Towards 2050 Goals.

Sustainable Economic Growth.

Conventional economic models have assumed a system of production where unconstrained greenhouse gas emissions sit alongside unconstrained economic growth. A model of growth that underpins the vast bulk of contemporary economic thought, this linear and unsophisticated view of the world has been challenged by science, which tells us that the current system of economic production is generating deleterious physical changes in the climate. In turn, these changes are negatively affecting the environment, putting at risk economic growth and our quality of life.

While doing nothing is a choice, it is not costless: a ‘no policy action scenario’ does not result in uninterrupted economic growth. A ‘no policy action’ pathway as the economy recovers – one that does not deliberately and rapidly mitigate climate change – results in significant economic losses. This is true in the Northern Territory, as it is in the rest of the world. There is no free ride: as the causes of climate change are global, so too are the effects. And our economic future and potential will not be isolated from the impacts of a warming world. While we may choose a pathway that does not mitigate climate change in line with the rest of the world, we will not be spared the economic cost as the world warms.

A growth recovery that mitigates climate change will be in line with existing targets and the world’s renewed enthusiasm to invest in resilient economic pathways. Most global economies, including China and Japan, our biggest trading partners, are seeking to reach net zero emissions by 2050, if not sooner, limiting global average warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels – and Territory business has to keep up if it is to remain competitive. While a net zero emission pathway requires a structural and economic adjustment, the shift can be embodied by deliberate and balanced actions taken towards the development and deployment of lower emission technologies and processes across the economy.

To be effective this change must be supported by both government investment and backed by private capital. These investments are not only right type of fiscal stimulus needed today but are the investments that secure long-term economic growth. New growth that provides good jobs, productivity in all the right places and deliberate disruption – out with the old drivers of growth and in with the new – is the Northern Territory’s climate for growth.

The worst effects of a changing climate are felt across every industry – with some wearing the economic cost of climate change more than others. One of the worst impacted industries is mining owing to its economic structure and the distribution of the impacts of the physical climate damages over time.

Industries in Northern Australia will have some of the largest losses due to a changing climate. This area is the first to take the hit as both a consequence of a concentrated industry base, and geography– and losses will compound over time. When the problem is unconventional, so too must be the response. For the opportunity to realise new growth trajectories and avoid the worst costs of a changing climate, the NT requires big ideas and change. A targeted new growth recovery will tick many boxes for the economy – providing jobs in high-growth industries, investment in infrastructure, technological progress and emissions efficiency in traditional sectors, and the creation of export opportunities – all the while mitigating climate change domestically.

[The full Deloitte Access Economics Report is available here.

The good news? Most of the big ideas that create the change required to grow the economy in recovery, while mitigating climate change, already exist. The most important thing is to start NOW. Waiting for someone else to begin the process will result in stagnation.

CARBON FARMING.

Carbon farming broadly refers to land management activities that reduce GHG emissions from agricultural practices or sequester carbon dioxide in the landscape, and in doing so create carbon credits which can be sold through both the ERF and on VCC international markets.

These activities involve managing:

• ruminant diets to reduce emissions from digestive processes,
• biological sequestration that absorbs and retains carbon in plants and soils, and
• savannah burning to prevent more potent greenhouse gas releases associated with hot fires.

An emerging opportunity is ‘blue carbon’ which is the potential of aquatic ecosystems such as mangroves to capture and store carbon.

There are a number of important domestic and international market drivers for the growth of carbon farming in Australia. A strong industry can provide important benefits for the triple bottom line delivering valuable economic, environmental, social and cultural outcomes. The Paris Agreement reached in December 2015 is a global agreement which aims to limit global temperature increase to 2°C degrees Celsius. It is based on voluntary emission reduction commitments made by each country in the form of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC’s). As the world transitions to a zero-net emissions economy, global emitters are looking to new and innovative ways to lower their emissions, as well as providing access to offsets for the remaining emissions. Unfortunately, Australia’s policy on NDC’s is very limited and, if the NT wanted to participate in the global scheme it would have to evolve a domestic policy to allow the export of ACCUs. However, notwithstanding the Federal situation, the NT is well placed to supply this market given its mature, well-designed regulatory approach to carbon credit creation and verification, low sovereign risk, defined land tenure and ownership arrangements and processes, scientific expertise, and biophysical capacity.

The voluntary carbon market is quite different from the compliance markets under the Kyoto Protocol and the new market which will develop under the Paris Accord. Instead of being driven by the need of governments and companies to comply with regulation the voluntary carbon markets have evolved from social corporate responsibility and there is no hard and fast rule by which one can easily price carbon credits or undertake quality assurance. Most voluntary carbon credits are sold to organizations and companies that are not part of any national emissions trading scheme and who want to go carbon neutral or if they are part of a scheme they simply want to offset their corporate GHG emissions, that they produce from power or manufacturing facilities that are covered by an ETS. In fact, the price for voluntary carbon credits has ranged anywhere from US$0.10 cents to $100 USD per tonne which is a massive range. Typically, however, the lower the volume and the lower the price. In addition, there are no exchanges with sufficient liquidity where VERs can be sold which makes the market much more complex.

Countries have begun to enact their emissions reduction goals under the Paris Agreement, many of which plan to implement domestic carbon pricing schemes and/or trade emissions reductions across borders, if they have not done so already. Yet, the Paris Agreement contains few hard-and-fast rules about international carbon trading, so as negotiators aim to develop this structure and guidelines before 2030 the voluntary markets continue to exist quite easily alongside compliance markets.

The land sector is critically important for achieving the emissions reductions needed to achieve our 2030 emissions reduction target under the Paris Agreement. Opportunities for large scale emissions reductions and carbon sequestration lie in unlocking new opportunities for the broader agricultural sector. Carbon farming methods can prevent land degradation, reduce run-off and reduce water pollution and salinity, delivering greater retention of nutrients and microbes and reducing runoff of pollutants and soil into water systems.

The benefits of Carbon Farming also include:

New & Diversified Income Streams: financial returns for agricultural enterprises particularly for unproductive/degraded land. Carbon income is an important additional revenue stream for agribusiness, providing added opportunities to re-invest back into agricultural enterprises.

Increased Farm Productivity: methods that improve soil health and reduce ruminant emissions can also improve agricultural productivity.

Protection of Indigenous Land: methods such as savanna burning can protect sacred sites through appropriate fire management practices and can leverage the traditional ecological knowledge of Indigenous people.

Biodiversity: Carbon farming can preserve and enhance biodiversity through a wide range of existing activities such as diverse environmental plantings and encouraging native regrowth. It can also be an important component of the national economy via ecosystem services and tourism.

For carbon farming to develop the NT government should:

• Develop funding mechanisms to drive regional market developments and positive land-use change.
• Work with project developers to develop scalable aggregation models.
• Establish policy that helps stimulate a viable secondary market for offsets.
• Map the strategic opportunities for investment in land sector, including for blue carbon projects. Encourage heavy emitters increase participation in voluntary markets and offset emissions liabilities by establishing long term supply contracts for land sector credits.
• Introduce new financial products to de-risk carbon farming investment and provide incentives for land management practices.

GHG abatement in the NT.

In 2014 iFM prepared a submission to the joint select committee on Northern Australia [# 52; The Carbon Economy – a new opportunity for Northern Australia] that set out a number of carbon abatement processes that would generate substantial income, and reduce GHG emissions in the NT. Since then we have kept abreast of the legislation and the changes arising from development of the ERF and expanded the range of methodologies that meet the requirements of the CER. The paper illustrates the fact that the Territory has a very different composition of its greenhouse gas emissions than Australia as a whole and reducing emissions from savanna burning and LNG processing will have a disproportionate effect on total GHG emissions. Any processes that can economically address these two sectors will have the potential to produce very large quantities of marketable carbon instruments. Several organisations, including the pre-eminent Warddeken Land Management, have very successfully implemented the ‘WALFA’ methodology and generate a significant proportion of the ACCU in the NT.

However, while the NT has been at the forefront of the emerging carbon industry, it utilises very few of the 36 approved carbon farming methodologies. The industry is only in its infancy and many untapped opportunities exist applicable to all regions of the Northern Australia. The King Review has recommended and it has been agreedby the Australian government;

Establish a new process to provide third parties with the opportunity to propose and prepare ERF methods. This would encourage innovation and accelerate method development, thereby helping to promote greater participation and the realisation of low-cost abatement opportunities. A multi-stage review, development and approval process would ensure third party methods are robust, meet the ERF’s offsets integrity standards, and are administratively sound.

The Northern Territory’s emissions are extremely high: far too high given the world made its first agreements to reduce emissions back in 1992. The rapid increase because of Inpex’s Ichthys project coming online, which occurred even after the Paris Agreement was signed, is not consistent with the NTG goals. Even with the climate impact of the Territory’s recent gas developments being vastly understated on the Government’s numbers, in the past two years the Territory’s emissions have increased by 35% as a result of the Inpex project.

Opening up the Beetaloo Basin to new gas projects will simply add further to NT emissions, making achievement of 2050 goals almost impossible. Greenhouse gas emissions are produced both from gas power stations and gas production e.g. methane from gas leaks. Methane is much more potent as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period. Development of new gas is entirely out of step with the Government’s net zero emissions by 2050 aspiration.

To do its fair share of a 2°C goal, the NT must hit zero in 2037, and drawdown 191 million tonnes of past emissions. This scale of drawdown of past harm would require the NT to procure further sequestering abatement equivalent in scale to all abatement currently contracted for under Commonwealth Government’s entire Emissions Reduction Fund.

‘DRAWDOWN’ IS ESSENTIAL.

Reducing emissions is not enough. We’re too far down the path to irrevocable global warming to be able to keep under 2 degrees by reductions alone. The food, agriculture, and land use sector [FALU for short] is a major contributor to climate change. And it may surprise many people to learn that it essentially ties electricity generation as the top two contributors to climate change today. Transition to renewable energy will go a long way to solving the energy dilemma and we can go beyond reducing greenhouse gas sources from agriculture and land use. Agricultural lands can also serve as ‘sinks’ to capture and store excess atmospheric carbon dioxide. A greenhouse gas sink refers to a process that can remove these gases from the atmosphere and store them somewhere else for long periods of time – thereby lowering the levels of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. On land, carbon dioxide is absorbed through photosynthesis, and is later stored in living biomass [as grass or trees] and as organic matter in the soil. Depending on form of biomass or soil organic matter, this carbon can be stored on land, away from the atmosphere, for a season, several years, multiple decades, or several centuries. Ultimately, the carbon that is locked up in biomass or soil organic matter is returned to the atmosphere, through decomposition and microbial respiration.

By deploying different agricultural practices – usually referred to as ‘regenerative agriculture’ – it is possible to create new carbon sinks. Soil Organic Carbon [SOC] is the largest pool of carbon on land and is largely made up of decomposed plant matter and microbes. As plant detritus and crop residues break down, some of their carbon is released as carbon dioxide by microscopic animals and microbes, the remainder is converted into soil organic matter. Plants also exude some of the sugars created through photosynthesis through their roots to feed beneficial organisms like microbes and mycorrhizal fungi, adding to the build-up of soil organic carbon. SOC comes in many different forms, and each has a certain lifetime in the soil. Some SOC breaks down quickly. This happens when microbes release the carbon back to the atmosphere as carbon dioxide through respiration. Other forms of SOC are much harder to break down, and it may take decades or centuries for microbes to break down these compounds. And some forms of SOC are extremely long-lived, where organic carbon is tightly bound to soil particles, making this soil carbon essentially permanent. It is estimated that the mean residence time of soil organic carbon, when bound to mineral particles in the soil, is centuries or even millennia in some cases. The levels of soil organic carbon are ultimately controlled by two processes: inputs of organic materials to the soil from plant detritus, crop residues, plant exudates, or additional organic carbon added by farmers – and losses of organic matter from microbial respiration, the leaching of organic carbon compounds to groundwater, or losses from soil erosion. By changing agricultural practices, we can alter the inputs and losses of organic matter in the soil, thereby increasing or decreasing soil carbon levels.

Organic matter, whether in living plants or soil compounds, is made from carbon and wide variety of other elements. The most limiting of which are nitrogen and phosphorus, the primary components of agricultural fertilizer. These elements are often extremely limited in many soils, especially degraded soils where soil carbon has already been lost. This means that carbon sequestration in biomass and soils may become limited by the availability of nitrogen and phosphorus. For example, for every billion metric tons of CO2 that is sequestered, 25 million metric tons of nitrogen is required. That’s the equivalent of about 19% of global synthetic fertilizer production today. Water is of critical importance to photosynthesis, and water availability is projected to become ever more uncertain with climate change. Scarcity of water, nitrogen, and other nutrients like phosphorus thus may constrain the size of agricultural carbon sinks to less than their technical potential.

Modelling [at the regional level] suggests that carbon stocks in vegetation in northern Australia range from 1 t/ha [e.g. in the Simpson Desert and skeletal soils of the northern Kimberley] to 70 t/ha [in the Brigalow belt and mulga lands of Queensland and the savanna forests around Darwin and the Tiwi Islands]. Estimates of soil carbon stocks [at 30 cm depth] range from 1 to10 t/ha in more arid regions to 40 to 50 t/ha in more mesic regions . Small changes to this store can either contribute markedly to Australia’s abatement efforts or overwhelm other abatement activities.

The GHG emissions landscape has altered significantly with the new LNG facilities reaching full production in 2018, contributing about a third of total emissions. Following are a number, by no means exhaustive, and in no particular order, of methodologies that could be implemented very quickly to reduce and replace those emissions.

Methodology 1 – Weed management.

Gamba grass infestations can cause both a significant loss of revenue from exclusions from carbon farming as well as major increases in land management costs associated with control and eradication efforts. Existing Gamba grass infestations within the NT already rule out the potential for carbon farming on as much as1.5 million hectares of land due to the increased likelihood of intense late season fires. This represents a lost opportunity of income from carbon credits under current approaches and much more under newly adopted carbon methodologies that include opportunities for carbon sequestration. The presence of a single plant in a carbon project area requires the permanent exclusion of a 6.25 hectare region [the size of a pixel on a vegetation map] from a project’s carbon accounting.

This is of grave concern to this growing industry, and threatens the future viability of many existing individual carbon projects. The presence and potential expansion of Gamba grass on to properties with potential carbon farming projects thus presents a significant threat to the future growth of this industry that could cost upwards of tens of millions of dollars annually in the NT. Gambagrassroots.org.au is perfectly placed to lead a re-vegetation/soil sequestration project that will promote greater participation and the realisation of low-cost abatement opportunities.

Revegetation and land use change over the savanna in Northern Australia is vital to sustainable natural resource management. Carbon sequestration from these activities could make a significant contribution to meeting Australia’s Greenhouse Gas [GHG] pollution reduction goals. If the basic premise behind weed management strategies were to be changed to “harvesting” biomass to produce feedstock for pyrolysis, and/or input to a densified pellet production system, over time, not only would the need for weed control be reduced, but the biochar output from pyrolysis would improve soils and grow plantations suitable for inclusion in a biosequestration pool and the pellets produced could form the basis of a valuable rural export industry.

Watch the video.

Methodology 2 – Mineral Carbonation.

Mineral carbonation involves the beneficial use of carbon dioxide captured from flue gases in a process in which CO2 is reacted with minerals to produce a carbonate mineral, permanently locking away the carbon dioxide in a stable solid form. It mimics a natural process in which carbon dioxide is converted to carbonate rocks over millennia. This process can be accelerated to occur in minutes through the application of heat and pressure. Cutting-edge companies are starting to commercialise the by-products of the process.

