Australia's red meat industry drops 2030 carbon neutral goal
The carbon neutral pledge, first announced in 2017, was absent from Meat & Livestock Australia's long-term strategy document released on Tuesday. Its managing director, Michael Crowley, said the target had proven unachievable.
"We need more time, more support, and more investment to reach our goal," he said.
Australia's Red Meat Advisory Council dropped the 2030 climate neutral goal from its strategy last week.
The decisions echo those of some governments and companies that have scaled back climate commitments in recent years.
The livestock industry's original 2030 target aimed to reduce emissions and offset those that remained by carbon sequestration in soil or plant matter.
To this end, the industry has pursued innovations including the breeding of animals that emit less methane, using feed supplements such as seaweed that inhibit methane production in the gut, and improving soil carbon capture techniques.
While emissions from Australia's red meat industry did drop 78% by 2021 from 2005 levels, according to the country's science agency CSIRO, this was due to less land clearing and a smaller national herd - not a decrease in methane produced per animal.
Crowley said the research over the last few years would mature into implementation and the industry could still reach 80-90% of its carbon neutrality goal by 2030.
"We need to drive adoption," he said.
He added that the 2030 target had spurred over A$100 million ($66 million) in sustainability investments and MLA, a livestock research and marketing body, would continue to drive efficiency gains and reduce net emissions per kg of meat production.
Australia is one of the world's biggest exporters of red meat and home to 30 million cattle and more than 70 million sheep, according to MLA.
During digestion, these animals produce methane, which breaks down over time but is 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over a timespan of 20 years.
($1 = 1.5207 Australian dollars)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Apple and Google found to have breached Australia's competition laws in landmark court case
Tech giants Apple and Google have been found to have engaged in anti-competitive conduct, paving the way for a payout that could be worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Epic Games, the developer of popular online game Fortnite, sued the two tech giants in the Federal Court, claiming they engaged in anti-competitive and unconscionable conduct against those developing apps distributed through iOS and Android devices. The lawsuit was launched after Epic was booted from Apple's App Store and Google's Play Store after attempting to introduce its own payment system into Fortnite games in August 2020. Justice Jonathan Beach on Tuesday found Apple and Google had breached Australia's competition laws, upholding key elements of Epic's case. Apple had a 'substantial degree of market power' because of the restrictions placed on in-app payment systems and the distribution of iOS compatible apps, he said. Google also had a significant degree of market power and was the predominant supplier of Android apps, the court was told. The tech companies' dominance had the effect of substantially lessening competition and breached Australia's competition laws, Justice Beach found. However, he rejected Epic's argument Apple had engaged in unconscionable conduct. Justice Beach also found in favour of a class action lawsuit comprising Australian developers and gamers who claimed Apple and Google's monopolistic practices led to inflated prices. The app developers had to pay higher commissions than they otherwise would have if there was more competition in the market Lawyers for the plaintiffs welcomed the result as a significant win for consumer rights and digital fairness that could have global implications for how digital platforms operate. 'This judgment is a turning point,' said Kimi Nishimura from Maurice Blackburn Lawyers. 'It sends a clear message that even the most powerful corporations must play by the rules and respect the rights of consumers and developers alike.' The lawyers said the decision could result in 'one of the largest class action payouts in Australian legal history with potential compensation of several hundreds of millions of dollars to come from two global corporate Goliaths'. The parties have been given time to consider the 2000-page judgment and will return to the Federal Court at a later date to determine compensation and directives aimed at increasing transparency. A Google spokesperson said the company disagreed with the court's characterisation of its billing policies and practices and would review the full decision. The Epic Games Store and Fortnite will come to iOS in Australia! An Australian court just found that Apple and Google abuse their control over app distribution and in-app payments to limit competition. There are 2,000+ pages of findings that we'll need to dig into to fully... - Epic Games Newsroom (@EpicNewsroom) August 12, 2025 Apple welcomed the 'rejection of some of Epic's claims, however, we strongly disagree with the court's ruling on others.' Epic Games took to social media to herald the result and say Fortnite would return to iOS soon. 'A federal judge just found that Apple and Google both engaged in anti-competitive conduct,' the company wrote. 'Another HUGE Win for Epic Games!' Epic won a separate US case against Google in 2023 after a jury found it had engaged in anti-trust conduct through the Google Play Store. It was less successful in its case against Apple, although the court found the tech giant had engaged in anti-competitive conduct. Apple has also been forced to implement changes to its App Store in Europe, including allowing third-party payment systems.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Albo's radical plan for cash as fewer Aussies pay with banknotes
