Climate Change Related Disclosure Report

NZX AND MEDIA RELEASE
18 November 2024

Napier Port publishes fourth Climate Change Related
Disclosure Report


Napier Port (NZX.NPH) today publishes its fourth annual Climate Change Related Disclosure Report,
seeking to provide stakeholders with an understanding of the potential financial implications of climate
change on the business.

The previous three years’ reports were primarily based on the recommendations of the TCFD
framework. The focus of this fourth report is to adhere to the new New Zealand Climate Standards (NZ
CS) framework.

Napier Port has been measuring Scope 1, 2 and limited Scope 3 emissions for several years which
have been reported in the Annual Report and on the Napier Port website. Since 2022 reported
emissions have been externally certified by Toitū Envirocare.

Our emissions audit certification and our Sustainability Strategy and Climate Change Related Disclosure
Reports are available at: www.napierport.co.nz/investor-centre/.


For more information:

Investors Media
Kristen Lie Jo-Ann Young
Chief Financial Officer Corporate Affairs Manager
DDI: +64 6 833 4405 DDI: +64 6 833 4521
E: kristenl@napierport.co.nz E: jo-anny@napierport.co.nz

About Napier Port
Napier Port is the gateway for Hawke’s Bay and lower North Island’s exports and operates a long-term
infrastructure asset that supports the regional economy. We service containers, bulk cargo, and host a
significant number of cruise ship visits. Our strategic purpose is to collaborate with the people and
organisations that have a stake in helping our region grow. View Napier Port’s investor centre:
https://www.napierport.co.nz/investor-centre/

---

This report is prepared in compliance
with the Aotearoa New Zealand Climate
Standards (NZ CS) 1- Climate Related
Disclosures, 2 - Adoption of Aotearoa
New Zealand Climate Standards, and 3 -
General Requirements for Climate-related
Disclosures.
The New Zealand External Reporting Board
(XRB) in December 2022 issued the NZ
CS, which are effective for reporting periods
commencing on or after 1 January 2023.
These new mandatory climate standards
are based on the Taskforce on Climate-
Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)
framework which this report also adheres
to. Napier Port has not applied any of the
adoption provisions that are permitted under
NZ CS 2.
Introduction
This is the fourth climate change related
disclosure report produced by Napier Port
Holdings Limited (Napier Port) which seeks
to provide stakeholders an understanding of
the potential financial implications of climate
change on its business. The previous three
years’ reports were primarily based on the
recommendations of the TCFD.
The focus of the fourth report is to comply
with the new NZ CS framework and to
incorporate, where relevant, updates to its
Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA)
report.
Napier Port’s sustainability journey is one
of continuous improvement and the people
of Napier Port are committed to improving
its environmental, social and economic
performance by identifying and managing
risks and finding opportunities to use our
resources more efficiently.
Napier Port expects to further develop and
improve its climate change related disclosures
as we gather more information and knowledge
and continue to deliver against our publicly
disclosed sustainability strategy.
+
Governance
p4.
+
Risk
Management
p6.
+
Strategy
p8.
+
Metrics and
Targets
p18.
DISCLAIMER: Quantifications in this report of financial
impacts of climate change are estimates and are not intended
to constitute earnings guidance. No representation is made
as to their accuracy, completeness or reliability. These risks
and opportunities may not eventuate and, if they do, the actual
impact may differ materially from these estimates. Other
material risks and opportunities may exist or eventuate that
are not included within this report
3
2
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT

