News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 General 
 No new tree plantings, says Kyoto group 

No new tree plantings, says Kyoto group

28 Jul, 2009 11:22 AM
Climate Change Minister Nick Smith is “badly misreading commercial and economic realities” if he thinks the Government’s planned changes to the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) will lead to the private sector resuming tree planting, the Kyoto Forestry Association (KFA) says.

KFA was responding to Dr Smith’s comments on TVNZ’s Q+A programme over the weekend and on Radio New Zealand National’s Morning Report yesterday saying New Zealand needed new trees and that he hoped changes to the ETS would restore confidence to the forestry sector.

KFA spokesman Roger Dickie said Dr Smith was right in saying that only the efforts of Kyoto forest owners in the 1990s in planting around 50,000ha of new forests a year were keeping New Zealand’s Kyoto account in balance “but sadly he is incorrect if he thinks the Government’s plans to water down the ETS are going to encourage new planting”.

Mr Dickie said KFA understood the Government planned to further delay the entry of polluting sectors into the ETS, increase their compensation and exclude agriculture.

“This means forest owners will have no one domestically to sell our credits to, and so the domestic price for carbon will remain low, which will not encourage investors to plant new trees.

“There has also been discussion around the likelihood the Government plans to put a cap on the price of carbon, which would prevent international trading of New Zealand Units (NZUs). Our carbon credits will therefore have no significant value.

“No private-sector investor will risk their capital to plant new forests under these circumstances.”

Mr Dickie said Kyoto forest owners had mostly welcomed last year’s change of government, including the National Party’s manifesto promise to encourage the planting of 600,000 to 800,000ha of hill country land that is prone to erosion and is not currently forested (see http://www.national.org.nz/files/ 2008/forestry.pdf).

“Unfortunately, we have seen nothing from the new Government so far that gives us any confidence that promise will be delivered,” Mr Dickie said. “To the contrary, we doubt there will be any new planting this year, and very little in the next two years – the whole of the first term of the new Government.”

KFA represents the more than 30,000 ordinary New Zealanders and forestry companies who risked as much as $175 million per annum of their own capital to invest in more than 250,000 hectares of new forestry in the 1990s, both because of the benefits predicted to arise from the sale of wood products and for the carbon credits earned from carbon sequestration.

These carbon credits, worth some hundreds of millions of dollars, were confiscated by the previous Labour Government but later returned following a high-profile campaign by KFA.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
I agree that a price cap would be suicidal, but an overall dampening of the ETS could only benifit the forestry sector. As I'm sure you know, all NZUs are fully transferable with Kyoto units (barring some types). And as such, entities will be indifferent between the types of units they use in complying with their obligations (be they ETS participants with liabilities to govt, or a govt with liabilities to Kyoto). This results in a relatively homogenous (global) price for any type of unit (including RMUs from NZ forestry), and will be a price that is resilient across policy changes that occur in little ol' NZ. Further, because 'plans to water down the ETS' by increasing the free allocation of NZU and excluding agriculture will increase total domestic emissions (thus NZ's Kyoto liability), NZs domestic demand will actually increase. This increase in demand will mostly be from govt, who will have to purchase more units at this world price (govt will in effect be subsidising this increase in emissions). And because NZs total unit demand will consist mainly of 1 reliable buyer, forestry investor risk will be minimal (what’s more, govt would probably pay a premium on NZ RMUs.
Posted by Sly, 14/08/2009 4:41:27 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Nick Smith
Nick Smith

Most popular articles



Straight Furrow







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...