Most research into mineral carbonation focuses on magnesium silicates which are available in naturally abundant rocks such as olivine and serpentine this results in two main products – magnesium carbonate and silica – both of which have a number of commercial applications. The most developed versions of mineral carbonation require an almost pure stream of carbon dioxide, But it may be possible to avoid the need to separate carbon dioxide. Some companies are conducting research on mineral carbonation using untreated exhaust gases from cement kilns and conventional power generation. Mineral carbonation has several significant advantages over conventional carbon capture and storage. Firstly there is no risk of leaking or need for post-storage monitoring, as the carbon dioxide is chemically bonded within a stable mineral. Secondly the technology can be applied in-situ at any location without the need for a local geological formation capable of storing carbon dioxide. Thirdly the economics are more promising because mineral carbonation can produce substances with commercial value, and can avoid the costs of compressing, transporting and storing carbon dioxide. The potential of magnesium silicate rock to absorb carbon dioxide is enormous. Olivine and serpentine are readily available at a low cost, and widely distributed around the world. In Australia it has been estimated that enough mineable serpentine exists in one part of the Great Serpentinite Belt of the New England area of NSW to absorb all the state’s stationary carbon dioxide emissions for 300 years.

MCi, a commercial collaboration between GreenMag Group, Orica Limited and the University of Newcastle, is developing mineral carbonation processes using locally sourced serpentine. The company has built a research pilot plant to test its technology and to determine the design and cost of large scale implementation. MCi’s aim is to commercialise their process by 2022, reducing the cost of mineral carbonation to $40 per tonne of carbon dioxide. Once proven at the commercial scale, production to capture hundreds of thousands of tonnes per year, using locally abundant serpentine could proceed. MCi intend to market magnesium carbonate as an aggregate, a fire-resistant building material or for other chemical applications. The company envisages numerous commercial applications for silica [SiO2], including as a binder in cement and also be used to produce sodium silicate for activating geopolymer cement.

Watch the video.

Mount Keith Nickel Operation has one of Australia’s biggest tailings dams – and it’s also a massive mineral carbon sink. At five kilometres wide, the dam in Western Australia’s northern Goldfields region currently stores approximately 40,000 tonnes of CO2 directly from the atmosphere each year. Researchers predict that it could store far more CO2 every year, if the mineral carbonation rate could be enhanced through different processes and engineering solutions. It’s an exciting opportunity to see if technology can be used to speed up the process, and store away carbon dioxide much faster. BHP is now working with leading Australian and international experts to investigate methods to increase the carbonation reaction to store even more CO2 into tailings, which will reduce or offset our operational greenhouse gas emissions and lower its carbon footprint.

Methodology 3 – Geopolymer Cement.

Concrete is a remarkable material – strong, versatile and durable – and cement is the technology that makes concrete possible. We’ll continue to need huge quantities of cement, but we urgently need to change the way we make it. Cement making causes 8% of world emissions, and this percentage is on track to rise substantially by 2050. The cement industry has outlined strategies to reduce emissions, but the reductions it anticipates are not enough even to offset projected growth in demand. This is because current strategies fail to tackle the main cause of cement-related emissions – the calcination of limestone to make Portland cement. In the zero-carbon era the cement industry must transform as the energy sector is now doing. This means developing strategies that drastically reduce the use of calcined limestone and Portland cement. This transformation is long overdue. Portland cement was invented nearly two hundred years ago, and although it has been improved, the fundamental technology remains unchanged.

Concrete is the most widely used man-made material, commonly used in buildings, roads, bridges and industrial plants. But producing the Portland cement needed to make concrete accounts for 5-8% of all global greenhouse emissions. The production of geopolymer uses reactive aluminosilicate materials and alkali-activation technology. Unlike Portland cement, geopolymer does not rely on limestone or require heating to around 1450 degrees Celsius for calcination, the process which drives out carbon dioxide.

Fly ash, the very fine particles generated from combustion, is one industrial waste that can be used in geopolymer production. Australia produces 14 million tonnes of fly ash per year. Only a small amount of this waste is used, more than two-thirds is dumped as landfill and only 38% is recycled. Changing these industrial wastes to greener options has potential to cut CO2 emissions by up to 80%.

