While not gaining much coverage in Australia, the fallout from the leaked emails detailing some questionable approaches to science by leading climate change scientists in the UK and the USA continues to attract comment and attention. View the rest of the post here

The New Zealand Parlaiment has narrowly passed legislation that will establish an emissions trading scheme in that country from mid 2010, with direct agricultural emissions covered under the scheme from 2015, although the proportion of emissions farmers will initially have to buy permits for will be quite small. View the rest of the post here

The leaking of a large collection of email correspondence between some of the leading scientists supporting the concept of human-influenced climate change has provoked a storm of debate, and has highlighted that scientists are only human. They have egos, ambitions and predjudices just like everyone else. What it also highlights, however, is the need for appropriate checks and balances in the management and administration of publicly-funded scientific agencies. View the rest of the post here

The 'deal' agreed (thus far) between the Government and the Coalition on the CPRS legislation appears to be a significant improvement on earlier proposals and will provide agriculture with some avenues to offset higher input costs, but the exclusion of the sector from CPRS coverage is by no means permanent or guaranteed after 2015, and will require agriculture to demonstrate some real progress in reducing emissions. View the rest of the post here

NZ Climate Change Minister Nick Smith fronted up to the NZ Federated Farmers meeting yesterday to explain why agriculture would remain in the NZ ETS, despite indications that agriculture may be excluded from the Australian CPRS. View the rest of the post here

The US Senate has apparently decided to delay consideration of Climate Change legislation until the spring of 2010, meaning that the US will not have any climate legislation in place before the UN Copenhagen climate conference, and creating doubt about whether there will be any legislation in place in the US for some considerable time, due to political concerns associated with forthcoming mid-term elections in the US in 2010. View the rest of the post here

Media commentary on the role of agriculture in the CPRS reveals considerable misunderstanding of the implications of Kyoto Protocol emission accounting rules to efforts by farmers to receive credit for carbon sequestration in agricultural soil. Adding to the complexity of this issue, a commentator has pointed out that, if the Australian Government were to recognise soil 'credits', it would have the potential to significantly reduce future Government revenue from the sale of emission permits. View the rest of the post here

New Zealand Climate Change Minister Nick Smith is reported to have stated that agricultural emissions will be included in the New Zealand emissions trading scheme, despite indications from the Australian government that agricultural emissions may be excluded from the Australian scheme. View the rest of the post here

The Climate Change Minister Senator Penny Wong has announced an offer to the Opposition to exclude agriculture from coverage under the CPRS, although there have not been any specific details of the offer made available, and the issue of agricultural offsets or imposing costs on agricultural emissions by other mechanisms has also not been clarified. View the rest of the post here

There are many involved in US agriculture who remain quite nervous about the potential impacts of proposed US Climate legislation on the farm sector. This is despite the relatively generous treatment proposed for the sector, which would mean no liabilities for direct farm emissions, and a broad suite of offset opportunities that could generate extra farm revenue. View the rest of the post here