Showing posts with label ETS. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ETS. Show all posts

Friday, November 11, 2011

Voluntary GHGs Emissions Reporting: Australian Evidence

This is a brief summary about my jointly-written research paper on Green House Gases (GHGs) emissions reporting, with my supervisors - Michaela Rankin and Carolyn Windsor - when I did my Master degree in Monash University. We examined voluntary corporate GHGs emissions disclosures in the absence of public policy regarding climate change in Australia. 
My video presentation is as follows:



PURPOSE

Our study looked at the determinants of voluntary GHGs emissions disclosures by Australian firms. In particular, we aimed to investigate two main points: (1) factors that associate with the Australian firms’ decision to provide voluntary (GHGs) emissions reporting in 2007; and (2) for those disclosing firms, factors that relate to the extent and credibility of corporate voluntary (GHGs) emissions reporting.
Institutional governance theory is introduced here to explain proactive corporate response to climate change in the Australian context. This theory is used to examine the hypothesised links between voluntary emissions reporting, internal governance systems and private regulations that guide GHGs emissions disclosures from external parties.

METHOD
We studied GHGs emissions disclosure in a voluntary setting in 2007. It is a point in time when global warming and climate change risks are acknowledged on the international stage as a crucial issue for corporations, and when a cap and trade scheme had been proposed in Australia, but before any mandatory reporting of corporate GHGs emissions was required in Australia.
Since the first July of 2008, Australian firms that meet certain thresholds, have to report their GHGs emissions and energy use to a government agency.

The sample includes all of the top 300 firms listed in Australian Securities Exchange (ASX).
Initially, we collected 295 firms that were recorded in the ASX300 as at 26 August 2008. But then we decided to study 187 firms as the final sample because the rest of them did not meet all testing requirements in our models.

We used a two-stage approach to test two different models.
First, we want to investigate the propensity to disclose emissions for ASX 300 firms as the sample. The first model includes both internal and external factors that relate to decision to provide or not provide voluntary GHGs disclosure.
Therefore, we use binary-choice logistic regression to test 187 firms that have all testing requirements.

Then we proceed to the next one.
The second model is to test whether the internal organisational systems and the external factors that are likely to impact on voluntary emissions disclosure, also relate to the extent and credibility of disclosures.

To measure the extent and credibility of emissions disclosures we designed an index based on the guidance provided in ISO 14064, part 1. 
It is a standard that details guidance on what should be included in a publicly available GHGs report.

We use an OLS (Ordinary-Least Squares) regression to test this more complex measure on a sub-sample of 80 disclosing firms as the dependent variables.

FINDINGS

Interestingly, we find evidence that 80 firms out of  187 Australian firms that we analysed, that is around 43%, provided voluntary GHGs emissions reports for the year 2007. That was before the Government required them to report this information to a government agency starting from 2008. They disclosed emissions information in their annual reports, and or stand-alone sustainability disclosures.

Firms are more likely to present voluntary (GHGs) emissions disclosures when they have an Environmental Management System (EMS) in place, either certified or uncertified, have stronger governance systems, make publicly available disclosures to the CDP (Carbon Disclosure Project), are larger in size, and operate in either the energy and mining, or industrial sector.

When we evaluate the extent and credibility of disclosures by the sub-sample of 80 disclosing firms, we find that they are more likely to have an EMS that is ISO14001-certified, use the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) to guide their sustainability disclosures, and disclose to the CDP with those disclosures being publicly available. Firms that provide more credible emissions disclosures also tend to be larger and operate within the energy and mining, industrial, or services sectors.


CONCLUDING REMARKS

We find evidence of Australian firms’ willingness to move to a carbon-low future in the absence of public policy.

These proactive companies have implemented organisational systems, but also have relied on external private guidance provided by GDP & GRI to publicly disclose their responses to climate change risks, including GHGs emissions data. 



AAAJ
For more details about this research, the article is available in the recently released edition of AAAJ, Accounting, Auditing, and Accountability Journal in November 2011, volume 24 number 8 - which is a special issue on climate change & greenhouse gas - pages 1037-1070. 
Here is the link for the paper on Emerald

Hope you find it useful.

Monday, July 11, 2011

Key Designs of Australian Climate Policy Architectures

The Australian Government’s Climate Change Plan: Securing Clean Energy Future was released on 10 July 2011. The Plan includes four main actions: putting a price tag on carbon pollution, driving innovation in renewable energy, improving energy efficiency, and creating climate-friendly opportunities on the land. Imposing a carbon price to big polluters is the central strategy. The key designs are as follow.