Geopolymer concrete has the same long-term performance as Portland cement, but without the environmental footprint. One only has to travel to some of the most famous World Heritage sites to see how well this alternative can perform; they have resisted the elements for thousands of years. Many ancient sites in Roman architecture were made with a similar composition to geopolymer [volcanic ash, fresh water and lime]. The reactions involved in making geopolymer cements do not generate greenhouse gases, and therefore zero emission geopolymer cements are possible. Geopolymer cements made from fly ash and ground-granulated blast-furnace slag are already made and used in Australia. It is also possible to make geopolymer cements from clay [metakaolin]. The www.ash-cem.eu project has shown that the process is viable and contributes substantially to GHG emissions reduction.

Watch the video.

Magnesium carbonate, such as that produced by the mineral carbonate process, is ideal as a binder in cement and also be used to produce sodium silicate for activating geopolymer cement. A geopolymer cement factory could be co-located with the mineral carbonation plant to take advantage of low cost feedstock with no transportation costs.

Methodology 4 – Ruminant methane reduction.

About the same time as the Senate submission was written, researchers at CSIRO and James Cook University demonstrated that feeding ruminants a diet consisting of 1-2% percent red seaweed reduced their methane emissions by over 90 percent. Watch the video.

Of 20 types of seaweed tested, A. taxiformis showed the most promise, with nearly 90% effectiveness. The findings spurred interest from leading academic and cattle producers to further investigate its effects on ruminant animal production. Some findings of research on these effects have been that the dichloromethane extract [found in A. taxiformis] was the most potent in reducing methane production. Supply from wild harvest is not expected to be adequate to support broad adoption. A. taxiformis has yet to be commercially farmed at scale. A research/development initiative called Greener Grazing is seeking to close the life cycle and demonstrate ocean based grow-out. Startups called Volta Greentech and Symbrosia are both working to grow commercial quantities. Sea-based cultivation has been proposed as a path to scale production and drive the cost down so it can be used by beef and dairy farmers across Australia.

Watch the video.

Methodology 5 – Algae sequestration of CO2.

It’s doubtful that biodiesel will replace petrodiesel in the near future, however, produced and used responsibly, fuel from plants will be a small, growing, subset of a broader renewable energy portfolio that includes wind and solar power. But even if wind turbines are in widespread use [which is unlikely in the NT – because of cyclone risk] and massive increases in photovoltaic cell efficiency take place, the need for liquid fuels will continue to rise. While the production of second generation fuels such as lignocellulosic ethanol may address the current gasoline market, it does not, however, meet the need for higher energy density fuels such as diesel and jet fuel. Biodiesel produced from oil seed crops cannot come close to meeting diesel demand. Alternative sources of renewable oils are therefore needed to meet the challenge of increasing demand for higher energy density liquid transportation fuels.

Microalgae represent an attractive feedstock for the production of higher energy density oils. Algae, in general, have the ability to produce a wide array of different chemical intermediates that can be converted into biofuels. Microalgae have the capability of producing hydrogen, lipids, hydrocarbons, and carbohydrates, which can be converted into a variety of fuels. Many species of microalgae are able to produce high levels of oil – as much as 50% on a dry cell weight basis. Coupled with their rapid growth rate microalgae can produce 10-100 times more oil than terrestrial oil seed plants. They do not require the use of agricultural lands but instead can be cultivated on non-arable land which has little likelihood of other use. They are also capable of using a variety of different water sources including fresh, brackish, saline, and waste water, and can use waste CO2 sources as a critical nutrient.

There are other environmental benefits that accrue including:

• Biodiesel is four times more biodegradable than petrodiesel and is therefore especially preferable as a fuel in areas where spills maybe common or the potential consequences are severe. Marine environments, including waterways and catchments, national parks and wetlands benefit significantly from its use in terms of reducing the impacts of potential fuel spills;

• It has a less energy-intensive life-cycle as compared with fossil fuels, particularly as the latter become harder to extract. CO2 emitted by B100 derived from algae is extracted from the atmosphere during the process of photosynthesis and consequently combustion of biodiesel does not contribute additional greenhouse gas to the current carbon cycle and is therefore regarded as being carbon neutral;

• biodiesel will also become increasingly important in the carbon economy because it has been assigned a zero fuel combustion emission factor thus producing an abatement of CO2-e making it’s petrodiesel displacement eligible for carbon credits.

Oil from algae is a sustainable, renewable feedstock that will significantly reduce transport carbon footprint. “Third generation” algae-based fuels are different from first [ethanol] and second-generation [non food derived vegetable oils] fuels because they are :

• easily refined into hydrocarbons – including gas, diesel and jet fuel – and thus serve as a direct fossil fuel replacement.
• compatible with existing oil and pipeline infrastructure and engines.
• not competitive with other biofuels, which can be blended with algae-based hydrocarbon fuels, making them a compatible, not competitive, technology.

Algae hold tremendous potential to play a key role in the development of a new energy economy – one driven by environmentally and economically sustainable fuel and power generation.

• Any commercially viable energy feedstock must be able to scale up to meet state – and potentially national – energy needs. Algae are one of nature’s most efficient photosynthetic organisms; a single crop of algae can mature in as little as 7 days, making it one of the fastest growing and most scalable energy feedstocks available.
• Algae are enormous consumers of CO2. Consequently, algae require industrial-source CO2 quantities [such as LNG production] in order to scale to significant levels.
• Algae can be grown on non-arable land, using non-potable salt or brackish water. Consequently, algae conserve precious agricultural resources, while providing exciting new opportunities for rural development.

Graphic Source: Solix Biofuels.

Muradel final report.

Unlike other plants, aquatic microalgae can directly absorb over 90% of the CO2 in flue gas. Ponds located close to existing GHG pollution could be piped directly, thus avoiding both the cost of bottled CO2 to stimulate algal growth. The biomass remaining after the oil has been extracted can be pelletized with at least two markets as food for the large numbers of live cattle that are exported though Darwin to Asia; feedstock for slow pyrolysis that co-produces electricity [eligible for certificates under the ERF and biochar, a soil supplement that sequesters carbon, eligible for additional carbon credits. Production costs will be reduced by as much as 60% because CO2, electricity and nutrients can all be supplied at little or no cost.

The project site – Darwin, the capital city of the Northern Territory, is the pre-eminent oil and gas processing hub for the north of Australia. The city can provide all the infrastructure requirements: qualified design and construction engineers, experienced process and control personnel, PhD algae experts at the local University, modern transport and export facilities south to Australia, North to Asia. The climate is perfect for maximizing photosynthesis all year round.

Methodology 6 – Blue Carbon.

Ecosystems like mangroves are very good at storing carbon. They pull it out of oceans and atmosphere and store it in their roots and mud. It can remain there for thousands of years. In Blue Carbon [BC] habitats, a large proportion of the carbon is stored below ground, typically in low-oxygen sediment where decomposition is comparatively slow. These low decomposition rates, combined with high biomass growth rates, allow these habitats to build up large, persistent carbon stocks. This below-ground biomass is what generates such disproportionate value in a carbon accounting context. Activities that restore and protect BC also offer the potential for developing market-based mechanisms that take advantage of existing frameworks for carbon offsets.

In Australia, the CSIRO Blue Carbon collaboration cluster has produced arguably the most comprehensive estimates of blue carbon sequestration. This body of work has been used to inform policy development for national reporting and emissions. The International Partnership for Blue Carbon, the Blue Carbon Initiative and the Blueprint for Ocean and Coastal Sustainability are international programs that promote protection and restoration of Blue Carbon habitats. These programs call for the development of global blue carbon markets . Quantifying coastal carbon stocks found in mangroves is a vital step toward establishing this market.

During 2017’s COP23 climate summit presided over by Fiji, the minister for foreign affairs, Julie Bishop, announced Australia would invest A$6 million in protecting and managing Pacific blue carbon ecosystems. The NT can realise blue carbon opportunities by engagement with the coastal communities that rely on healthy ecosystems, and national stakeholders through carbon markets and other mechanisms. Future blue carbon projects in the NT could be supported by carbon financing from blue carbon credits, developed under the ERF. Since 2014, the Fund has provided financial incentives for Australian businesses and natural resource managers to adopt new practices and technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Projects accredited under the Fund can receive carbon credits for each tonne of carbon reduction achieved. Carbon credits can then be sold to create a revenue stream. Other innovative mechanisms to finance carbon sequestration projects are being developed and trialled throughout the world. Green bonds [and more recently, blue bonds], carbon insetting, payment for ecosystem services and private public partnerships of various kinds, are increasingly used to finance carbon sequestration and climate-resilience activities. For example, the green bond market is only a decade old and is already well established with over US$500 billion labelled green bonds, issued by over 600 financiers.

Key incentives for blue carbon projects are the ability to generate carbon credits from coastal restoration activities to realise financial returns. These opportunities are particularly relevant to ‘saltwater’ communities because, while the intertidal zone ususally falls under the ownership of the state and federal governments, Rowan Foley, CEO of the Aboriginal Carbon Foundation, highlights the case of Blue Mud Bay – where the High Court recognised the rights of the Yolngu people over the intertidal zone in 2008. “The mangroves are largely in that intertidal zone, so the fact that native title rights have been demonstrated in that area is very good, because it opens up that whole door for us,” he says.

The Australian Seaweed Industry Blueprint outlines plans to be a $100 million plus industry in the next five years, with investors and entrepreneurs lining up to get involved in seaweed to make money and reduce emissions, improving ocean health and creating jobs in regional areas. Published by AgriFutures Australia, the Blueprint offers current seaweed producers the foundations needed to mobilise industry development and realise the opportunities in sight.

Australia has no commercial-scale seaweed ocean farms and no industry development plan, but consultation with industry has identified a $100 million plus opportunity for seaweed over the next five years, with potential to scale to $1.5 billion over the next 20 years. This will create

thousands of jobs in regional towns and reduce Australia’s national greenhouse gas emissions significantly. The opportunity for an Australian seaweed industry has important economic, environmental and social impact factors. Recent media coverage has revealed major investors have invested in Future Feed, a commercialisation of the Asparagopsis feed additive pioneered by the CSIRO. Research into bioproducts from native Australian seaweed species has potential to contribute to global health and nutrition while adding significant value to the Australian economy. The future of the industry will rely on significant expansion into ocean cultivation of native seaweeds and development of high value nutritional products for humans, animals and plants.

Report highlights:

• Extension of kelp farming around fish farms to clean the water and provide additional revenue streams for aquaculture businesses.
• Development of seaweed biofilters to remove excess nutrients and protect offshore reefs while providing beneficial agricultural products in an innovative circular economy solution.
• Development of offshore integrated food, energy and carbon sequestration platforms for sustainable food production into the future.
• Biodiscovery from native Australian seaweeds to uncover valuable compounds.
• Development of new seaweed products using advanced manufacturing techniques.

The report also highlights the role of state government aquaculture policy and the formation of a dedicated research, development and extension plan is a crucial step for the Australian seaweed industry, offering a clear pathway to capitalise on growth opportunities. Seaweed has enormous potential and the facilitation of ongoing collaboration between research organisations, government and investors to realise the industry vision of becoming a high-tech and high-value sustainable industry that will support thriving oceans and coastal communities.

Globally, seaweed is the largest aquaculture production by volume at over eight million wet metric tonnes per annum. Mostly this production is for traditional foods in Asia and the commodity markets of agar, alginates and carageenans. However, there is also untapped potential in smaller, high product value markets for nutritional and health applications. This is where Australia’s best investment in a seaweed industry may lie. A RIRDC report presents findings that demonstrate an untapped potential for cultivation of a number of local Australian seaweed species, but it also identifies the challenges facing commercial-scale production. Importantly, it also provides evidence that Australia has the capacity and potential to undertake cutting edge screening and development of healthy seaweed products, in particular, products with nutraceutical and anti-cancer applications.