Linfox is well known for the “You are passing another Fox” sign on the back of its vehicles. But the company has also cut its greenhouse gas emissions by 9% in the last eighteen months, and is on track to cut its emissions by 15% by December 2010.

I had the privilege of interviewing David McInnes, Group Manager Environment and Climate Change yesterday and being inspired about Linfox’s approach to the climate change challenge. It was refreshing not to hear the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme mentioned once in the interview. Linfox is reducing its carbon emissions because it wants to, not because its being forced to, and is quietly getting on with it.

So how does a organisation with 15,000 staff, whose carbon emissions mostly come from diesel consumed in trucks, reduce its per km emission by 9% in eighteen months? You can find the interview on our “Good News Interviews” page.

For me a couple of the standouts from the interview were:

• Their staff engagement program. Almost all of their savings have come about by making better use of what they already have, rather than investing in new technology. This has been achieved by getting their staff involved in changing the way things are done and in how trucks and buildings are operated, and making hundreds of small changes.
• Their carbon accounting system – developed in-house. Linfox programmers set up their SAP system such that now monthly carbon reports can be generated, down to the level of individual trucks if necessary. A consistent theme of all organisations cutting their carbon footprints is their focus on accurately and frequently tracking their emissions
• David’s recommendation to any organisation wishing to cut their carbon footprint to undertake an energy audit, which provides the business case for action. Thanks for the plug for my profession David!

After the interview we discussed Linfox’s Greenfox program, and I wish I had left the voice recorder on. This is a fantastic program. Staff can become a Greenfox by passing five training modules. Everyone who completes the training gets a framed certificate, and drivers who complete the training get a Greenfox badge on the shoulder of their uniform. David mentioned that Greenfox’s often become ambassadors, with truck drivers going to their kid’s schools and talking about climate change.

Also not covered in the interview was the great help David got from Linfox’s IT department in modifying SAP. Normally there is a long queue in the organisation for projects requiring SAP changes. The carbon accounting adjustments though were undertaken by the SAP programmers on top of their normal requirements, such was their commitmen to the company reducing its carbon footprint.

Finally David also spoke off the record about the need to focus less on the science and more on the community and the emotional response that when sparked can result in great change.

As one of Australia’s larger businesses Linfox is taking a leadership role by getting on with reducing its corporate carbon footprint. David McInnes is providing inspirational leadership. Take half an hour to listen to David McInnes and I guarantee you’ll come away motivated and hopeful about what is possible if we focus on cutting carbon emission.

Yesterday I attended the public consultation in Melbourne about accounting for and measuring voluntary greenhouse gas savings. The consultation was run by the Offsets Policy Team from the Department of Climate Change.  

It was good to be consulted and heard, and made me feel a little less disenfranchised by the CPRS.

Four or five years ago I attended a number of state government consultations on climate change. There was always strong disagreement and a lack of consensus. Yesterdays workshop was doubly satisfying for not only feeling that my opinions were being heard, but to also see that pretty well everyone else who attended was expressing the same view point. Many individuals and small businesses want to make a contribution to reducing greenhouse gas emissions. And we want our contribution to be a real, recognizable contribution that actually reduces carbon emissions and is additional to that which would be achieved by the CPRS.

It was reassuring to be able to ask questions like “what is the definition of a small business under the CPRS” and learn that this same question had been asked in similar workshops around the country.

Hopefully the workshops will help the government make changes such that voluntary carbon ababement by businesses and organisations not liable under the CPRS is recognised. In a way that the business doesn’t have to “pay twice” to get their carbon abatement recognised. And that withdraws the carbon voluntarily saved from the CPRS.

Starting today, public workshops are being held by the government to get public opionion and advice about how voluntary climate change action can be taken into account when setting emission caps for the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS).

Workshops are being held on the following dates:
Perth
11 June 2009 9:00 am - 12:00 pm
Rydges Hotel Perth Corner Hay & King Street, Perth
Adelaide
12 June 2009 9:00 am - 12:00 pm
Mercure Grosvenor Hotel 125 North Terrace, Adelaide
Brisbane
30 June 2009 9:00 am - 12:00 pm
Chifley at Lennons 66 Queen Street Mall, Brisbane
Sydney
16 June 2009 9:00 am - 12:00 pm
Wesley Conference Centre 220 Pitt Street, Sydney
Melbourne
24 June 2009 9:00 am - 12:00 pm
Rydges on Swanston 701 Swanston Street Carlton, Melbourne

To attend register your interest at:
http://www.climatechange.gov.au/emissionstrading/householdassistance/index.html.

Voluntary action isn’t recognised under the proposed CPRS unless you pay to have the carbon retired into the Carbon Trust. In other words you pay twice - you pay to actually cut your carbon emissions (eg upgrading your office lighting by installing reflectors. Then, if you want the carbon you’ve saved to be “retired” so it can’t be traded by one of the large companies participating in the CPRS you have to pay again to lock it up in the Carbon Trust.

This is a tremendous disincentive for voluntary action. So have your say at these workshops.

The federal government’s $8,000 rebate to householders installing a PV system runs out on 30 June. Time is running out if you want to take advantage of the rebate, which you are eligible for you if you own a home and your household income is less than $100,000 a year.

