CSIRO study set to fuel food security concerns (11 Apr 2011)

A CSIRO report suggests that a carbon price of just $11 per tonne of carbon dioxide could result in a significant part of Australia’s food bowl being planted to permanent carbon sinks. The as yet ‘unreleased’ report is set to fuel concerns about food security from planting trees. The report comes at exactly the same time as Australia’s forest industries provide evidence to a House of Representatives Inquiry that even with an effective carbon price, Australia will struggle to re-plant even the existing 2 million hectares of plantations as they mature in coming years.

According to The Age newspaper, the report says that with a carbon price of just $36 per tonne of carbon dioxide, the entire Murray Darling Basin could be planted to permanent carbon sinks. This would reduce Australia’s food production by as much as 40 per cent.

Researchers were very quick to point out that if these scenarios were to arise, it would be because farmers were paid large subsidies, specifically to switch from growing food to growing trees for carbon storage. One researcher suggested that this scenario was at one end of the extremes with little prospect of receiving public policy support or government financial assistance.

However, with the CEO of the CSIRO using graphics showing much of the Murray Darling Basin being covered in trees in a public presentation, there seems little doubt that no matter how speculative, the material will be used by those concerned over the ‘fibre versus food’ debate. Normally, this significant land use consideration arises in the context of very heavily populated and developing countries. In those situations, the third ‘f’ – fuel – is also a consideration.

In Australia, little of the debate will genuinely be about food security or even security of renewable energies that might come from growing trees. For some, the report will be used as an argument against placing a price on carbon. Doubtless this is an unintended outcome from the CSIRO which has in recent days confirmed its ‘house view’ that climate change is real and poses a significant threat to Australia’s future.

Announcement of the CSIRO research seems all the more perverse in the context of authoritative submissions to the House of Representatives Inquiry into the Forest Industry. In particular, the submissions of Australia’s most significant forest growers suggests that under current policy settings, as much as 400,000 hectares or 20% of Australia’s purpose grown plantations will not be re-planted.

Importantly, these are the plantations grown for timber and wood products manufacturing used in houses and other buildings, not just grown because they store carbon and receiving only income from a carbon price. CarbonEdge asks the question, if professional forest growers may not be able to sustain plantations where they receive income from wood and from carbon, how will plantations grown only for a carbon price on land that otherwise be in food production? The short answer is that they cannot… unless the subsidies to farmers PLUS the carbon price are more valuable to the farmer than growing food.

Debate rages about applying any carbon price in Australia, via any means. It is probably unhelpful to that debate to have headlines getting in the way of the core analysis. Almost inevitably, the CSIRO report will show a far more balanced mix of land uses under a carbon price than the early reports of its extremes suggest. Equally inevitably, the report and the CSIRO will be in the spotlight – just as soon as the nation is afforded the opportunity to see it.

 

RECENT ARTICLES

Australian energy flows show the industrial integration of renewable electricity (May 2012)

Australian energy projections to 2035 (May 2012)

Few surprises in latest Australian energy consumption data (May 2012)

Time to engage - carbon price is just around the corner (May 2012)

Moving towards APAC region ETS (May 2012)

Two Heads (May 2012)

VIEW FULL ARCHIVE