Under the shadow of the myriad of promises made at COP 28 to accelerate movement on climate change, and in the lead up to Christmas, let’s look at the action of a few Australian organisations that landed them on either the naughty or nice list this year.
Making a strong bid for the nice list, Atlassian released its second instalment of Don’t F&*! The Planet at the start of the month. This resource outlines the tech company’s ongoing journey to net zero in a bid to help accelerate other businesses’ sustainability plans and drive ESG outcomes. It says nearly 1000 companies downloaded the first version released earlier this year.
Atlassian walks the talk. In 2023 it reported an 81 per cent decrease in emissions compared to 2019 and its operations have run on renewable energy for the past four years. Not to mention the bright green hybrid timber building its pioneering at Tech Central in Sydney.
Atlassian’s co-founder, Mike Cannon-Brooks, also chairs his climate fund Boundless Earth, which leverages philanthropy, investment and advocacy to push Australia to become “a renewable energy superpower by 2030”. Investments include a dedicated climate jobs site terra.do and a climate leadership program.
Another of Australia’s richest men, Andrew Forrest, told the ABC he was attending this week’s COP28 to ask fossil fuel companies to deliver an energy solution that doesn’t destroy the planet, and to ask his fellow industrialists to stop using fossil fuel (and to tell those who can’t to get off the stage).
This follows his publication of an open letter on the Fortescue website to world leaders about lethal humidity, about which he says “we must move beyond all policies that inhibit the development and deployment of renewable technology in order to achieve the defossilisation of our economy”. The letter was signed by more than 50 climate scientists from around the world.
While it’s hard to listen to this message from someone who heads a mining company, he may have a point when he suggests that he is better positioned to lobby government and industry about these issues than environmentalists.
For its part, Fortescue says it has worked out how to eliminate 90 per cent of its scope 1 and 2 emissions by 2030 and from next year it will no longer buy voluntary carbon offsets unless required by law. The Forrest family’s charitable foundation also this week invested $3 million in Planet Protector, which makes sustainable alternatives to polystyrene.
Also earning a spot on the nice list, as well as cementing its leading position as an environmentally sustainable company this year (as graded against the UN’s Sustainability Development Goals) is CSR.
In the building product manufacturer’s 2023 annual report it was good to see progress against sustainability goals discussed next to financial achievements: increasing use of recycled materials in products, significant reductions in waste going to landfill, new infrastructure that will reduce water usage by 80 per cent and good movement towards zero emissions, both in its operations and through providing products that enhance sustainability in the built environment.
Firmly on the naughty list is an organisation that theoretically should be leading the way in environmental due diligence. The NSW Government’s Forestry Corporation had to pause timber harvesting in two separate forests this week after failing to protect endangered Greater Gliders (it looked for the nocturnal animals during the day).
It is also facing several ongoing legal challenges, including one against logging in the Labor-election-promised Great Koala National Park.
A recent report by the Nature Conservation Council found Forestry Corp has received $246.9 million worth of grants since 2019/20 financial year (funded by taxpayers), while the hardwood division (which is responsible for native forest logging) made a loss of $28.2 million over the same period.
There are similar concerns about Sustainable Timber Tasmania (the former Forestry Tasmania). Making it even more heartbreaking to see centuries-old, irreplaceable gums being carted off on logging trucks is the knowledge that a large chunk of that timber is pulped and sent offshore, making a mockery of the immense value of those trees to the environment.
Before the forestry industry gets its logs and branches in a twist let’s say we understand the issues are intensely complicated. We all use timber; most of it is imported. We need it for our sustainable buildings. We need it for paper and a lot of other products. But it seems most people turn a blind eye to where it comes from – a lot is from other countries that may not have high environmental protection caveats strapped around each log felled, but prioritise the economic value – which might be a very significant issue, as we’d all expect.
We would love to bring together some of the people involved in the industry on the forestry and conservation side to see if we can bring better understanding to the issue. Kirsha Kaechele of Mona in Hobart who was a special guest at our Tomorrowland event last year, has attempted just that, with a recent three day conference that brought a big range of stakeholders together.
We’ve yet to catch up with what the results were but one of the issues was expected to have focused on the phasing out of native forestry and Tasmanians angry that Victorians, “subsidised to exit the sector are looking to muscle in on local resource and contracts,” according to The Australian.
Tasmanian Sawmillers Association spokesman Matthew Torenius told the newspaper that the conference was “the most interesting forestry conference I’ve ever been to” and that he hoped it would achieve a consensus that Tasmanian based mills and forestry operators should have priority access to the state’s native timber.
“I think it is a crucial time for the industry,” he said. “The imminent closure of the Victorian native forest industry has meant there is a crunch on for the supply of high quality timber products.
“We are seeing a lot of parties from Victoria trying to source product and we are also seeing Victorian sawmills coming down here trying to source product.
“I am passionate to… see that resource used in Tasmania… It is really a case of doing as much as we can with our resource in this state and providing jobs for Tasmanians.”
Perhaps next week’s launch of a framework put together by the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures will help.
The global framework, which was revealed at UN Climate Week in New York, is designed to give investors a commonly-accepted basis to compare companies’ nature-related risks. The convenors of the Australian and New Zealand version, the Responsible Investment Association Australasia, says it hopes companies from all sectors will use the framework “to report and act on evolving nature-related risks, with the ultimate aim to support a shift in global financial flows away from nature-negative outcomes and toward nature-positive outcomes”.
For organisations fumbling around ESG communication, this framework could be an effective conduit to action and transparency.
Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek is also aiming for a spot on the nice list with her Nature Repair Market getting through Senate on Tuesday night. The goal is to create a regulated pathway for investors to support landowners to improve their environment.
Let’s hope that next year places on the nice list will be much more hotly contested as organisations try to outdo each other in the race to save our environment.