The Napier Port Board of Directors are ultimately responsible
for identifying the principal risks faced by Napier Port and taking
reasonable steps to ensure that appropriate internal controls and
monitoring systems are in place to manage and, to the extent
reasonably possible, reduce the impact of these risks, including
material climate-related risks. The Board reviews Napier Port’s
Risk Management Policy annually.
The Audit and Risk Management Committee supports the Board
in this function by ensuring that management is implementing
Napier Port’s overall risk management framework and policy
and monitoring corporate risk assessments and ensuring that
risk controls are implemented. The Audit and Risk Management
Committee reviews Napier Port’s overall risk management
framework on a six-monthly basis and the Committee
proceedings are reported back to the Board.
The Sustainability Committee reviews annually a separate
Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA) inclusive of a climate-
related risk register specifically for the management of climate-
related risks and opportunities. This is part of the Sustainability
Committee’s wider role to identify and consider relevant
environmental, social and governance (ESG) matters to provide
strategic guidance and feedback to the Board and management
on Napier Port’s ESG related strategies, policies, frameworks,
initiatives, performance and reporting.
The Sustainability Committee meets at least two times per
year to review progress on the implementation of Napier Port’s
Sustainability Strategy, the assessment of climate-related risks
and opportunities documented within the CCRA, and progress
and achievements against climate-related metrics. The Committee
proceedings are reported back to the Board.
The Board maintains a director skills matrix, which includes a
specific category for sustainability expertise. The skills matrix is
an important recruitment consideration when a new director is
being considered to join the Board. The Corporate Governance
Statement found within the Annual Report shows the Director
skills matrix and the attendance at Sustainability Committee
meetings.
As climate-related issues, including the new Aotearoa New
Zealand Climate Standards, are rapidly evolving, directors are
continuing to develop their knowledge, including by attending
courses and presentations.
The Chief Executive and Senior Management Team are
responsible for ensuring that risks to the business, including
climate-related risks and opportunities, are identified and
evaluated, effective responses and control activities developed,
and appropriate monitoring and timely re-evaluation conducted in
accordance with Napier Port’s Risk Management Policy.
The General Manager – Assets and Infrastructure has overall
responsibility for the development and implementation of the
sustainability strategy, including the assessment of climate-
related risks and opportunities and reports on progress to the
Sustainability Committee.
Board and management utilise external advice and expertise for
climate-related issues where appropriate.
Remuneration policies for the CEO and Senior Management Team
are outlined in the Governance Statement in the Annual Report,
and for the CEO and certain executives includes remuneration
linked to the achievement of sustainability strategy related
objectives.
The different levels of responsibilities and the supporting Risk
Management Policy that governs the management of climate-
related risks at Napier Port are illustrated in Figure 1.
+
Governance
NZ CS Requirements:
+
Describe the board’s oversight of climate-related risks and opportunities
+
Describe management’s role in assessing and managing climate-related
risks and opportunities
S1
RISK MANAGEMENT POLICY
• Provides the overarching framework for identifying, assessing,
managing and monitoring risk at Napier Port, including climate-
related risks.
• Objectives of the policy include ensuring that Napier Port
operates in a sustainable manner and protects the Port
environment in accordance with its sustainability strategy.
SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
• Makes recommendations and reports to the Board on material ESG
matters requiring governance decisions.
• Ensures the integration of ESG considerations into business planning
and strategy, risk management, key policies, processes and culture.
• Oversees the development of Napier Port’s ESG sustainability
strategy and workplan.
• Monitors progress against the goals and actions included in Napier
Port’s sustainability strategy.
• Responsible for ESG related aspects of climate change and
related physical risks within context of qualitative or quantitative
assessments to measure or understand the potential impacts
of climate change e.g. undertaking annual Climate Change Risk
Assessments.
• Ensures an appropriate framework is maintained for the
management of ESG risks, including climate-related risks and
opportunities.
• Reviews and monitors ESG related risk assessments and the
effectiveness of the related risk management processes.
• Oversees and reviews ESG reporting processes, including relevant
internal controls and external review and audit processes.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND SENIOR MANAGEMENT TEAM
• The Chief Executive and Senior Management Team
are responsible for ensuring that risks to the business,
including climate-related risks, are identified and
evaluated, effective responses and control activities
developed, and appropriate monitoring and timely
re-evaluation conducted, in accordance with Napier
Port’s Risk Management Policy.
• The Chief Financial Officer, working with senior management, updates
Napier Port’s overall risk management framework and reports to the
Audit and Risk Management Committee on a six-monthly basis.
• The General Manager – Assets and Infrastructure has overall
responsibility for the development and implementation of the
sustainability strategy, including assessment of climate-related risks,
and reports on progress to the Sustainability Committee.
KEY STAFF TASKED WITH RISK MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
(FROM INFRASTRUCTURE, FINANCE AND OPERATIONS TEAM)
• Provide support with identifying, monitoring and assessing
climate change risks and ensuring appropriate management
actions are taken in relation to them.
• Responsible for maintaining the safety, performance and
capability of Napier Port’s infrastructure assets and plant and
equipment over their projected economic lives.
• Maintain long term asset management plans.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
• The Board is ultimately responsible for identifying the principal
risks faced by Napier Port and taking reasonable steps designed
to ensure that appropriate internal controls and monitoring
systems are in place to manage and, to the extent possible,
reduce the impact of these risks, including material climate-
related risks.
• The Board receives reports and recommendations from, and
has access to management reports provided to, the Audit and
Risk Management Committee, in relation to Napier Port’s overall
risk management framework, and reviews the Risk Management
Policy annually.
• The Board is also responsible for setting the strategic direction
of Napier Port. This includes ensuring that the environmental,
social and governance (ESG) risks and opportunities in Napier
Port’s sustainability strategy, including climate-related risks and
opportunities, are integrated into the Group’s long-term strategy
and investment decision making.
• The Board receives reports and recommendations from and has
access to management reports provided to the Sustainability
Committee, and reviews the Sustainability Committee Charter
annually.
Figure 1. Governance of climate-related risks at Napier Port
AUDIT AND RISK
MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
• Ensures that management is implementing
Napier Port’s overall risk management
framework and policy.
• Monitors corporate risk assessments and
internal controls implemented.
• Reports to the Board whether Napier Port’s
overall risk management framework and
processes are sufficient.
• Responsible for overseeing the assessment
and assignment of financial and economic
impacts within disclosures related to the
expected physical and transitional impacts of
climate change as identified through Climate
Change Risk Assessments or similar exercises.
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
5
4