Anthony Albanese's government is considering a takeover of Australia's cash distribution channels based on a Covid-era assumption that cash is dying. The Council of Financial Regulators - which includes the Reserve Bank, Treasury and the Australian Prudential Regulator Authority - has recommended a Minister for Cash be appointed. Its consultation paper also implied the government would have to intervene in the cash distribution business, based on the fear Armaguard would financially struggle, even with a near monopoly, as fewer Aussie consumers used cash. 'The decline in the use of cash for payments in Australia has challenged the economics of the cash distribution sector, upon which access to cash relies,' it said. 'Challenges in the cash distribution sector include the long-term decline in the use of cash for payments, and a high degree of concentration and limited competition in parts of the market.' The minister would have the power to 'designate specific registered entities' to deliver cash. 'To be designated, a registered entity would provide critical cash services to a significant part of the market,' the paper said. 'To ensure crisis readiness, a regulator may need ongoing powers enabling it to assess a designated entity's crisis preparedness and to improve that entity's resolvability in a crisis' Anthony Albanese's government is considering a takeover of Australia's cash distribution channels based on a Covid-era assumption that cash is dying (pictured are Commonwealth Bank customers in Melbourne) But Cash Welcome founder Jason Bryce said the proposal for the government to take over cash distribution was a bridge too far. 'This is massive overkill - what I'm saying in my submission is cost-free for the government, the best solution is pass a law that says cash is legal tender in Australia and all retailers must accept cash,' he told Daily Mail Australia. 'Pass a law that says banks must provide an ATM or a bank branch in every town or community. 'If you do those two things, there will be no cash crisis, the market signals will be clear, banks will stop talking, talking, talking about going cashless.' He argued the government proposal was based on flawed and outdated Reserve Bank data from 2022 that found only 16 per cent of in-person transactions were still done in cash, based on the pandemic idea that banknotes are 'dirty'. 'That number - 16 per cent of in-person transactions - dates from that period and is no longer relevant and should not be used by policymakers,' he said. The RBA's Consumer Payments Survey is only released every three years, which means data showing fewer Australians are paying with cash could be failing to reflect changing behaviour in the years after Covid. 'What's going to happen if it jumps up from 16 per cent?' The Council of Financial Regulators - which includes the Reserve Bank, Treasury and the Australian Prudential Regulator Authority - has recommended a Minister for Cash be appointed Mr Bryce said the banks were to blame for scrapping $2 fees in 2017 for customers using rival ATMs and forfeiting $500million in revenue that could be used to pay the likes of Armaguard. 'Banks need to pay for cash distribution - they gave up $500million annually, revenue, and now they're complaining like stuck pigs about having to pay Armaguard $25million every six months,' he said. Australia's Big Four banks, supermarket giant Woolworths and retail group Wesfarmers - the owner of hardware chain Bunnings, Kmart and Officeworks - last month announced they would provide a $25.5million lifeline to Armaguard from July to December. 'Major banks and major retailers have reached an agreement with Armaguard to extend their financial contribution for a further six months,' the Australian Banking Association said. In the seven years after the $2 rival ATM fee was scrapped, the number of ATMs has more than halved, plunging from 13,814 in June 2017 to just 5,476 in June last year, APRA data showed. The number of branch branches fell from 5,694 to 3,360 and the Commonwealth Bank last year scrapped plans to charge customers $3 to withdraw cash from a bank branch. Linfox Armaguard and Spanish group Prosegur were given permission from the competition regulator to merge in 2023. The consultation paper suggested new laws to ensure the future of cash. 'Given the government's commitment to maintaining access to cash and the subsequent announcement of its intention to implement a cash acceptance mandate, it is necessary to consider whether existing regulatory regimes can support the cash distribution sector continuing to perform its critical role in facilitating long-term, sustainable and adequate access to cash across Australia,' it said. Submissions close this Friday the Regulating Cash consultation paper.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Three more interest rate cuts may be on the way. But when is increasingly looking like anyone's guess
Three down, three more to go. For mortgage holders, that was the most optimistic takeaway from Michele Bullock's press conference after the Reserve Bank of Australia's decision to cut its cash rate for the third time this year. The RBA's cash rate target started the year at 4.35% and – after moves in February, May and now August – it has reached 3.6%. 'We've become increasingly confident that inflation is on track to be in our 2-3% target range on a sustainable basis,' the RBA governor said, before adding that the central bank and its board were 'determined to keep inflation down'. Those rosy inflation forecasts depend on a key assumption, or what Bullock called the bank's 'best guess' about where rates would go from here. That assumed path is a further rate cut by the end of this year, another by the following June, and then potentially one more by the end of 2026. Sign up: AU Breaking News email 'The forecasts imply that the cash rate might need to be a bit lower than it is today to keep inflation low and stable, and employment growing, but there is still a lot of uncertainty,' she said. And while the direction of travel for rates looks clear, there was plenty of evidence from Bullock's press conference that the RBA is not particularly convinced when those moves need to happen. In July the board surprised us by not cutting its cash rate. But Bullock made it clear that the RBA just needed to tick a couple of boxes before taking the plunge. Now, the vision is much blurrier. The board is taking things 'meeting by meeting', the governor said a number of times. What would potentially determine when we might get another cut? She responded with a laundry list of data that the central bank's policy board considers when they make their decisions. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion Another question: Is the cash rate at 3.6% a handbrake on the economy? Maybe, maybe not, Bullock replied. All of which is to say: again, two or three more rate cuts is the bank's 'best guess'. Sure, it would be nice to think the bank can do more than just guess, but monetary policy this deep into a cutting cycle looks a lot more like art than science. For now, we will have to console ourselves with the prospect that interest rates, at some stage, 'might need to be a bit lower'. Patrick Commins is Guardian Australia's economics editor
