Kyoto carry-over credits are a carbon accounting measure by which nations count historical emissions reductions that exceeded previous international goals towards its current targets. The use of Kyoto carry-over credits to meet national greenhouse gas emissions targets is contentious as they undermine climate ambition by allowing targets to be met with "emissions reductions" that have already happened. At COP25 in 2019, it was reported that Australia was the only country in the world explicitly planning to use Kyoto carry-over credits. Climate Analytics find there is no legal basis for the use of carry-over credits under the Kyoto Protocol or the Paris Agreement.
Support of UN Climate Process
Under Consideration: Government has not definitely ruled out the use of Kyoto credits as of yet
From 2015 to 2020, the Australian Government consistently supported the use of Kyoto credits to meet its 2030 federal emission reduction target of 26 to 28 per cent under the Paris Agreement. In December 2020, Australia appeared to soften in its support for the use of Kyoto credits, after Prime Minister Scott Morrison stated that he was “very confident” that Australia would not need to use Kyoto carry-over credits to meet its 2030 emissions targets. However, Australia's emissions projections are based on its Technology Investment Roadmap, which relies heavily on the scale-up of low-emission technologies. Australia has not definitively ruled out the use of Kyoto carry-over credits.
The table below lists the entities tracked by InfluenceMap which have publicly engaged with the policy. InfluenceMap tracks around 300 companies and 150 industry associations globally. Each entity links back to the entities’ full InfluenceMap profile, where the evidence of its policy engagement can be found.
What do our scores mean?The organizational score represents the degree to which the organization influencing climate policy and legislation. Corporations also have relationship scores reflecting their links with influencers like trade associations. Both are combined to place the corporation in a performance band. Full details can be found here. Update August 2021: If limited evidence had been collected either on a company's direct policy engagement (Organization Score) or industry association links (Relationship Score) this is signified with an ‘n/a’ (not available). If limited evidence has been collected in both areas, the Total Score is also given as n/a. Full details and links back to any primary evidence that has been collected can still be located on the company’s profile. |
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
B
|
Carbon Market Institute | All Sectors | Australia |
|
D
|
Business Council of Australia | All Sectors | Australia |
|
C-
|
Origin Energy | Energy | Australia |
|
D
|
BHP | Materials | Australia |
|
D-
|
Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) | Materials | Australia |
|
C
|
Australian Industry Group (Ai Group) | All Sectors | Australia |
|
D
|
Australian Industry Greenhouse Network | Energy | Australia |
|
D-
|
Santos | Energy | Australia |
|
D+
|
Boral Limited | Materials | Australia |
|
C
|
Australia and New Zealand Banking Group | Financials | Australia |
