Climate Change
 

Caltex is committed to addressing the serious issue of climate change by working with the government to develop effective policies to reduce emissions.

Caltex accepts the science behind global warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a body set up by the UN in 1988, says it is very likely the increase in temperatures since the mid twentieth century is a result of increased greenhouse gases in the atmosphere from human activity.

Climate change presents a significant risk to economies, societies and the environment and Caltex is helping to tackle this problem. There are costs for Caltex in reducing emissions but also opportunities, and a responsibility to the community to act.

Caltex supports setting a national goal for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. This goal should be determined and adjusted from time to time on the basis of the best available science. 

03.05.2010 - Caltex PM Task Group Energy Efficiency Issues Paper

31.07.2009 - Caltex Australia Limited submission to the Senate Select Committee Inquiry into Fuel and Energy

04.06.2009 - Caltex Australia Limited submission to the Senate Economics Committee Inquiry into the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009 and related bills

29.05.2009 - Caltex Australia Limited submission to the Senate Select Committee on Climate Policy (Update of submission dated 23 April 2009 to take account of CPRS changes announced on 4 May 2009)

25.02.2009 - Opening statement by Caltex Australia to hearing of Senate Select Committee on Fuel and Energy

23.04.2009 - Caltex Australia Limited submission to the Senate Select Committee on Climate Policy

21.04.2009 - Caltex Australia Limited opening statement to Senate Select Committee on Climate Policy inquiry into Climate Policy

11.09.2008 - Caltex Australia Limited submission to Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme

30.04.2008 - Caltex submission to Garnaut Climate Change Review Emission Trading Scheme Discussion Paper

Caltex's position on the Government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme

We believe the treatment of Emissions Intensive Trade Exposed (EITE) industries under the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) needs to be reviewed, while its treatment of motorists is flawed and could actually increase petrol emissions. Instead, we believe an emphasis needs to be placed on complementary measures for motorists.

  • Do we support an emissions trading scheme at Caltex?
    Yes, at Caltex we see an emissions trading scheme of some kind as an important tool for reducing point source greenhouse gas emissions. However, the proposed CPRS is flawed and needs major changes before being implemented.
  • How long do we think the scheme should be delayed?
    The scheme should be delayed until the design is right and until economic conditions return to normal. There should also be time for a trial period so businesses can test the operation of the scheme and their business systems.
  • What is wrong with the scheme's treatment of EITE industries?
    At Caltex, we would need to purchase $25 to $40 million of permits for carbon emissions from our two refineries each year, and that's assuming we receive 60 percent of our permits for free. Yet our direct overseas competitors, such as refineries in Singapore, would have no carbon costs, so we could not pass on our carbon costs. This would mean a loss of international competitiveness and effectively impose a new tax on business.
  • What are our current refinery emissions?
    Our two oil refineries directly and indirectly emit about 2.5 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO 2e) each year, which is about 0.4% of Australia's total emissions.
  • What do we propose for EITE industries like oil refining?
    At Caltex, we propose that activities such as refining receive a 100 percent allocation of free permits until such time as our international competitors face equivalent carbon costs.
  • What are the emissions from the use of petroleum products, such as transport?
    In 2006, a total of 115 Mt or 20% of Australia's total emissions were from the use of petroleum products, including petrol, diesel and jet fuel. Transport use accounted for 14% of total emissions.
  • Why do we believe motorists should be removed from the CPRS?
    We at Caltex will have to buy permits for customers' carbon emissions, then charge them back to the customer. However, the government has proposed a reduction in the fuel excise related to carbon cost which effectively removes private motorists and some small businesses from the scheme. In fact, emissions from petrol would actually increase less, leading up to 2025, without the CPRS.
  • How much would we have to spend to buy customers' carbon permits?
    Based on the CPRS design, our company would have to purchase between $0.9 and $1.6 billion in permits for our customers' emissions each year.
  • How would the CPRS actually increase petrol emissions?
    For the first three years and several years beyond that, the excise reduction for petrol will actually be greater than the carbon price being imposed. That means petrol prices will actually go down and emissions will go up. By 2025, petrol suppliers will have churned $20 billion in permits for no environmental gain.
  • What about larger diesel vehicles?
    We don't propose changing the CPRS carbon cost proposals for on-road vehicles over 4.5 tonnes or off-road vehicles in various industries.
  • What should be done instead of including motorists in the CPRS?
    At Caltex, we propose voluntary targets for carbon emissions from vehicles, government incentives for consumers to purchase low-emissions vehicles through a "cashback" (feebate) scheme, funding for cleaner vehicle technology together with greater reliance on alternative fuels, and investing further in public transport and better land use planning.
Site map Button
Caltex Logo