Qantas makes announcements about buying carbon credits

I noticed Andrew Bolt picked up this story from July – and the questioning article from the Australian Farm Institute. My curiosity was raised by another ABC article from ABC Rural in the NT – “Henbury carbon credits clear for take-off”. Where against the tone of the headline – the article states – “… The rangelands methodology that the Henbury Conservation Project depends upon has been submitted but is yet to be finalised, so Mrs Pearse says the first sale to Qantas is still months off. “We have to wait for the domestic offset integrity committee to have a good look at that methodology and then that will go out to public consultation for three months. “So we’re not expecting an approved methodology any time soon, it’s still a long path.”
This all sounds as though what QANTAS announced as a done deal – is still a work in progress.
And of course at the end of 2010 QANTAS announced “…New Carbon Offset Provider”, a private Euroland company Climate Friendly owned by South Pole Carbon – so what has happened that CF and SPC can not supply what QANTAS requires.

3 thoughts on “Qantas makes announcements about buying carbon credits”

  1. Warwick,

    very curious financial deal. Government gives RM Williams $9 million so they can “restore” the land back to native state. What do RMW get for their $4 million to cover the expense of clearing the land, except for the current stock? Theoretically no ongoing income.

    Unless RMW are taking the long view, expecting the carbon scheme to fail and be left with a cattle station after the change of government.

    What does this government get out of this, apart from an excuse to waste money? Still $9 million seems such a tiny amount, they usually waste billions.

  2. Here is an explanation of this little money making scheme. Look at the rate of return!
    (Ah! if only I had a few million and an assurance that this stupidity will last).

    WARNING: Her voice would drill through boiler plate.

  3. Yes Graeme, pity about her voice. No sex discrimination implied but she is better looking, has nicer hair and has more understanding of the carbon tax than the other person pictured. Also, by the speed of her diction she does not use notes or a teleprompter.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *