Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Climate change, carbon sequestration and Tasmania

By Fred Gale - posted Thursday, 28 August 2008


Forest certification

Forest management interacts in a world of increased globalisation. Australia, for example, imports from China large volumes of timber products, many of which are manufactured from wood from Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, the Solomon Islands and other developing countries.

Much of this wood is semi-legal or illegal due to corrupt governments and unscrupulous companies. Australian consumers of imported wood products may be complicit in the deforestation of surrounding countries if they purchase forest products that are not certified to an adequate standard.

Advertisement

In order to safeguard consumers - and secure markets for legal producers - it is crucial that products come from forests that meet high-quality management standards. This means that preference should be give to forest products carrying the Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) logo, which provides the best guarantee that the products are both legal and sustainable.

If FSC certified forest products are not available, then it is preferable to purchase forest products that carry the Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (PEFC) logo. Although PEFC programmes, including the Australian Forestry Standard, are relatively permissive in terms of their social and environmental practices, they do provide a better safeguard of legality than no logo whatsoever.

Forest, carbon sequestration and Gunns Pulp Mill

I have already written a critique of the deficiencies of the planning processes used to assess Gunns’ Tamar Valley pulp mill under the Pulp Mill Assessment Act (Gale 2008). In my view, the pulp mill is an example of bad environmental governance and should not proceed. The review of the pulp mill under the Pulp Mill Assessment Act resulted in inadequate scrutiny of the range of risks the pulp mill poses to the Tasmanian economy, environment and community.

To these process considerations must now also be added the potential future benefits to Tasmanians of alternative uses of its forest resources for carbon sequestration.

While there are a whole host of unknowns - whether REDD will be included in post-Kyoto arrangements, what terms and conditions will be placed on its operation, whether carbon trading will prove successful, and whether the price of carbon will be sufficient to compensate governments, industry, communities and environmentalists for the opportunity costs of foregoing other productive activities - the potential is certainly there.

Proceeding with the pulp mill now risks foreclosing the adoption of alternative and potentially better policies in the near future. These new policies could not only protect Tasmania’s old-growth forests, but also provide employment opportunities in wilderness protection, natural forest management, plantations, and tourism. These opportunities need to be fully and seriously considered under a new forest politics and policy process.

Advertisement

If proper deliberation under a new forest politics were to occur, I doubt that a pulp mill on the Tamar Valley would emerge as an optimal use of Tasmania’s forest resources in an era of climate change and carbon sequestration. If it were approved under a new forest politics process, however, the proponents could proceed with the full backing of the majority of Tasmanians - in stark contrast to the situation that exists today.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. Page 5
  7. All

First published in the Tasmanian Times on August 25, 2008. This article is adapted from a speech given by the author to the Environment Tasmania Forum to Address Gunns’ Pulp Mill and Climate Issues on August 20, 2008.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

5 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Dr Fred Gale is a Senior Lecturer in the School of Government, University of Tasmania, Launceston.

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Fred Gale
Article Tools
Comment 5 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy