Most companies are closely watching the Federal carbon price push – and the likely outlines of a deal are starting to emerge – but state, territory and local governments are also taking action that has major implications for business.
New Victorian law
Potentially the most significant development is Victoria's Climate Change Act, which comes into force on July 1 and has received surprisingly little attention. It incorporates a commitment to a 20% emissions cut by 2020, below 2000 levels, and provides the platform for tougher action by various agencies, including the state's EPA.
However, the extent to which Victoria's Coalition Government will utilise the Act to secure deeper emission cuts from business remains unclear.
Despite the imminent start date, the state government hasn't released any supporting regulations and the EPA hasn't indicated it is proposing new policies to make use of its expanded powers under the legislation.
Project-specific rulings
Meanwhile, recommendations by the WA EPA and a decision by a Queensland council offer insight into how state governments and local authorities are attempting to exert pressure on companies to cut emissions.
The WA EPA's recommended conditions for the Wheatstone LNG project require it to offset roughly a quarter of total emissions.
While the EPA has proposed a similar LNG offset condition in the past, it this time also proposed an emissions intensity goal for the project.
Not only is that a first, it also has ramifications for Woodside's James Price Point LNG hub, and highlights inadequacies in how the Northern Territory is regulating Inpex, according to the WA Conservation Council.
While Wheatstone is a multi-billion dollar project, in Queensland Coles is battling the Sunshine Coast Regional Council over a proposed supermarket redevelopment.
The council wants 50% of the development's energy to be sourced from renewables, while Coles is arguing for a "flexible partnership" between it and the council.
Although the Nambour supermarket project is minuscule compared to Wheatstone, it is important because it shows how councils could attempt to impose emission controls on a great number of businesses through development approval processes.
Significant court cases
On the legal front, perhaps the two most significant environmental judgments in June were handed down by the NSW Land and Environment Court and the Federal Court.
In a first for the NSW Land and Environment Court, chief judge Brian Preston overturned an environment department remediation order for an inner-Sydney site and replaced it with one of the court's own making, with Thiess Service's John Hunt commenting the decision would lead to a more rigorous approach by the remediation industry.
And in the Federal Court, Justice John Logan delivered a decision with disturbing implications for environment groups contemplating proceedings in the Federal Court. The judge ruled that Wide Bay Burnett Conservation Council must pay $1 million in costs after it failed in its challenge of actions taken by a Queensland Government-owned water utility.
Other significant state developments in June included a back-to-basics review of statutory policies in Victoria and Queensland's new controls on mining in prime cropland areas.
Carbon price package
On the all important issue of the carbon price package, some indications of what it might look like are starting to emerge.
Its heritage will be the CPRS and the suite of 12 bills that the Greens introduced to the Senate in October 2009. And possibly – at least in the electricity generation sector – it could even involve a little injection of "direct action".
Energy efficiency measures are under discussion by the multi-party climate change committee and a so-called "white certificate" scheme seems to be top of mind.
Crucial aspects yet to be clarified include the price, the target and industry assistance terms. On the latter issue, perhaps the area where the new package could look most different to the CPRS is in its delivery of assistance for coal-fired generators.
While Garnaut argues generators don't deserve anything much, there are others – not just in the coal-fired generation sector – who think they do (though their reasons vary).
Resolution of this issue might not just turn on the amount of money offered but on how it is made available – with one possibility being something along the lines Origin floated in a CE Daily interview back in March – "direct action" in the form of bidding for funds to support controlled closures.
Bipartisanship on resource efficiency
Also in Canberra, passage of the Product Stewardship Bill provided a welcome reminder that there is still some scope for bipartisan agreement on environmental issues, with both major parties backing it, along with the Greens and independents.
Meanwhile, it's easy to forget that many companies are still working away at reducing their environmental footprint off their own bat.
One good example involves News Ltd, which garnered massive improvements in air quality and major reductions in energy use through an air-conditioning add-on technology.
You can also still take advantage of the special end-of-year CE Daily subscription deal (14 months for the price of 12 months) - but hurry – it ends 5pm tomorrow (28/06/2011).
Start your subscription at our secure sign-up form, or arrange access by phoning (02) 9267 3800.
Subscription pricing can be seen here, and our latest headlines are at www.cedaily.com.au.
