This letter outlines a practical way to strengthen Australia’s climate strategy by pairing carbon trading with real, measurable carbon reductions. The core idea is to help developing countries—starting with China—adopt wicking bed and “sponge bed” growing systems that save water, grow food reliably, and lock carbon into soils. The proposal asks the Australian Government to fund targeted research so carbon sequestration can be verified and used as credible offsets that build public trust and support international agreement.
Dear Prime Minister
F.A.O Julia Gillard,
I welcome your comments that the Government will be taking a fresh look at the climate change strategy. Many people voted for the Labor Government at the last election because of its strong stance on climate change, and were very disappointed when the trading scheme was shelved.
I hope the enclosed proposal, “Resolving Climate Change”, is useful in helping the Government develop a revised climate change strategy. I have circulated the proposal widely and received very positive support. I believe a clear statement on the Government’s new thinking on climate change, before the election, would receive widespread support from the environmentally sensitive section of the community.
Why Carbon Trading Must Be Credible to Work
A trading scheme is an essential tool for fighting climate change, but there are two key issues which must be resolved for it to be effective and popular with the public.
First, there must be a supply of real carbon credits. People are suspicious of “virtual” offsets—such as those seen in the EU scheme where Eastern bloc countries were able to sell credits simply because their economies were in recession. The public understands carbon accounting risks and does not want tricks. They want to see genuine reduction in carbon emissions.
Second, the public also understands Australia’s contribution to global greenhouse gases is relatively small, and they want to see international agreement—particularly from developing countries such as China. As I note in the proposal, Bjorn Lomborg has indicated developing countries are responsible for around 40% of global emissions and that this is expected to rise to 70%. These are exactly the two issues my proposal addresses: credibility of carbon reduction, and a pathway to international participation.
The Core Proposal in Plain Language
Many Australians want the Government to resurrect a trading scheme, but they also know these major issues must be resolved before they will fully support it. Even people who support strong climate action question why Australia should jeopardise industries and living standards if the bulk of future emissions will come from developing countries.
I want to offer a practical solution to this impasse. It is always risky to oversimplify complex problems, but the essence is straightforward: Australia can help a major developing nation reduce emissions in a way that is real, verifiable, and economically attractive—so the world can move toward a workable global agreement.
Why Wicking Beds and “Sponge Beds” Matter
I have spent significant time in developing countries and was asked (by World Vision) to go to Ethiopia to see if I could develop a way of providing sustenance food in times of drought. This led to the concept of the wicking bed.
In essence, a subsurface organic sponge contained within a waterproof liner allows nutrient-rich water to wick up to the root zone. This can provide high productivity with minimal water loss by evaporation or seepage beyond the root zone. One of the benefits of the system is that it sequesters significant quantities of carbon. This is technically complex, and the proposal provides the detail required to assess the sequestration claim properly.
Why China Is the First Step
The proposal outlines a plan where Australia can help developing countries stabilise their emissions while still growing their economies and reducing poverty. This would remove a major blockage in the global climate change debate.
China is a lead country in the developing world. If China were to adopt this technology, other developing countries would rapidly follow. Giving developing countries practical technology so they can willingly enter a global agreement is crucial. If we can help create a pathway where carbon reduction and economic development move together, international agreement becomes far more achievable.
The Research Request: $500,000 for Verification
I have been working with the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences on how to introduce this technology to China. We have agreed on a research plan focused on how the approach could be applied within China, and particularly on providing the scientific verification required for carbon trading.
They require $500,000 to undertake this research. I am asking the Australian Government to provide this funding to the Academy so the work can be done properly and the results can stand up to scrutiny.
Why This Investment Serves Australia’s Interests
The justifications for this expenditure are simple and practical.
- Carbon is global. The impact of climate change on Australia is largely the result of overseas emissions. $500,000 to help developing countries curb emissions is small compared with the costs we already experience from drought, floods, bushfires, and climate volatility.
- It would be a highly cost-effective way for Australia to reduce global emissions. Helping China adopt a scalable approach could have more impact than far larger sums spent only within Australia.
- A fully international agreement is unlikely unless developing-country needs are satisfied. Enabling sequestration helps remove the developing-versus-developed impasse.
- Australia’s prosperity is strongly tied to energy exports of coal and gas. We have both moral and self-interest obligations to help reduce the global impact.
- A significant supply of carbon offsets would help protect industries from future restrictions and make policy transitions more manageable.
- More credible offsets would help keep the price of carbon in check, making a trading scheme easier to introduce and sustain.
There is also a political reality: before the last election, many people felt ashamed of Australia’s stance on climate change and voted for action. Many felt let down when climate change was placed in the too-hard basket. Supporting a practical, internationally focused project would help restore credibility—both overseas and with the electorate.
Closing
While I have focused on reducing emissions in China as a first priority, I see this approach flowing back to Australia. China is now the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases and has a large agricultural workforce that can readily adopt new growing systems. Other developing countries will follow, enabling a truly global agreement. Introducing a trading scheme in Australia becomes far easier once an international agreement is achievable and trusted.
Yours sincerely,
Colin Austin
Colin Austin — © Creative Commons. Reproduction allowed with source acknowledgment; commercial use requires a license.