+
Risk
Management
NZ CS Requirements:
+
Describe the organisation’s processes for identifying and assessing
climate-related risks (for both transition risks and physical risks)
+
Describe the organisation’s processes for managing climate-related risks
+
Describe how processes for identifying, assessing and managing
climate-related risks are integrated into the organisation’s overall risk
management
Therefore, a move to SSPs from RCPs is considered an
evolutionary step given SSPs provide the most up to date climate
change information and data for future climate scenarios.
For the IPCC global scale modelling to be useful for Napier Port’s
CCRA process the results need to be downscaled to a Hawke’s
Bay regional level. The partially available regional downscaling of
the IPCC’s AR6 has been utilised, however, at the time of writing
this FY2024 report, not all downscaling information had been
released. Regionally downscaled data not included in FY2024 is
expected to be incorporated into future reports once available.
However, for risks and hazards associated with sea level rise and
tropical cyclone intensity, relevant information from the IPCC AR6
has been downscaled to local levels and has been utilised by
Napier Port.
Interim guidance from the Ministry for the Environment (MfE)
recommends using existing data that has been based on
modelling from the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment Report with
reasonable confidence, until newer data becomes available for
areas where IPCC’s AR6 findings have not yet been downscaled
5
.
The use of the 2020 NIWA report and the RCPs scenarios was
central to modelling future climate change projections and
impacts in our early Climate Change Related Disclosure Reports
and is still relevant in this year’s report where regional downscaled
data from the IPCC’s AR6 is not available.
The use of IPCC AR6 data saw the introduction of three SSP
scenarios for the climatic effects of sea level rise, temperature
increase, and tropical cyclone.
In addition to these SSP scenarios, and while we await the
release of regionally downscaled IPCC AR6 data, our CCRA
process continues to consider the following RCPs for some
climate-related risks:
• RCP4.5 is a ‘stabilisation’ pathway that stabilises radiative forcing at
4.5W m-2 in the year 2100 without ever exceeding that value.
• RCP8.5 represents continuing high global emissions without effective
mitigation, which will lead to high greenhouse gas emissions (a high-
end pathway).
The reason for choosing these two scenarios was to present a
‘high-end’ scenario if atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations
continue to rise at high rates (RCP8.5) and a scenario which could
be realistic if moderate global action is taken towards mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions (RCP4.5).
Where regional downscaling has been completed, our climate-
related risk assessment process now considers three SSP
scenarios identified as plausible outcomes.
• SSP1-1.9 is the ‘sustainable’ pathway (where global warming is limited to
1.5 degrees by 2100),
• SSP2-4.5 is the ‘middle of the road’ pathway (where socio-economic
factors follow their trends, with no significant change in reducing
current temperature rise projections)
• SSP5-8.5 represents ‘the highway’ pathway (effectively the worst case
scenario where the world economy grows rapidly, but this growth is
driven by fossil fuel exploitation and very energy intensive lifestyles).
These three scenarios were chosen to align with NZ CS, which
requires three scenarios to be analysed:
• one where global temperature increase is limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius
(with an emissions pathway aligned to SSP1-1.9),
• another where the temperature is 3 degrees Celsius or greater (aligned
to SSP5-8.5)
• a third scenario of the reporting company’s choice. Napier Port has
chosen a scenario which looks to limit global temperature increases to
a range between 2.1 and 3.5 degrees Celsius (aligned to SSP2-4.5). The
reason for choosing this pathway is that SSP2-4.5 has been recognised
by members of the climate science community as a most likely pathway
to eventuate out of the five SSPs
6
.
For climate-related risk management, we believe a medium to
long-term horizon is appropriate. This time frame is aligned with
the economic lives of our infrastructure assets and Napier Port’s
asset management plan. As a result, we have used the following
timeframes to assess the likelihood of climate-related risks and
opportunities occurring under each scenario: Short-term 0-20
years (using RCP & SSP scenarios up until 2040); Medium-
term 20-70 years (using RCP scenarios up until 2090 and SSP
scenarios up until 2070); and Long-term 70 plus years (using SSP
scenarios up until 2100).
In accordance with Napier Port’s Risk Management Policy, we
assess the significance of each identified climate-related risk
using a likelihood and consequence matrix. The climate-related
risk register assesses the likelihood of risks occurring during
the short-term, medium-term and long-term timeframes outlined
above, to recognise the longer-term nature of climate-related
risks. This varies from the overall risk management framework
which assesses the likelihood of a risk occurring based on
whether it is probable to occur within the next 12 months. For
both, the consequence of the identified risk is assessed based on
the potential level of impact on our people, assets/infrastructure,
operations and systems, environment, reputation and financial
planning. Based on the likelihood and consequence, levels of risk
are categorised as either very high, high, moderate or low. This
allows us to determine the appropriate response for each issue
identified. Climate-related risks and opportunities are assessed
annually to ensure they continue to reflect material changes in our
knowledge, business strategy, and operating environment.
Napier Port’s CCRA includes parts of its value chain outside
the operational control of its business. This includes climate
change impacts affecting our key local growers and upstream
transportation links. However, there are parts of the value chain
that are excluded on the basis of immateriality and/or data
collection complexity. For further value chain inclusion and
exclusion please refer to the Scope 3 tables found in the metrics
and targets section of the report.
During the 2024 financial year, using the process described
above, we updated our Climate Change Risk Assessment
– looking at infrastructure resilience, trade forecasting, land
levels, weather conditions, emergency preparedness and habitat
modification. The current assessment has identified 71 climate-
related physical and transition risks and 24 opportunities. An
overview of the top physical and transition impacts is contained in
our strategy disclosures section.
S2
Our climate-related risk management spans
50 years, aligning with asset management and
scenario-based likelihood of risk occurring.
Napier Port’s Risk Management Policy provides the overarching
framework for identifying, assessing, managing and monitoring
risk at Napier Port, including climate-related risks and
opportunities. Each Napier Port business unit is responsible for
establishing and maintaining risk documentation to monitor and
report risks that threaten achievement of business objectives.
The Chief Executive and Senior Management Team are
responsible for ensuring that risks to the business are identified
and evaluated, that effective responses and control activities are
developed, and appropriate monitoring and timely re-evaluation
is conducted. The Chief Financial Officer, working with senior
management, updates the Napier Port enterprise risk register,
drawing on business units’ documentation, and reports this
register to the Audit and Risk Management Committee at least on
a six-monthly basis.
An output of the CCRA process is a climate-related risk register
specifically for the management of climate-related risks and
opportunities. Napier Port has also benchmarked against
recommendations of the NZ CS and the TCFD for identifying and
assessing climate-related risks.
Napier Port’s Assets & Infrastructure team which includes
environmental & sustainability subject matter experts, supported
by others as required, are tasked with staying up-to-date with
the latest climate-related research, facilitating regular risk
assessments and performing detailed climate change analysis.
The Board and Management of Napier Port are also continually
monitoring developments to existing and emerging regulatory
requirements related to climate change as part of their risk
assessment processes.
In November 2020, Envirolink, Gisborne District Council, and
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council collaborated to commission
a review of climate change projections and their impacts on
the Tairawhiti (Gisborne) and Hawke’s Bay regions. This was
conducted by the National Institute of Water and Atmospheric
Research (NIWA)
1
and is used as the basis for the scenario
analysis contained within our Financial Year 2021 (FY2021) and
FY2022 reports. For our FY2023 and FY2024 reports, Napier
Port has drawn upon the findings of previous reports and data
sources and has also incorporated data from various additional
sources, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC), to determine potential shifts in sea levels, wind
patterns, temperatures, and extreme weather events. These data
inputs enable us to analyse a range of potential future scenarios
and assess how they may affect Napier Port’s assets, operations,
financial plans, and business model.
Future climate projections strongly depend on estimates for
future global mean temperature rise resulting from greenhouse
gas concentrations. In turn, those concentrations depend on
global greenhouse gas emissions that are driven by factors such
as economic activity, population changes, technological advances
and policies for mitigation and sustainable resource use. This
range of uncertainty has been considered by the IPCC. The IPCC
Fifth Assessment Report considered ‘scenarios’ that describe
concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. These
scenarios were called Representative Concentration Pathways
(RCPs)
2
. The IPCC’s more recent Sixth Assessment Report
(IPCC AR6) provides updated future climate change findings
and projections. The IPCC AR6 refers to Shared Socioeconomic
Pathways (SSPs)
3
for future projected socioeconomic global
changes used to derive greenhouse gas emissions scenarios
based on different climate policies.
Differences between RCP findings and projections from SSPs
stem from using improved models as well as a more precise
estimate of historical warming
4
. While the scenarios represent
the same amount of radiative forcing (i.e. RCP4.5 and SSP2-4.5
both represent 4.5Wm-2 radiative forcing), the emissions pathway
and socio-economic drivers to achieve this were revised, and
predictions generally show higher levels of warming associated
with SSP’s than RCP’s.
Timelines for warming have also changed; SSPs are focused
around “pre-industrial” times which refers to 1850-1900, which is in
line with the Paris Agreement. These pre-industrial levels are now
what temperature increases are based off rather than the period
between 1986-2005 as used in RCPs.
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
7
6

Our purpose is very clear: Together, we build a thriving region
by connecting you to the world. To achieve this outcome, four
long-term pillars form the basis of our strategy and guide our
business planning:
• Networked Infrastructure - connecting customers’ cargo to market
and enhancing end-to-end supply-chain solutions via an integrated
network of infrastructure assets, connecting the port with road, rail,
sea and warehousing across New Zealand.
• Connecting with our Customers - a close connection with our
customers enables us to know them, their businesses and the
environment they are operating in, so we can develop innovative
and efficient cargo solutions.
• Collaborative Partnerships - with others help us achieve a better
outcome than we would on our own. Forming and fostering strong
collaborative partnerships means we can deliver more for our
customers and region than we could on our own; and
• Harnessing data and technology - our innovative technology
delivers value to our business, our customers and others outside
the port gate enabling the smooth flow of information and the
optimisation of our operations and customers’ supply chain with
enhanced visibility.
+
Strategy
NZ CS requirements. An entity must disclose:
+
A description of its current climate-related impacts
+ A description of the scenario analysis it has undertaken
+
A description of its climate-related risks and opportunities it has
identified over the short, medium and long-term
+
A description of the anticipated impacts of climate-related risks and
opportunities
+
A description of how it will position itself as the global and domestic
economy transitions towards low emissions, climate resilient future state
These four strategy pillars are underpinned by our foundation, which
comprises:
• Culture of care - actively building a strong, resilient and agile workplace
culture with a focus on health and safety attracts and retains our high-
performing workforce; and
• Sustainability focus - enables us to create a positive legacy for future
generations by nurturing people, planet, prosperity and partnerships
actions.
A 10-year strategic roadmap is in place, and periodically this is
reviewed and refreshed. Annually, business planning is undertaken
which reviews strategic projects and allocates resource, targets,
and accountabilities. In doing so, all teams understand what the
business has prioritised year on year. This ensures alignment across
our team to achieve our stated goals and deliver stakeholder value.
Our business is exposed to climate-related risks outside our port
gate, including transport links and the impact of climate change on
our community and customers. We work collaboratively with relevant
territorial authorities and community groups, sharing information and
developing solutions, to deliver a more resilient business and region.
S3
Services
Provided
Container
operations
services
Warehousing
services
Landside
logistics
services
Marine
services
Bulk
cargo
services
People
We provide purposeful
and safe employment
and development
opportunities for our
people.
Financial
We provide
economic returns
to our financial
capital providers.
Economic
We enable
and enhance
our regional
economy, including
significant
industries,
businesses
and individual
operators.
Community
We enhance our
local community
by being a
good corporate
citizen, providing
employment
and supporting
community and
iwi initiatives.
Infrastructure
We maintain and add
to our infrastructure
for the benefit of
current and future
generations.
Environment
We support the
maintenance and
enhancement
of our marine
environment and
our environmental
stewardship and
impact.
How we Create Value
Networked
Infrastructure
Harnessing data
& technology
Sustainability
focus
Culture of
care
Connecting with
our customers
O
u
r

