Karoly from the Climate Council said the only way to slow climate change was by reducing both greenhouse gas emissions and the concentration of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere. "If we want to offset, we have to get it out of the atmosphere and store it away permanently," he said. He said for a carbon offset to make a difference it had to be "long-term in terms of storage, high-quality… and defensible and demonstrable in terms of reductions in emissions". "All of those issues for many of the international offsets are very hard to determine," Professor Karoly said. He said there needed to be stricter international quality assurance controls of offsets. Professor Karoly said there were a range of initiatives local governments could undertake to reduce emissions, including installing solar powers, upgrading their fleets to electric vehicles and planting more vegetation and trees. Mr Raven said the Logan council would use the money saved from funding carbon credits to buy degraded land for revegetation, purchasing high-quality habitat to protect it, as well as other local carbon offset projects. "It will mean we aren't carbon neutral certified, but it will mean we can say your ratepayer dollars are being spent in our city to the benefit of the environment," he said. "We've got no confidence that was happening with this program."
AU Financial Review
6 days ago
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Corporates go cold on carbon neutral scheme
A top climate consultant says a key federal government carbon neutrality program has fallen out of sync with measures companies are taking on sustainability. Mike Cox of multinational decarbonisation consultancy Schneider Electric said companies he worked with had almost completely abandoned the Climate Active program, which allows companies to make certified claims that their products are carbon neutral.
AU Financial Review
28-05-2025
- Business
- AU Financial Review
Before you trash carbon offsets, ask who pays for conservation
Let me put this right up front – this is not a defence of the federal government's Climate Active scheme. It is not perfect and should be improved. Nor is this an attempt to suggest that offsetting emissions using carbon credits is a substitute for actual emissions reductions. I am also not trying to defend companies that greenwash and suggest that the purchase of carbon offsets somehow neutralises the climate impacts of their business activities, or is a substitute for direct emissions reduction.
The Australian
19-05-2025
- Business
- The Australian
Allegations over ‘carbon-neutral' marketing
EnergyAustralia, the third largest electricity and gas retailer in Australia, has reached an out-of-court settlement with climate advocacy group Parents for Climate to resolve a high-profile greenwashing case that alleged the energy retailer misled more than 400,000 customers through its now-defunct 'Go Neutral' product. The case, which was set to begin in the Federal Court last week, was the first of its kind in Australia targeting 'carbon-neutral' marketing claims, and marked the first time a major energy provider faced legal action for alleged greenwashing. Parents for Climate, a registered charity, argued that EnergyAustralia's promotion of its Go Neutral product gave consumers the impression they were meaningfully reducing emissions. In reality, the program relied on international carbon credits – some of which have been heavily criticised for questionable effectiveness in abating carbon pollution. The settlement on Monday avoids what could have been a landmark trial with wide-ranging implications for corporate climate marketing. Under the terms, EnergyAustralia acknowledged the product was 'not the most effective' way to cut emissions and issued a formal apology. While details remain confidential, the agreement sees all legal proceedings discontinued. EnergyAustralia's chief customer officer, Kate Gibson, said the company developed the program in good faith as part of its participation in the federal government's Climate Active certification scheme, a voluntary initiative encouraging business to measure and offset emissions. 'In recent years, questions have begun to emerge about the benefits of carbon offsets, including those offered as part of certified government programs such as Climate Active,' Ms Gibson said. 'EnergyAustralia accepts that there is legitimate public concern about the efficacy of these programs.' The Go Neutral product has since been withdrawn. Parents for Climate's legal action was seen as a bold move by a relatively small charity, especially given the financial risk of a loss in court. The case garnered significant public attention amid growing scrutiny of corporate environmental claims and the broader integrity of carbon offset markets. While the settlement spares EnergyAustralia from potential court-ordered penalties, it represents a reputational blow at a time when it is trying to improve public perception and accelerate its energy transition after years of financial turbulence. The case also adds to growing unease surrounding the Climate Active scheme. Once a flagship government program to support corporate climate action, it has seen more than 100 companies – including Telstra, NRMA, and Australia Post – quietly exit in the past 18 months. Most recently, $230bn super fund-backed IFM Investors also withdrew. Critics have argued that reliance on low-quality international offsets undermines the credibility of net-zero claims, while supporters maintain the program offers an important framework for encouraging emissions accountability in the private sector. The EnergyAustralia case is expected to serve as a cautionary tale for other businesses relying heavily on carbon offsets in their climate strategies. Legal experts suggest the settlement could encourage further litigation if companies continue to promote environmental claims without transparency or rigor. With regulators and consumers increasingly demanding proof of real emissions reductions, corporate Australia may face a reckoning over how it markets its climate credentials. Colin Packham Business reporter Colin Packham is the energy reporter at The Australian. He was previously at The Australian Financial Review and Reuters in Sydney and Canberra. Nation Victoria is committed to Australia's most aggressive renewable energy plan, which is acknowledged is exposed to unfavourable weather. It insists, however, it can manage that risk. Business A green hydrogen project in the NT which counted Osaka Gas as one of its backers has been paused. It is the latest setback for true believers of the renewable energy source, after Andrew Forrest's Fortescue cut 90 jobs this week.