If you do an internet search or scan the papers you can find at least two companies offering a 1kW grid connect solar system for free, excluding the metering. You have to assign the installer the RECS (Renewable Energy Certificates) to get the system at this price, and may have to pay extra for variations to a standard install such as fitting it to a tiled roof. Considering the historical price of PV systems, the free offer is very good indeed. If you don’t already have a PV system - consider getting one now - but you should be quick, some of the free offers are expiring at the end of May or early in June.

The PV system on your roof will cut your power bills by about $200 a year for a 1 kW system, and should add value to your house. Lets say all up your costs including the meter install are say $1,000. That’s a 20% return on investment, which is pretty good.

By assigning the RECS to the system installer, and if the government’s proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) legislation goes through, don’t kid yourself that you are saving the planet by putting on the PV system. The clean energy provided by your PV system is assigned to the system installer when you give the installer the right to the RECS, and the carbon savings arising from the system essentially won’t count under the proposed CPRS.

So look at it as a chance to cut your bills, improve your property value, and make it look as though you are doing something to save the planet, although unfortunately under the proposed CPRS you won’t be. Its not clear to me if you’ll be able to voluntarily “lock up” the carbon savings by making a payment to the proposed Carbon Trust - and thus actually do something to slow climate change - if you’ve assigned the RECS to the installer.

If you go ahead, be aware that the metering install can be fraught with pitfalls. Make sure you follow the advice of your electricity distribution business - see www.bcse.org.au/default.asp?id=305 for a link to the guides offered by different distribution businesses.

And, even though you are putting in a solar system, also make sure that you are buying 100% governmetn accredited green power from your retailer. Keep you your greenpower purchases until the CPRS comes in, after which point it may not make a difference.

Direct quote from the government’s 2009 budget web site:

“Households and small businesses will be able to calculate the potential dollar savings from their energy efficiency actions and make tax deductible donations to the Energy Efficiency Savings Pledge Fund. The Australian Carbon Trust will use these donations to purchase and retire Australian emissions units or purchase carbon offsets.”

What this means:

• If you voluntarily cut your household energy consumption to save greenhouse gas - sorry the greenhouse savings don’t count! If you want to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, you have to actually now go and pay to “retire” the carbon you’ve saved - and pay the government to do so. See my earlier blog posting rantings about the disincentives in the CPRS (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) for more detail. Basically if you don’t pay to retire the greenhouse gas you’ve saved, the entity generating the energy (say an electricity generator) can claim it. And trade it. And you have contributed no additional greenhouse savings beyond that which the emissions trading scheme would achieve anyway.
• If you are a small business…. hang on… what is a “small business”? As only Australia’s top emitters get to participate in the CPRS doesn’t the definition of a “small business” in this context mean anyone who can’t participate in the CPRS? To participate in the CPRS you either have to directly generate over 25,000 tonnes of carbon a year, or consume more than 100 Terajoules of energy. In other words you are a small business if your annual energy consumption is less than 100 TeraJoules of energy or you directly produce less than 25,000 tonnes of carbon. What is a tera joule? You are probably familiar with kilojoules (1,000 joules), a tera joule is actually 1,000,0000,000,000 Joules. 100 TJ equates to an annual energy expense of about $2 million (as does the production of 25,000 tonnes). So, if you spend less than around $2 million a year on energy you are a “small business”!

So let me rewrite what budget actually means in plain English. “If you spend less than around $2,000,000 a year on energy, and you cut your energy use, in order to be able to also say that you’ve cut Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions you need to pay the government for it to recognise that what you’ve saved is an actual saving.”

Or, lets do a hypothetical here. Lets assume that you are a “small business” - ie your energy expense is less than $2 million a year. (What a tiny, wee business you’ve got if you’re not spending $2 million a year on energy!) You invest $10,000 in upgrading your lighting (using Mirrorlux Reflectors say). This saves you  $5000 a year on your electricity bills and about 25 tonnes of carbon annually. But if you want to say that your investment has reduced Australia’s emissions you actually have to pay. Lets say the carbon price settles at $50 a tonne. You’ll have to spend $1,250 a year to be able to genuinely say that your investment in your lighting upgrade is saving greenhouse gas. Because if you don’t, under the CPRS, the electricity generator supplying you the power that energises your lights has the right to the carbon you’ve saved.

Another hypothetical. This time you invest in a new gas heating system in your school. You spend $300,000 to put in gas space heaters and eliminate the old central heating system. It saves you approximately $20,000 a year in gas costs, and about 160 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions a year. At $50 a tonne you have to pay the government $8,000 to “retire” the carbon you’ve saved. 40% of the financial savings you’ve realised goes to the government if you want to be able to say that your investment is actually reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Are, you, like me, someone who believes that personal or “small business” action can do something to avert dangerous climate change? Do you, like me, spend less than TWO MILLION DOLLARS a year on energy? Well the government is clearly telling you and me that if we want to make a difference we have to pay twice. Pay for the investment to cut your emissions. And then pay the government to retire those emissions.

Isn’t there something really really wrong if we have to spend twice to cut our greenhouse gas emissions?