F
o
u
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
O
u
r

S
t
r
a
t
e
g
y

G
o
a
l
s
Collaborative
Partnerships
(Inputs)
Natural
environment
The marine
and natural
environment and
how we work
within it alongside
stakeholders and
our community is
fundamental to our
business.
Physical assets
Our assets and
infrastructure,
including port
land, wharves, sea
defences, dredged
shipping areas, marine
and heavy plant fleet,
and inland ports.
Relationships
Our strong
relationships with
stakeholders –
cargo owners,
shipping lines,
transport partners,
local community, iwi
– give us our social
licence to operate
and grow.
Skills and
knowledge
Our deep expertise
in port operations
and logistics,
and the creation
of technology
solutions for our
business and our
customers.
People
Our motivated and
engaged workforce,
who have pride
in their work
keeping the cargo
flowing across our
wharves.
Financial
Financial capital
provided by our
shareholders
and debt
funders.
The diagram below depicts Napier Port’s strategy and how we create value for all stakeholders.
Together, we build a thriving region
by connecting you to the world
Our
Purpose
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
9
8

Current physical climate impacts
Tropical Cyclone Gabrielle in February 2023 caused widespread
flooding and property damage to the Hawke’s Bay region.
Although the physical impact on Napier Port’s infrastructure was
not significant it was a reminder of the devastating impact severe
weather events can have and the potential consequential effects
arising from such events as flooding and infrastructure damage
outside the port gate resulted in decreased cargo being exported
from the region via our port. Such losses represent millions of
dollars of lost earnings for Napier Port.
1
Current transition climate impacts
As part of its asset management programme, Napier Port is
considering how it can utilise technological advancements and
alternative equipment choices to shift its fuel intensive heavy
equipment and marine fleet assets towards lower emission
and more energy efficient options. However, much of this
technology is still at an early development stage and therefore
functionally unproven and carries additional cost premiums
when compared with the traditional internal combustion engine
equivalent. For example, this year Napier Port placed an order
for five new Eco Reachstackers (container handling mobile
plant) and commissioned one more, each carry a capital cost
premium of approximately 15% over the price of the base model
Reachstacker. Napier Port will continue to consider a broad range
of objectives including the financial implications and its obligations
as a lifeline asset and significant regional infrastructure as it
considers pathways and the timeframes it adopts to transition its
mobile plant equipment and marine assets.
The impacts of severe weather events such as extreme rainfall
and tropical cyclones (like Cyclone Gabrielle) are having an
adverse impact on our insurance renewal programme for our
material damage and business interruption policies. As a result
of Cyclone Gabrielle trading losses incurred by Napier Port,
policy premiums and insurance capacity have been negatively
affected, however the direct financial impact on insurance is not
determinable.
Current impacts
of climate change
1
The amount of insurance proceeds to compensate for Napier Port’s lost
earnings as a result of Cyclone Gabrielle are disclosed in the 2023 and 2024
annual financial statements of Napier Port Holdings
Physical Risks
Climate change related effects result in several risks to Napier Port infrastructure, due to its coastal location and susceptibility to sea
level rise. All of our tangible assets are susceptible to physical risks today, including from acute weather and natural disaster events.
Climate change modelling indicates that higher temperatures will increase the likelihood of extreme weather events that may affect
operations and damage infrastructure and there will be ongoing impacts of sea-level rise, extreme rainfall, and intensifying tropical
cyclones which may cause coastal inundation, erosion and flooding. Napier Port’s breakwater and sea defence asset (our largest
infrastructure asset with a net book value of $157m in FY2024) is the most exposed to the impacts of climate change and accordingly
forms an important part of our assessment of future physical climate risks.
The physical impacts of climate change considered most material to Napier Port are described over the page:
Future impacts of
climate change
For Napier Port, a warmer world in 2100 consistent with the
RCP8.5 and the SSP5-8.5 scenario would result in potential
physical impacts on our infrastructure, create uncertainties as to
how our region would be affected and be required to adapt, and
what our business may look like as a result. The transition impacts
of climate change caused by strong climate action policy will also
create a mix of risks and opportunities for our business. We have
identified and assessed these risks and opportunities, undertaking
analysis of the potential impacts for our business.
The physical and transition risks included below are from Napier
Port’s CCRA (dated September 2024) and are rated very high, in
accordance with the risk management policy and specific climate-
related timeframes noted above. This assessment is based on
the likelihood of the risk occurring (likely or almost certain) and
consequence (greater than $5 million), in at least the RCP8.5
or SSP5-8.5 scenario in the medium to long-term. Under the
RCP4.5 (2 degrees or lower scenario) or SSP2-4.5 (3 degrees or
lower scenario), these risks are also present, although they would
manifest themselves at a later date.
From the analysis undertaken, at this stage, we do not consider
that the effects of climate change materially change our overall
strategy. Sustainability will continue to be embedded into our ways
of working as we continue to collaborate to look after people,
planet and place, including completing the actions contained in
our sustainability strategy.
The more financially material infrastructure improvement actions
are required over the medium to long-term to ensure that we
continue to have a resilient and agile infrastructure network.
Planning to address this is being embedded within our overall
infrastructure masterplan. In the short-term, we will continue to
complete more detailed investigations of climate-related effects
and ensure these are considered in Napier Port’s master planning
process.
To support our sustainability strategy action plan implementation
we include climate-change considerations within Napier Port’s
procurement processes and policies. This involves consideration
of alternative lower emission options related to plant and
equipment procurement and, in the case of more significant
investment business cases, emission scenario and financial
analysis including the consideration of shadow emission pricing.
Work in these two respective areas is ongoing.
Napier Port recognises that climate change is currently
impacting the way we operate in the following ways:
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
11
10