The Advertiser
18-05-2025
- Business
- The Advertiser
Carbon offsets set aside following greenwashing lawsuit
One of Australia's largest energy firms has issued an apology to more than 400,000 customers, acknowledging that carbon offsets "do not prevent or undo harms" caused by burning fossil fuels. EnergyAustralia issued the statement early on Monday following a lawsuit launched by Parents for Climate that had been scheduled to be heard in the NSW Federal Court on Wednesday last week. The group, with more than 20,000 members, called EnergyAustralia's acknowledgement a win for Australian consumers but said it could also set a standard for the use of carbon offsets and environmentally friendly marketing by other companies. The lawsuit, filed in August 2023, claimed the energy generator and retailer misled customers using its Go Neutral products that were marketed as "carbon neutral" due to the purchase of carbon offsets and claimed consumers would have a "positive impact on the environment". In its statement, EnergyAustralia apologised to customers who felt the marketing claims were unclear and acknowledged carbon offsets did not reverse environmental harm. "While offsets can help people to invest in worthwhile projects that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, offsets do not prevent or undo the harms caused by burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use," the statement said. "Even with carbon offsetting, the emissions released from burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use still contribute to climate change." EnergyAustralia withdrew its Go Neutral plans from the market in 2024, and chief customer officer Kate Gibson said the company would focus on direct efforts to reduce emissions in future. "Carbon offsets should not be used to delay or diminish the important work that needs to be done to actively decarbonise," she said. The energy giant's acknowledgement should herald a fresh approach to the use of carbon offsets in Australia, Parents for Climate chief executive Nic Seton said, as greenwashing had become too common. "Parents have spent too long trying to make careful, considered decisions about where their money goes, especially in a cost-of-living crisis, but corporate greenwashing has pushed them off track," he said. "This isn't just about EnergyAustralia – it's about holding companies to a higher standard across the board." Australian regulations for corporate environmental claims were not strong enough, Mr Seton said, and the government should consider ending Climate Active carbon neutral certification that had been under review since October 2023. The outcome of the court case could set a standard for corporate environmental claims in Australia, Equity Generation Lawyers principal lawyer David Hertzberg, who represented the charity, said. "Today's outcome is a watershed moment in greenwashing litigation in Australia," he said. EnergyAustralia ranked as Australia's third-largest emitter in 2023-2024, according to statistics from the Clean Energy Regulator, and has more than 1.6 million customers. One of Australia's largest energy firms has issued an apology to more than 400,000 customers, acknowledging that carbon offsets "do not prevent or undo harms" caused by burning fossil fuels. EnergyAustralia issued the statement early on Monday following a lawsuit launched by Parents for Climate that had been scheduled to be heard in the NSW Federal Court on Wednesday last week. The group, with more than 20,000 members, called EnergyAustralia's acknowledgement a win for Australian consumers but said it could also set a standard for the use of carbon offsets and environmentally friendly marketing by other companies. The lawsuit, filed in August 2023, claimed the energy generator and retailer misled customers using its Go Neutral products that were marketed as "carbon neutral" due to the purchase of carbon offsets and claimed consumers would have a "positive impact on the environment". In its statement, EnergyAustralia apologised to customers who felt the marketing claims were unclear and acknowledged carbon offsets did not reverse environmental harm. "While offsets can help people to invest in worthwhile projects that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, offsets do not prevent or undo the harms caused by burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use," the statement said. "Even with carbon offsetting, the emissions released from burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use still contribute to climate change." EnergyAustralia withdrew its Go Neutral plans from the market in 2024, and chief customer officer Kate Gibson said the company would focus on direct efforts to reduce emissions in future. "Carbon offsets should not be used to delay or diminish the important work that needs to be done to actively decarbonise," she said. The energy giant's acknowledgement should herald a fresh approach to the use of carbon offsets in Australia, Parents for Climate chief executive Nic Seton said, as greenwashing had become too common. "Parents have spent too long trying to make careful, considered decisions about where their money goes, especially in a cost-of-living crisis, but corporate greenwashing has pushed them off track," he said. "This isn't just about EnergyAustralia – it's about holding companies to a higher standard across the board." Australian regulations for corporate environmental claims were not strong enough, Mr Seton said, and the government should consider ending Climate Active carbon neutral certification that had been under review since October 2023. The outcome of the court case could set a standard for corporate environmental claims in Australia, Equity Generation Lawyers principal lawyer David Hertzberg, who represented the charity, said. "Today's outcome is a watershed moment in greenwashing litigation in Australia," he said. EnergyAustralia ranked as Australia's third-largest emitter in 2023-2024, according to statistics from the Clean Energy Regulator, and has more than 1.6 million customers. One of Australia's largest energy firms has issued an apology to more than 400,000 customers, acknowledging that carbon offsets "do not prevent or undo harms" caused by burning fossil fuels. EnergyAustralia issued the statement early on Monday following a lawsuit launched by Parents for Climate that had been scheduled to be heard in the NSW Federal Court on Wednesday last week. The group, with more than 20,000 members, called EnergyAustralia's acknowledgement a win for Australian consumers but said it could also set a standard for the use of carbon offsets and environmentally friendly marketing by other companies. The lawsuit, filed in August 2023, claimed the energy generator and retailer misled customers using its Go Neutral products that were marketed as "carbon neutral" due to the purchase of carbon offsets and claimed consumers would have a "positive impact on the environment". In its statement, EnergyAustralia apologised to customers who felt the marketing claims were unclear and acknowledged carbon offsets did not reverse environmental harm. "While offsets can help people to invest in worthwhile projects that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, offsets do not prevent or undo the harms caused by burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use," the statement said. "Even with carbon offsetting, the emissions released from burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use still contribute to climate change." EnergyAustralia withdrew its Go Neutral plans from the market in 2024, and chief customer officer Kate Gibson said the company would focus on direct efforts to reduce emissions in future. "Carbon offsets should not be used to delay or diminish the important work that needs to be done to actively decarbonise," she said. The energy giant's acknowledgement should herald a fresh approach to the use of carbon offsets in Australia, Parents for Climate chief executive Nic Seton said, as greenwashing had become too common. "Parents have spent too long trying to make careful, considered decisions about where their money goes, especially in a cost-of-living crisis, but corporate greenwashing has pushed them off track," he said. "This isn't just about EnergyAustralia – it's about holding companies to a higher standard across the board." Australian regulations for corporate environmental claims were not strong enough, Mr Seton said, and the government should consider ending Climate Active carbon neutral certification that had been under review since October 2023. The outcome of the court case could set a standard for corporate environmental claims in Australia, Equity Generation Lawyers principal lawyer David Hertzberg, who represented the charity, said. "Today's outcome is a watershed moment in greenwashing litigation in Australia," he said. EnergyAustralia ranked as Australia's third-largest emitter in 2023-2024, according to statistics from the Clean Energy Regulator, and has more than 1.6 million customers. One of Australia's largest energy firms has issued an apology to more than 400,000 customers, acknowledging that carbon offsets "do not prevent or undo harms" caused by burning fossil fuels. EnergyAustralia issued the statement early on Monday following a lawsuit launched by Parents for Climate that had been scheduled to be heard in the NSW Federal Court on Wednesday last week. The group, with more than 20,000 members, called EnergyAustralia's acknowledgement a win for Australian consumers but said it could also set a standard for the use of carbon offsets and environmentally friendly marketing by other companies. The lawsuit, filed in August 2023, claimed the energy generator and retailer misled customers using its Go Neutral products that were marketed as "carbon neutral" due to the purchase of carbon offsets and claimed consumers would have a "positive impact on the environment". In its statement, EnergyAustralia apologised to customers who felt the marketing claims were unclear and acknowledged carbon offsets did not reverse environmental harm. "While offsets can help people to invest in worthwhile projects that may reduce greenhouse gas emissions elsewhere, offsets do not prevent or undo the harms caused by burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use," the statement said. "Even with carbon offsetting, the emissions released from burning fossil fuels for a customer's energy use still contribute to climate change." EnergyAustralia withdrew its Go Neutral plans from the market in 2024, and chief customer officer Kate Gibson said the company would focus on direct efforts to reduce emissions in future. "Carbon offsets should not be used to delay or diminish the important work that needs to be done to actively decarbonise," she said. The energy giant's acknowledgement should herald a fresh approach to the use of carbon offsets in Australia, Parents for Climate chief executive Nic Seton said, as greenwashing had become too common. "Parents have spent too long trying to make careful, considered decisions about where their money goes, especially in a cost-of-living crisis, but corporate greenwashing has pushed them off track," he said. "This isn't just about EnergyAustralia – it's about holding companies to a higher standard across the board." Australian regulations for corporate environmental claims were not strong enough, Mr Seton said, and the government should consider ending Climate Active carbon neutral certification that had been under review since October 2023. The outcome of the court case could set a standard for corporate environmental claims in Australia, Equity Generation Lawyers principal lawyer David Hertzberg, who represented the charity, said. "Today's outcome is a watershed moment in greenwashing litigation in Australia," he said. EnergyAustralia ranked as Australia's third-largest emitter in 2023-2024, according to statistics from the Clean Energy Regulator, and has more than 1.6 million customers.
