So what's your role in all this?

I'm the Business Development Manager for our Climate Neutral team. I sell contracts to the companies that choose to become carbon neutral. I am responsible for the sale of the certificates, predominantly in Western Europe. 
 
Are there a lot of companies voluntarily buying certificates? Why would they do that?

There is no compliance driver on the voluntary market, it is purely companies that wish to become carbon neutral for ethical or reputation reasons. For instance, most airlines will give their customers the option of paying a little bit extra to offset the carbon emissions from their trip, and they will then go on to buy certificates from us according to how many people chose those options. A lot of the financial institutions have become carbon neutral as well actually. Our clients include financial, media, retail and services companies. The football [soccer] World Cup in Germany in 2006 was a carbon neutral event, and we provided certificates for that. A lot of multinational companies have decided to go carbon neutral voluntarily, to demonstrate leadership in their sustainability program, for reputation reasons, and because they recognise the need to respond to the global warming challenge. They know carbon management is part of their future, and they have begun to proactively manage it.

What's the emissions threshold that requires companies to meet compulsory emission standards and what sort of companies do these tend to be?

In the compliance market, each site is given an individual threshold of carbon emissions per year. These are likely to be energy generation companies, manufacturers, chemical and cement producers. These companies are required to do an annual reconciliation of their emissions, and if their emissions are over their allowance, or they are short certificates, they have to buy them from the government, at a significantly higher price, so the incentive is to comply.

What do you think of the reluctance of the United States' Federal Government to place a cap on emissions?

Ahhh, well [laughs].

Ok, sorry, possibly an unfair question, let me ask a different one: do you believe business in Europe has completely accepted the controls and extra expense associated with an Emission Trading Scheme?

There is an increasing acceptance in Europe there is a problem that has to be addressed. Certainly there has been a huge amount of political pain generated, but companies are increasingly coming to terms with the fact there is no choice but to find different ways of running the economy. I think the same thing is happening in the US to an extent, but the difference in Europe is there was no one saying 'we can't and we won't do this'. That line was driven in the United States because of the position of the White House. Now that's about to change I think America will catch up very quickly. Both presidential candidates support an Emission Trading Scheme. The other thing worth mentioning is, while there has been some disruption (in the way the economy runs), there is a whole new economy being created around this, and that has created significant opportunities in green energy and technology, and has driven some strong efficiency gains.

What volume of carbon contracts are you working with?

In the voluntary market alone we sold 1.2M tonnes last year. The value of that varies because the certificate values vary based on the nature of the project. In terms of our expected growth, we sold 1.2m tonnes last year, I expect we'll do double that this year.

So now Australia is a signatory to Kyoto, I guess the next step is implementing a scheme like the one used in Europe?

Yes, the Australian Government is currently in the process of designing an Emissions Trading Scheme, that will probably be something pretty similar to what has been done in Europe. They will announce how that will work later this year. 

Have we learned from the mistakes made during the implementation of the European scheme?

It has certainly been ironed out in Europe, that is, the problem related to the allocation of credits. The scheme was first run as a trial period for a couple in years in Europe, and in that phase an over-allocation of emission allowances was made. When companies realised they were not under pressure to reduce their emissions, the price of carbon dropped dramatically. The new period started in 2008 and the allocation problem was avoided based on experience gained in the trial phase.

How did you find yourself working in France for a carbon asset management firm?

I started with Climate First fairly recently although the company has been in existence for the past 10 years. Previously I was an environmental consultant for 20 years with a global environmental consulting firm, working on environmental strategy and sustainability. I was keen to become involved in the climate change given the challenge it represents, and the also the opportunity it provides. I've been in France for seven years, and I’m pretty well dug in here. It’s a good place to work from.

Do you have plans to live in Australia again?

Let's just say I am interested in following where Australia goes with this. In my current role I am starting discussions with people down there now… we're talking to some asset managers like us, some government contacts we have in Australia, and some of the large companies about doing the same sort of things we are doing in Europe, and looking to benefit from European experience to help make it work in Australia.