Carbon Price
CARBON PRICE MECHANISM
  •  To start off from 1 July 2011
  •  It will be charged on around 500 heavy polluters which emitting at least 25ktCO2e  direct  green house gases (excluding emissions from transport fuels)
  • The scheme coverage: emissions stationary energy, industrial processes, fugitive emissions (other than from decommissioned coal mines) and emissions from non-legacy waste. Agriculture will be excluded from the scheme. It will be covered by other Government measure called the Carbon Farming Initiative.
  • It will be delivered in two phases: fixed carbon price for the first 3 years, followed by a floating price though a cap-and-trade emissions trading scheme (ETS)
  • Phase 1 – Fixed Carbon Price – commencing on 1 July 2011
o   Carbon tax per tCO2e (tonne CO2 equivalent) = an initial price $23 rising by 2.5% p.a. in real terms, assuming 2.5% inflation p.a = $23 in 2012, $24.15 in 2013, and $25.40 in 2014
o   Liable entities have to buy emissions permits from the Government at fixed price which will be automatically surrendered for that compliance year.
o   These fixed price permits are non-tradable and not bankable for future use.
o   Penalties for any shortfall: 1.3 X the fixed price for permits = $29.90 for 2012-13, $31.40 for 2013-14, and $33.00 for 2014-15
  • Phase 2 – Floating Carbon Price – commencing on 1 July 2015
o   There will be pollution caps for each year
o   Pollution caps for years 2015-2019 will be announced on 31 May 2014
o   The price ceiling and floor will be set for the first three years of the flexible period, 2015-17
o   The price ceiling will be set $20 higher than the estimated international carbon price on 1 July 2015, rising by 5% in real terms per year
o   The price floor will be set $15 initially, rising by 4% in real terms per year.  
o   Penalties for any shortfall: double the average price of permits for the relevant year
o   It will be linked to international carbon market since the first year of operation

PLANNED ASSISTANCE FOR BUSINESSES 
  • Jobs and Competitiveness Program to assist emissions-intensive trade-exposed industries, e.g. for the most emissions intensive industries – aluminium, steel, zinc, pulp and paper makers – will be allocated free permits representing 94.5% of industry average carbon costs, reducing by 1.3% p.a. This industry will be allocated $9.2bn by 2014-15 to assist the transition to the flexible price period.
  • Clean Technology Program with $1.2 bn for investments on innovation across manufacturing industries.
  • Energy Security Fund, including payment to phase out around 2,000 MW of highly polluted coal-fired generators by 2020.
  • Small businesses: increase in instant asset write-off thresholds to $6,500
  • Clean Energy Finance Corporation - $10bn to be invested in renewable energy and low polluting technologies.
  • Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) – to administer $3.2bn for R&D and commercialisation of renewable energy.


ESTIMATED IMPACTS OF CARBON PRICE ON HOUSEHOLDS
Big polluters that must pay carbon prices will likely pass these carbon costs on to customers. It was predicted that it will increase living costs by 0.7% - on average, electricity will rise by $3.30/week, gas by $1.50/week and food expenses by 80c/week. Average costs will increase $9.90/week or $515/year.

PROPOSED ASSISTANCE FOR HOUSEHOLDS
  • Average assistance rate for most households: $10.10/week or $525/year. 
  • Tax-free thresholds will increase to $18,200 from 1 July 2012, then to $14,900 from 1 July 2015


At a glance, the Australian climate policy looks similar to EU ETS climate policy landscape to me. The EU charges polluters a carbon price through ETS and demands higher level of renewable energy and energy efficiency.  The first three years of fixed price period in Australia resembles a pilot phase in EU ETS – from 2005 to 2007 -  which mainly serves as a transition period to the more stringent rules of ETS.

The obvious difference is that the Australian climate policy appears to be better designed to charge polluters since the beginning of policy implementation compared to the EU’s. For phase 1 of the EU ETS, 95% of European Union Allowances (EUAs) – the permit to emit one tonne CO2 equivalent gas during a specified period – are allocated free (termed grandfathered) to liable entities. In contrast, the Australian policy is going to really charge polluters with a carbon price, which I think will encourage businesses to alter business-as-usual operations to become more carbon conscious.


It is clear that Australian businesses need to start factoring in the impacts of future carbon prices. Not only liable entities that directly covered under the carbon price scheme, but industries outside the scheme will also be affected by carbon price through increased electricity prices transferred along the input supply chain.

All in all, this is a progressive step into our sustainable future. I think the Plan opens up lots of opportunities for both individuals and businesses. Let’s start carbonvestmens... It can be simply started off from investing carbon conscious into our daily activities, such as carbon mindful in using electronic equipments at home and at workplace J


More details on CleanEnergyFuture
KPMG summary on Australia's Climate Change Plan (pdf)