For Australia to meet emissions reduction targets, we don’t need nuclear energy
Sep 9, 2024
The Federal Opposition’s energy policy includes the construction of nuclear power plants. Peter Dutton says that we need them because Australia’s emissions reduction target of 43% on 2005 levels by 2030 is unachievable. Is this true? We argue that it is not – and especially if the Australian Government works with state and territory governments to stop native forest logging and land clearing.
Ending land clearing and halting logging of native forests would achieve a reduction of between 14.5 million and 37.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent a year. This is greater than the annual reduction of 14.2 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent needed to meet Australia’s 2030 target. A major reduction in emissions from logging and clearing forests would be sit admirably along Australia’s efforts to transition from fossil fuels to clean energy – which is now 40% of the electricity market (up from 15% a decade ago).
This is an entirely feasible proposition, as ending native forest logging will serve to further stimulate investment in the plantation sector – where there are the most jobs and the best profits in the forest industry. Indeed, 90% of all sawn timber in Australia (to make roof trusses, floorboards and furniture) already comes from plantations. Native forest logging generates predominantly woodchips, paper pulp and packaging (and not high-quality timber products). Plantations employ, on average, three times more people per ha of trees than do native forests. In addition, the capital investment needed for one full-time equivalent position in a native forest logging operation is almost 10 times that needed for a full-time equivalent in a plantation.
Native forest logging is a major loss maker everywhere it occurs. It continues only because of subsidies from governments. Financial losses and government handouts have exceeded well over a billion dollars in Tasmania and Victoria. Economic analyses have repeatedly shown that the economies of all states would be better off without a native forest logging sector. Despite the huge amounts of taxpayer funds “invested” in the native forest logging industry, it employs remarkably few people – people who could readily be employed in other sectors (such as in plantation logging and plantation wood processing).
The co-benefits of ending land clearing and native of forest logging extend to our biodiversity. Australia has an appalling record on biodiversity loss; the nation leads the world in mammal extinctions and our threatened species list grows ever year. Logging and land clearing are preventable threats that have serious negative effects on biodiversity. For example, almost all areas proposed for logging support large numbers of threatened species – on average, eight species in timber production forests in Victoria and similar numbers in New South Wales. Stopping logging and land clearing will dramatically improve the chances of persistence of many unique Australian species.
Policies to stop land clearing and native forest logging need to be real. If not, they will be gamed. The Victorian Government, for example, has stated that it stopped native forest logging in January 2024. But, in fact, it is implementing a plan to cut down 24,000 ha of trees by constructing 6,000 kilometres of 40+ metre wide firebreaks across the state over the next five years. This is actually an increase in the amount of forest being cut before native forest logging was supposed to be halted. The logs from this land clearing will be sold to firewood yards and sawmills. By the Victoria Government’s own calculations, this kind of de facto logging will be the equivalent of the emissions of almost one million cars every year, making it harder rather than easier to meet Australia’s national emissions reduction target, and the even stronger Victoria Government’s target.
If Australia stops native forest logging and land clearing, it will reach its 2030 emissions reduction target. Other key benefits will include ending the subsidies that state governments need to pay to prop up native forest logging, reducing fire risks that are significantly increased by native forest logging, and slowing losses of biodiversity that results from logging and land clearing. Native forest logging stopped in South Australia 150 years ago and 45 years ago in the ACT. Victoria and Western Australia announced an end to native forest logging in January 2024. New South Wales and Tasmania would be wise to follow suit. Ending land clearing remains a challenge in all states, and urgently requires tightening of existing regulations.
Prof Brendan Mackey is Director of the Griffith Climate Change Response Program and the National Climate Change Adaptation Facility. He is a coordinating lead author for the IPCC 6th assessment report, Working Group II on impacts, vulnerability and adaptation
David Lindenmayer
Professor David Lindenmayer is a distinguished Australian scientist and academic, specialising in landscape ecology, conservation, and biodiversity. His research focuses on integrating nature conservation with agricultural production, improving biodiversity conservation in forestry and plantations, and enhancing fire management practices. With over 940 peer-reviewed papers and 49 books, David is one of the most published ecologists globally. He leads large-scale, long-term research programs in south-eastern Australia. A Fellow of the Australian Academy of Science, he has received numerous prestigious awards, including the ESA Whittaker Award, multiple Eureka Prizes, and the Australian Natural History Medal.
Contributions to Pearls and Irritations
Your contribution will fund quality independent comment and analysis in Pearls and Irritations
Contribute
