Organisational Emissions Reduction Progress Report · Report

PLANNING & ENVIRONMENT COMMITTEE MEETING                                         9 DECEMBER 2025



As a first step in establishing the Zero Emissions Organisational Strategy and setting the 2026 target,
Council engaged Beyond Zero Emissions Inc., a climate change solutions think-tank, to undertake
an independent audit of Council’s operations and services, to develop an emissions inventory and
to determine a baseline Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions (carbon) footprint.

With the data available at the time and current knowledge of carbon accounting, the baseline
assessment indicated that the total emissions were only 10,713 tCO₂e (tonnes of carbon dioxide
equivalent). Council’s target was originally set based on this figure. It was acknowledged in the ZEN
Strategy that there were limitations to this calculated figure: “continued improvement is required in
the collection of data to complete Council’s understanding of the GHG components”. It was also
noted in the baseline footprint report that, due to unavailability of data, emissions from waste
excluded the majority of Scope 3 (supply chain) sources, legacy waste (pre-FY15/16 landfill
material), and methane emissions from uncapped landfill cells. Under the GHG Protocol (5), these
sources must be included. After gathering the necessary data and recalculating for FY15/16 to
include these sources, the baseline was revised to 55,843 tCO₂e, nearly five times higher than the
original estimate, significantly increasing the scale of the challenge.

Achieving net zero emissions requires reducing emissions from a given baseline to the lowest
possible level with technology available at the time. Industry standards (6) for a credible net zero
claim indicate a minimum 90% reduction over the long term, with only 10% or less of residual
emissions to be offset by generating or purchasing credits for emissions reductions elsewhere.

Therefore, even if Council purchased offsets for current residual emissions, achieving its net zero
target could not be credibly claimed. Council could instead pursue carbon neutrality, where
emissions are balanced by equivalent offsets. However, as Council currently has no self-generated
offsets, these would need to be purchased from third-parties, for projects outside Noosa Shire and
in some cases, overseas.

In Australia, current Australian Carbon Credit Unit (ACCU) prices are around $38/tCO₂e, which
would equate to spending approximately $1.7m annually to offset Council’s current residual
emissions of 45,118 tCO₂e. In many cases, carbon offset projects can have significant co-benefits
for local communities and biodiversity conservation if established well using best practice methods.
These benefits would not be realised if Council were to purchase offsets from projects outside of
Noosa. Significant transparency and integrity concerns also remain around third-party offsets,
particularly regarding additionality and permanence (7)(8)(9). This has led to limited availability of
‘high-quality’ carbon credits in the market, as there is now an increasing demand for high integrity
projects to offset corporate emissions. Additionally, other LGAs, including Brisbane and Logan, have
recently opted against continuing to purchase third-party carbon credits (a majority of which from
overseas) to maintain carbon neutrality, instead prioritising direct emissions reductions actions
internally.

Whilst notable improvements are currently being made to increase the quality and integrity of offsets
in both the Australian carbon market and the overseas voluntary carbon market, at this time, it is not
recommended to purchase third-party offsets to neutralise Council’s emissions due to: the high
associated annual costs (which, whilst still providing net positive benefits to community due to the
high impact costs of climate change, are better spent locally on direct emissions reduction actions),
the limited local co-benefits, and the integrity and availability concerns associated with third-party
offsets. Instead, it is recommended that the focus remain on accelerating impactful, cost-effective
actions that directly reduce Council’s organisational emissions, particularly those at the Waste
Resource Recovery Centre (in line with the endorsed From Waste to Resource Plan) and on
balancing residual emissions through natural carbon removal projects across the Shire.

Investing in direct emissions reduction and carbon removals within the region demonstrates: a
genuine commitment to long-term emissions reduction, which is the only credible path to
‘absolute/true zero’ (zero residual emissions); long-term operational cost savings and positive net