Latest news with #ClimateEnergyFinance
Daily Mail
2 days ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Anthony Albanese's government considering a new Donald Trump style tariff: What it means for you
Teaming up with other regional economies to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive iron and other goods has been pitched as key to Australia's future as a major player in emerging green industries. The case for Asian carbon border tariffs has been made by think tank Climate Energy Finance days after the federal energy minister signalled openness to charges at the border on emissions-heavy steel and cement. Carbon border adjustment mechanisms, known as CBAMs, can level the playing field for heavy industries subject to domestic carbon pricing. Without them, steelmakers and other producers may choose to move factories offshore to countries with less stringent regulations on pollution, a problem known as 'carbon leakage'. The European Union has been leading the charge and its carbon border adjustment mechanism is scheduled to come into full force in 2026. There was a strong case for an Asian equivalent building on the 17 domestic carbon pricing schemes already across the region, Climate Energy Finance net-zero transformation analyst and report author Matt Pollard said. This includes Australia, which forces big polluters to pay a carbon penalty if their emissions are above a certain threshold via the safeguard mechanism. China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore also have carbon pricing in some shape or form. With most emissions-intensive goods produced in Asia for export traded within the Asia Pacific, a regional border mechanism would effectively function as a price on carbon in international trade. 'As a result, lower-emission products can more effectively compete against higher-emissions products in a global market,' Mr Pollard explained. The think tank wants Australia to spearhead the conversation as part of its bid to co-host the COP31 climate summit alongside Pacific nations. Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen would not rule out the possibility of carbon tariffs on specific sectors, such as steel and cement, during an interview on ABC's Insiders on Sunday He cited an ongoing review into carbon leakage headed by Australian National University climate change economics expert Frank Jotzo. 'We want to ensure Australian industry is best placed to compete in a decarbonising world,' he said on Sunday. Opposition energy and emissions reduction spokesman Dan Tehan criticised the minister for floating the idea immediately after winning the federal election. 'He's put electricity prices up, he's put gas prices up, and he's put emissions up, and now he wants to follow Donald Trump's lead and put in place tariffs,' Mr Tehan said on social media platform X on Sunday. Mr Pollard rejected the comparison to the US president's 'erratically applied, economically and industrially destructive and investment-deterring' tariff agenda. 'Carbon border adjustment mechanisms are not discriminatory, and enhance globalisation, international collaboration and climate action - which is intrinsically a global problem,' he said. While they are tariffs by nature, carbon border adjustment mechanisms have the opposite objectives of the Trump administration's trade policies that are designed to 'enhance protectionism and isolationism'. The push for regional Asian carbon tariffs was welcomed by groups like clean energy industry body Smart Energy Council and economic think tank The Superpower Institute.
West Australian
2 days ago
- Business
- West Australian
Australia urged to spearhead regional carbon tariffs
Teaming up with other regional economies to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive iron and other goods has been pitched as key to Australia's future as a major player in emerging green industries. The case for Asian carbon border tariffs has been made by think tank Climate Energy Finance days after the federal energy minister signalled openness to charges at the border on emissions-heavy steel and cement. Carbon border adjustment mechanisms, known as CBAMs, can level the playing field for heavy industries subject to domestic carbon pricing. Without them, steelmakers and other producers may choose to move factories offshore to countries with less stringent regulations on pollution, a problem known as "carbon leakage". The European Union has been leading the charge and its carbon border adjustment mechanism is scheduled to come into full force in 2026. There was a strong case for an Asian equivalent building on the 17 domestic carbon pricing schemes already across the region, Climate Energy Finance net-zero transformation analyst and report author Matt Pollard said. This includes Australia, which forces big polluters to pay a carbon penalty if their emissions are above a certain threshold via the safeguard mechanism. China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore also have carbon pricing in some shape or form. With most emissions-intensive goods produced in Asia for export traded within the Asia Pacific, a regional border mechanism would effectively function as a price on carbon in international trade. "As a result, lower-emission products can more effectively compete against higher-emissions products in a global market," Mr Pollard explained. The think tank wants Australia to spearhead the conversation as part of its bid to co-host the COP31 climate summit alongside Pacific nations. Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen would not rule out the possibility of carbon tariffs on specific sectors, such as steel and cement, during an interview on ABC's Insiders on Sunday He cited an ongoing review into carbon leakage headed by Australian National University climate change economics expert Frank Jotzo. "We want to ensure Australian industry is best placed to compete in a decarbonising world," he said on Sunday. Opposition energy and emissions reduction spokesman Dan Tehan criticised the minister for floating the idea immediately after winning the federal election. "He's put electricity prices up, he's put gas prices up, and he's put emissions up, and now he wants to follow Donald Trump's lead and put in place tariffs," Mr Tehan said on social media platform X on Sunday. Mr Pollard rejected the comparison to the US president's "erratically applied, economically and industrially destructive and investment-deterring" tariff agenda. "Carbon border adjustment mechanisms are not discriminatory, and enhance globalisation, international collaboration and climate action - which is intrinsically a global problem," he said. While they are tariffs by nature, carbon border adjustment mechanisms have the opposite objectives of the Trump administration's trade policies that are designed to "enhance protectionism and isolationism". The push for regional Asian carbon tariffs was welcomed by groups like clean energy industry body Smart Energy Council and economic think tank The Superpower Institute.
Perth Now
2 days ago
- Business
- Perth Now
Australia urged to spearhead regional carbon tariffs
Teaming up with other regional economies to impose tariffs on carbon-intensive iron and other goods has been pitched as key to Australia's future as a major player in emerging green industries. The case for Asian carbon border tariffs has been made by think tank Climate Energy Finance days after the federal energy minister signalled openness to charges at the border on emissions-heavy steel and cement. Carbon border adjustment mechanisms, known as CBAMs, can level the playing field for heavy industries subject to domestic carbon pricing. Without them, steelmakers and other producers may choose to move factories offshore to countries with less stringent regulations on pollution, a problem known as "carbon leakage". The European Union has been leading the charge and its carbon border adjustment mechanism is scheduled to come into full force in 2026. There was a strong case for an Asian equivalent building on the 17 domestic carbon pricing schemes already across the region, Climate Energy Finance net-zero transformation analyst and report author Matt Pollard said. This includes Australia, which forces big polluters to pay a carbon penalty if their emissions are above a certain threshold via the safeguard mechanism. China, South Korea, Japan and Singapore also have carbon pricing in some shape or form. With most emissions-intensive goods produced in Asia for export traded within the Asia Pacific, a regional border mechanism would effectively function as a price on carbon in international trade. "As a result, lower-emission products can more effectively compete against higher-emissions products in a global market," Mr Pollard explained. The think tank wants Australia to spearhead the conversation as part of its bid to co-host the COP31 climate summit alongside Pacific nations. Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen would not rule out the possibility of carbon tariffs on specific sectors, such as steel and cement, during an interview on ABC's Insiders on Sunday He cited an ongoing review into carbon leakage headed by Australian National University climate change economics expert Frank Jotzo. "We want to ensure Australian industry is best placed to compete in a decarbonising world," he said on Sunday. Opposition energy and emissions reduction spokesman Dan Tehan criticised the minister for floating the idea immediately after winning the federal election. "He's put electricity prices up, he's put gas prices up, and he's put emissions up, and now he wants to follow Donald Trump's lead and put in place tariffs," Mr Tehan said on social media platform X on Sunday. Mr Pollard rejected the comparison to the US president's "erratically applied, economically and industrially destructive and investment-deterring" tariff agenda. "Carbon border adjustment mechanisms are not discriminatory, and enhance globalisation, international collaboration and climate action - which is intrinsically a global problem," he said. While they are tariffs by nature, carbon border adjustment mechanisms have the opposite objectives of the Trump administration's trade policies that are designed to "enhance protectionism and isolationism". The push for regional Asian carbon tariffs was welcomed by groups like clean energy industry body Smart Energy Council and economic think tank The Superpower Institute.