Risk Driver: Increase in Sea Level (RSLR)
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeMedium to Long-term
Financial Implications
Fortification of eastern boundary sea defences: $6-100 million
(depending on the extent of engineered structure)
Methodology
Potential financial impact is estimated capital expenditure required, based on current civil construction
costs in today’s money
Risk Mitigation
• Northern log yards may eventually need to be further developed to raise the level of pavement
• Ensure the western reclamation area is developed to levels to meet future mean sea levels due to
climate change
• Detailed investigation and potential design of sea defences to provide long-term protection in the
eastern beach area where a more substantial hard structure may be required in these areas and other
similar areas in the long term
Risk Driver: Extreme Rainfall Events
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeLong-term
Financial Implications$5-$10 million
Methodology
Potential financial impact is estimated capital expenditure required based on the installation of two
pumping stations and current civil construction costs in today’s money
Risk Mitigation
• Modelling of the stormwater system capacity under future scenarios
• Assess capacity of the outer breakwater drain under future scenarios and increased frequency of
drain cleaning
• Likely mitigation options could include additional drainage works or pumping stations
ii) Extreme rainfall events
Climate change is expected to result in an increase in the
frequency and intensity of extreme rainfall events. The NIWA
report notes that short duration rainfall events have the largest
relative increases compared with longer duration rainfall events.
Rainfall depths for 1-in-50 year and 1-in-100 year events are
projected to increase across the greenhouse gas concentration
scenarios and future time periods
10
.
Napier Port has seen minor issues with storm water management
in recent years due to extreme rainfall events that the systems
were not designed for. The storm water system will be further
compromised by sea level rise with more outlets likely to be
below sea level which impacts the system’s ability to discharge
effectively resulting in backing up of storm water. This is likely to
result in inundation if the extreme rainfall coincides with extreme
sea levels. Detailed modelling is to be completed to better
understand the system capacity both currently and under future
scenarios so appropriate plans can be put in place. Likely options
include additional drainage networks or pumping stations.
i) Increase in sea level
One of the major and most certain consequences of increasing
concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases and associated
warming is the rising sea level. SSP scenario modelling has
confirmed the pace of sea level rising is also accelerating.
Interim guidance on the use of sea level rise projections from the
Ministry for the Environment
7
recommends using data from the
NZSeaRise research programme, which uses SSP sea level data
on a localised scale across New Zealand. This is a shift away from
the RCP sea level rise based data used in the 2020 NIWA report.
These projections include not only sea level rise (SLR) (relative to
2005), but also vertical land movement (VLM), from satellite data,
at 2km spacing across all of NZ’s coastlines. By combining both
SLR and VLM, we can understand relative sea level rise (RSLR).
There are three sites in NZSeaRise within the Napier Port
footprint and these sites are reportedly subsiding at an average
rate of 3.01mm/year (2.93-3.14mm/year). When this rate of VLM
is combined with the various rates of SLR, dependent upon the
emissions scenario, overall RSLR is higher.
With sea levels continuing to rise, even under low emission
scenarios, there is high confidence in the increased frequency
and severity of coastal flooding
8
.
In respect of extreme coastal flooding, in the short term (2040),
there is no difference seen between different SSP pathways
and inundation risk remains manageable. However, projected
temporary inundation in a one in one-hundred-year event shows
the previously identified northern log yard areas experiencing
greater levels of inundation corresponding with escalating
temperature over time. This trend expands under all SSPs in 2070,
and eventually, in 2100 under all SSPs, coastal flooding projections
show a large portion of the Napier Port site could be potentially
impacted during a one in one-hundred-year event.
Furthermore, as sea levels rise, high-energy waves that strip
sediment can reach higher up the shoreline and cause erosion
9
.
Due to the nature of Napier Port, being built directly on the coast,
coastal erosion could cause loss of usable land area and damage
to existing infrastructure if not prepared for. Among the three
beach areas within the port boundaries, risk exposure is materially
present within the two easternmost stretches. Whilst these areas
undergo continuous natural movements due to wave action,
these areas serve as natural sea defences, safeguarding critical
structures and operational zones from potential inundation.
In FY2024, the establishment of a rock bag revetment structure
was commenced in the eastern beach area between the Plant
Services workshop and eastern Security hut providing protection
for infrastructure against coastal erosion. Climate-related risks
such an anticipated rise in RSLR, coupled with heightened
cyclone/rainfall intensity, are expected to increase erosion forces
in this area. In the long-term a more substantial hard structure
may be required in this and other similar areas to provide long-
term protection.
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
13
12

iii) Tropical Cyclones
Tropical cyclones are predicted to be more severe under all
temperature scenarios, yet there is still a large amount of
uncertainty on the changes in frequency of tropical cyclones
11
.
Potential damage caused by tropical cyclones can be quantified
using the power dissipation index (PDI), which considers
maximum sustained wind speeds, and the distance/time the
cyclone has travelled. Projections for future severity of cyclones
aligned with SSP findings show increases across all scenarios,
with the greatest increase in PDI seen in SSP5-8.5 (24%).
The implications of Cyclone Gabrielle provided insight into the
susceptibility of Napier Port’s breakwaters and sea defences to
damage. Anticipated synergies between relative sea level rise
and the amplification of cyclone PDI appear to forecast an uptick
in the magnitude of damage sustained per event. Such powerful
weather events have the potential to dislodge or displace the
armour units (akmons) that help protect the breakwater structure.
With a projected increase in cyclone PDI for storms arriving at
Napier, proactive maintenance through a program of continual
akmon renourishment is required, not only for dissipating wave
energy and upholding the structural integrity of the breakwater
itself, but also for the protection of the infrastructure sheltered
behind it.
Risk Driver: Increase Tropical Cyclones
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeMedium to Long-term
Financial Implications$10-$15 million
Methodology
Potential financial impact is estimated capital expenditure planned plus potential enhancements in the
medium term, based on current civil construction costs for shore protection in today’s money
Risk Mitigation
• The akmon unit “top-up” program is embedded within the Asset Management Plan and the post
cyclone breakwater reinstatement works are due to be completed during FY2025
Transition Impacts
The transition impacts of climate change caused by strong climate action policy are also a mix of risks and opportunities for our business.
Government regulation to encourage a shift to a low carbon economy (like the Aotearoa New Zealand Emission Reduction Plan) may
result in:
• increased fuel costs particularly for Napier Port’s mobile plant;
• requirements to invest in new technologies, equipment and supporting infrastructure to move away from diesel powered plant; and
• policies to increase the use of rail which may require additional infrastructure investment and changes to Napier Port’s operating model.
The transition impacts considered most material to Napier Port are:
Risk Driver: Government Regulation to Encourage a Shift to a Low Carbon Economy Resulting in Higher Fuel Costs
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodModerate risk in short term. Almost certain in medium to long term
TimeframeShort to Medium term
Financial ImplicationsUnknown impact and timing
Risk Mitigation
• Ensure fuel price escalation risk is considered in forecasting
• Implementation of sustainability strategy actions to reduce dependence
upon and quantities consumed of diesel fuel
ii) Government Regulation to Encourage Shift to
Alternative Fuels
Combined with the above it is highly likely there will be
government policy to either ban, limit the procurement of, or
otherwise disincentivise the use of, internal combustion engine
powered machines and encourage a shift towards machines
powered by renewable and low emission energies (e.g. electricity,
hydrogen). It is expected that import restrictions will precede any
outright ban of diesel equipment, which will provide some time to
adapt.
Napier Port is expected to transition in a planned orderly way
with emission reduction pathways under development as part of
the wider sustainability strategy and through targeted emission
reduction plans. The transition triggers are likely to be a mix of
fuel and other price pressures, investment cycles, the availability
of alternative energy equipment able to deliver comparable
operational capability and resilience.
The development of the required infrastructure is expected
to occur over a longer period and require additional capital
investment.
Our Electrical Master Plan outlines a pathway to meet future
electrical demand. There are, however, numerous policy risks
which may affect the electrification programme:
• A ban on the importation of diesel equipment within a short timeframe
may result in the need to accelerate infrastructure investment,
uneconomically extending the lifetime of existing plant or affecting
expansion aspirations;
• An early ban in the importation of diesel equipment may result in
effective and reliable alternative low emission options not being readily
available;
• Policy that results in dramatic increase in fuel price may result in earlier
than expected move to an electric fleet. If electrical infrastructure is
not available, continued use of internal combustion engine powered
equipment may result in higher than desired operating costs.
i) Government Regulation to Encourage a Shift to a Low Carbon Economy Resulting in Higher Fuel Costs
Government policy may increase emissions taxes on fuel by greater amounts to encourage the significant reduction in emissions
required to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. This will likely increase diesel fuel costs and operating costs for Napier Port which is
currently reliant on diesel fuel to power tugs, mobile harbour cranes, and container handling equipment. By way of illustration using
FY2024 data, a $0.20 per litre increase in the cost of diesel would increase operating costs by approximately $0.5 million per annum.
The higher fuel costs may encourage the shift to alternative fuels throughout the region which may ultimately reduce the fuel imported
through Napier Port and the revenue that this generates.
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
15
14

