Carbon farmers are failing to save the planet when they sell offsets to major polluters, say promoters of more transparent industry regulation.
The Australia Institute hosted the digital discussion on Wednesday, with acting director of the Australia Institute's Climate and Energy program Polly Hemming and The Monthly essayist Nick Feik arguing that the real purpose of saving the planet would fail under the current framework of the Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU).
Ms Hemming argued that the carbon credit trading scheme in its current form encouraged sustainable farming at the cost of continuing carbon dioxide and methane pollution, with exported product not even figuring into the equation.
The panel argued for greater government pressure to come to bear on fossil fuel companies so that hard to rectify polluters like the concrete and construction industry, and agriculture, could be buffered from unrealistic reduction targets.
Mr Feik criticised ACCU methodologies like Avoided Deforestation - which Chubb recommended be withdrawn - and even Human Induced Regeneration, and labelled regenerative grazing as "simply moving cows around".
The presenters questioned the accuracy of the ACCU, with on-farm data only in its infancy. Asked if the carbon credit trading scheme was helping to reduce global warming Ms Hemming answered in the negative.
"At a system level, at an economy level, no," she said. "Perhaps if a farmer is planting a tree or not cutting down a tree then yes, there is a tonne of Co2 avoided or reduced, but stored, but if the business buying that carbon credit does nothing to justify itself then nothing is actually reduced.
"The best that can be achieved by purchasing offsets is to maintain the status quo - and that is assuming they have integrity.
"Every business buying offsets year on year instead of decarbonising - they are effectively treading water and we are shuffling numbers around a column in a spreadsheet but haven't reduced anything."
Mr Feik rang alarm bells on governance issues surrounding the ACCU, with too many ex-fossil fuel employees sitting on the boards of carbon aggregators - those who manage soil organic carbon projects for farmers.
He expressed shock that non-government workers and conservationists were working with gas companies to create carbon projects.
"This is a terrible idea," he said. "People think they are doing the right thing selling a carbon credit but when I look at the offsets industry I think, the more credits people put into this system - every single one of those is going to be used as an excuse to emit more carbon."
Ms Hemming said new coal and gas projects - like the Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory - could be allowed if enough offsets were purchased to allow its pollution.
And she pointed out that while the Liberal coalition was in power when the carbon trading industry was being formalised, voters can expect no appetite for change under a Labor government.
"Labor has inherited that legacy but it actually suits Labor very nicely because of course they are just as committed to gas expansion as the coalition was, just with some slightly different branding."
The panel argued that the current government "safeguard" mechanism allowing for the transition away from fossil fuels allowed the biggest polluter to offset 100pc of their emissions while paying up to a cap of $75 for every ACCU - a price undervalued on the world market.
Read more: Where's the climate driver for what's next?
- Subscribers have access to download our free app today from the App Store or Google Play