Image from farmersforclimateaction.org.au
Farmers for Climate Action (FCA) has warmly welcomed news that low emissions heavy equipment, trucks and utes will be eligible for low interest loans under a new scheme supported by the Federal Government.
The Emissions Reduction Incentive Program for farmers will offer loans at 1.15% less than market rates through NAB’s arrangement with the Government-owned Clean Energy Finance Corporation. Hybrid, electric and hydrogen powered trucks, utes and machinery, will be eligible.
Some $300 million is available under the program, with loans expected to largely be in the amount of $1 million to $5 million. This means farmers could save in the order of $50,000 a year on interest costs.
FCA CEO Natalie Collard said it was fantastic to see the Government using the carrot rather than the stick with farmers on emissions reduction.
“This is exactly the sort of program our 8400 farmer members have been calling for. Farmers want to know how to reduce emissions whilst remaining profitable, and this program gives them a way to do that, if they choose. That’s how you keep farmers farming. Credit where credit is due,” Ms Collard said.
“Farmers know why we need to reduce emissions – this year’s bushfires remind us that climate change is hurting farmers now.
“We warmly welcome this scheme because it gives farmers choice. If a farmer wants to choose a hydrogen, hybrid or electric powered machinery, the farmer can choose to take a low-interest loan to get it. As the technology proves itself, other farmers can also choose low emissions machinery if they wish.
“Australia’s farmers have a tradition of clean, green farming, and we want to continue that tradition so our kids can farm forever.”
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Regular readers may have noticed that I try and stay out of the Middle East…
In a move that’s barely registering in Australian media, President Trump has publicly dismissed U.S.…
President Trump has dismissed claims that his early departure from the G7 summit was a…
By Denis Hay Description Who does government really serve? Do they work for you,…
Environment Centre NT Media Release The Environment Centre Northern Territory is alarmed that the Finocchiaro…
It’s official. If not, it ought to be. Israeli forces freely butcher Palestinians in Gaza…
View Comments
Farmers, who suspect they are not being given the full story as to the way farming is lead, might like to learn about the dirty tactics being used in the renewable energy space before signing up for more loans.
Farmer-activist Wade Northausen (Billboard Battalion) is on top of the facts.
It's alright, Carmen - offshore wind farms do not endanger whales.
leefe - deep water floating wind turbines, future theme parks for intrepid scuba divers? One good cyclone will probably reduce the Newcastle installation to a tangle of cables and shredded blades. I have trouble finding a good functional example of a floating wind farm in deep water (140m - 1000m). Maybe our genius political class has turned a corner and are backing a winner for a change.
Keep reading the propaganda rather than the actual peer-reviewed, scientific and engineering literature if you must, but please stop trying to ram it down rational people's throats. Wasted effort, for one thing.
I read a lot of scientific papers @ ScienceDirect, PubMed, NIH etc. The current state of floating turbines, as a business opportunity, was described in the same glowing terms as Carbon Capture Storage, ie, it's impractical and costly. Lucky the govt is going to subsidize the suppliers. Another white elephant for taxpayers.
Carman:
Yes, a lot RWNJ propaganda. All those sites are well known for their inaccuracy, lack of peer-review and just plain bullshit.
There are heaps of offshore windfarms already; they are known, achievable, viable financially and technically on the proposed sites, and far more environmentally sustainable than coal, gas, petroleum or nuclear.
(Also, for the record, 140m is out of reach of any but serious technical divers on trimix rebreathers. 1000m isn't even thinkable without submersibles. There's no scuba playground at those depths.)