The Guardian
28-03-2025
- Business
- The Guardian
Peter Dutton's new energy plan sounds like a gas. In reality it means more emissions – and more profits for industry
Peter Dutton's new national gas plan sounds good in theory: force gas companies to supply more gas for domestic consumption, thereby reducing domestic gas prices by about 40%. But the reality is likely to be very different. Dutton is keen to ramp up domestic production. In practice this would mean billions in new taxpayer subsidies to fund new gas infrastructure, new pipelines, new gas storage and new gas power plants. This would take years and years to approve, build and develop, locking in fossil gas use for many decades to come. The multinational gas companies would be allowed to continue to feast at Australian energy users' expense. More subsidies. More gas production and more carbon emissions. More profits for the long term! Sign up for Guardian Australia's breaking news email Dutton's plan was unveiled as part of his budget reply speech on Thursday, in which he promised lower power prices under the Coalition. The centrepiece of the policy is to decouple the domestic gas price from international prices by forcing current exporters to direct 10-20% more gas into the domestic market. 'This is all about ensuring Australian gas is for Australians.' Currently, 300 to 350 petajoules (PJ) of fossil gas supplies domestic use in eastern Australia every year. Meanwhile the multinational gas industry exports 1,500-1,600PJ annually, or 84% of total production. Currently all of this is sold at export price parity, meaning we pay as much or more as users in Japan pay for our gas. Under the change, Dutton says this will increase by 50 to 100 PJ. Sounds solid in principle. Dutton claims: 'This will drive down new wholesale domestic gas prices from over $14 per gigajoule to under $10 per gigajoule.' But Climate Energy Finance notes that for 50 years prior to 2015, the domestic east Australian gas price was just $3-4/PJ. Everything changed in 2015 when the gas companies contrived a domestic 'shortage' by permanently increasing production by 300% by opening up six LNG export trains concurrently in Gladstone, Queensland. Lowering the price 30-40% permanently to 'just' $10/PJ to enable us to use our Australian public gas resources to supply our domestic needs first would be a good outcome. IF it could be delivered. But the reality will likely be very different. There is zero likelihood in our view that the Coalition will somehow find the political will to effectively regulate the multinational gas industry that is profiting at our collective ongoing expense. The industry is a major donor to both major parties, particularly the Coalition. Despite Dutton's assurances, there are no new gas fields imminent, or even remotely ready to go. So when he says, 'The only way to drive down power prices quickly is to ramp-up domestic gas production', and effectively create a domestic gas reservation, thereby creating a buyer's market for local fossil gas, I have some doubts. Opening up the massive stranded Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory will lock in a massive new gas reservoir of what will be really expensive gas exceptionally remote to Australian consumers. And there of course will be a massive quid pro quo. Dutton used his budget reply speech to reveal he would commit $1bn of taxpayer money to subsidise more gas pipelines and more storage capacity. And he will open up the Capacity Investment Scheme to subsidise more new gas power plants. General Electric has said there is a massive global shortage of gas turbines and that anyone wanting one will have to wait till 2030. Last time I checked, 2030 is very different to 'by the end of 2025'. With all this talk of gas, one has to wonder: what happened to the government's nuclear plan? Tim Buckley is the director of Climate Energy Finance, a public interest thinktank
South China Morning Post
24-03-2025
- Business
- South China Morning Post
Trump's ‘retrograde' policies towards Chinese solar mostly harm US, report finds
US President Donald Trump's 'retrograde policy changes' towards China's solar industry risk harming America's own clean energy sector by driving Chinese firms to redirect their investment into other markets, according to a new report. Advertisement Chinese solar energy companies had agreed deals to build a string of factories to produce photovoltaic solar components in the United States, with over 20GW of capacity due to come online in 2025, but future projects may now be at risk due to the Trump administration's policies, the Sydney-based think tank Climate Energy Finance said in its overview of global solar manufacturing trends released on Monday. Since returning to office, Trump has raised tariffs on all Chinese goods, paused tax incentives introduced under the Inflation Reduction Act to encourage manufacturers to shift production to America, and frozen Department of Energy loans, leading Chinese solar firms to become cautious about investing in the US. 'Tariffs can protect domestic manufacturers but at the cost of increasing costs for domestic consumers,' said Harry Martin, an analyst at the think tank. Instead, Chinese companies will accelerate their expansion into Southeast Asia and the Middle East, where governments need to build up solar capacity quickly to meet their growing energy demand. Advertisement 'Policymakers in other jurisdictions should take note: imposing trade barriers on China will only redirect investment to other regions poised to benefit from its technological leadership,' Martin said.