Risk Driver: Government Regulation to Encourage Shift to Alternative Fuels
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeMedium to Long-term
Financial Implications
Unknown impact and timing. The FY2024 net book value of diesel powered machinery held by Napier
Port is $52m
Risk Mitigation
• Consider flexibility in electrical infrastructure development as part of the Electrical Master Plan
• Consider future fuel cost risk and other ESG matters in equipment purchasing and investment
business cases
• Consider equipment that can be retro-fitted in investment decision making process
• Regularly assess the remaining life and residual value of key equipment because of climate-
related changes
iii) Rail
Rail transport typically has significantly lower emissions per tonne
compared to road freight, and provides other benefits, in particular
reducing the number of trucks on New Zealand’s roads. In the
short-term, a lack of national and regional rail infrastructure is and
will remain a major hindrance to a significant step change in the
use of rail. In the medium term, it is likely that road transport will
continue or accelerate the adoption of green energy technology
to reduce their emissions.
In the long-term (70+ years), it is expected that New Zealand’s
rail network will be effectively emission free, running on alternative
fuels such as hydrogen for long haul routes or potentially a fully
electrified network, which may result in a significant uptake of rail.
A significant increase in cargo transported by rail would require
changes in Napier Port’s operational layout and associated
infrastructure investment.
Risk Driver: Government Regulation to Encourage Increased Use of Rail
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeLong-term
Financial Implications$10-$15 million
MethodologyPotential financial impact is a high-level estimate of capital expenditure required, in today’s money
Risk Mitigation
• Changes to Napier Port’s operational layout in line with existing provisions in the Master Plan to
increase our on-port rail infrastructure
• Further consideration of climate change related effects will be included in Napier Port’s master
planning process
iv) Commercial Impacts
Whilst the extent of potential impacts are not conclusive,
available data suggests climate change may negatively affect
Hawke’s Bay’s primary industry with potential for crop production
disruption, heightened pest and disease spread, and destabilised
growing conditions. Forestry, agriculture and horticulture are all
significant primary industries within the Hawke’s Bay region, and
Napier Port plays an important role within these industries, by
connecting suppliers with international customers. These sectors
are vulnerable to the impacts of climate change (i.e. potential
increases in rainfall intensity, mean temperatures and drought
severity) while changes in production may not directly affect
Napier Port, there is a significant indirect risk to revenue should
these industries suffer from the effects of a changing climate.
Drought, in particular, has been highlighted as one of the key risks
for Hawke’s Bay, with some of the largest increases to the annual
number of days of soil moisture deficit compared to other parts
of the country
12
. The largest impact is expected to be in the meat
industry with increased drought frequency resulting in changes to
pasture composition. Increased droughts coupled with occasional
heavy rainfall could have major adverse effects on soil stability.
The meat industry is a significant exporter through Napier Port
and drought therefore poses a risk to revenue in the medium term
and almost certainly in the long term. Other industries such as
horticulture and forestry are in a better position to manage the
risk of drought through various practices, although horticulture will
have an increased reliance on water security.
Risk Driver: Drought
ScaleHigh to Very High
LikelihoodAlmost certain
TimeframeMedium to Long-term
Financial Implications
$15-$20 million
Trade loss exposure estimated as 15%-25% of annual (TEU) exports
Methodology
Potential financial impact is an estimate of the annualised impact on trade volume in today’s dollars
assuming a complete loss of current refrigerated container trades without replacement by other
substitute produce
Risk Mitigation
• Napier Port has limited direct control in managing this risk. Napier Port will keep an active interest
in potential impacts and how that might change export volumes, shipping patterns and changes in
exports through the regular master planning process
Transition Opportunities
Addressing climate change potentially offers various chances for growth and improvement. These include the opportunity for Napier
Port to become more resource-efficient, using cleaner energy sources, creating innovative service offerings, and enhancing supply chain
resilience.
Opportunities may include a reduction in recurring expenses over the long term or additional revenue streams from requirements for
ships to use shore power while in port and opportunities to partner in the supply chain to provide low carbon or zero emission solutions
for customers.
Additionally, climate change might create new opportunities as crops dynamically shift, allowing the horticulture sector to cultivate
new thermally resistant species and varieties. Napier Port considers that if climate change alters the primary sector, crop substitution
opportunities will become available.
Failure to consider transitional climate-related risks throughout
an asset’s lifecycle during procurement may lead to stranded
assets in the future whereby either the fuel required to operate
them is either unavailable or cost prohibitive or equipment
becomes technically obsolete and unserviceable. In particular,
key plant such as tugs and mobile harbour cranes have operating
lives of up to 30 years. To manage this transition risk, Napier
Port’s Procurement Policy requires consideration of ESG
factors alongside economic factors in significant expenditure
and procurement decisions. Additionally, our approach to asset
management ensures periodic reviews are undertaken to evaluate
aspects such as remaining useful life, and the residual value of
key assets potentially impacted by climate-related pressures
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
17
16

S4
www.napierport.co.nz/sustainability/Toitu-
Independent-Audit-Opinion-2024
The certification means we’ve measured and managed the
operational emissions of our organisation in accordance
with ISO 14064-1:2018 and the Greenhouse Gas Protocol:
A Corporate Accounting and Reporting Standard (2004).
Defining our (GHG) emissions inventory
We worked with an external consultant, BraveGen, to define our
GHG inventory scope to reflect best practice including identifying
a wider range of Scope 3 emissions. This expanded definition of
our GHG inventory has been used to determine and report our
emissions from FY2022. This provides a better understanding of
our emissions profile, identifies where opportunities for reductions
are, enables the setting of GHG targets and measures, and
reporting overall progress. The GHG emissions sources included
Under the GHG Protocol, these emissions are classified under the following categories:
Scope 1 – Direct GHG emissions occurring from sources that are owned or controlled by the company.
Scope 2 – Indirect GHG emissions occurring from the generation of purchased electricity, heat and steam consumed by the company.
Scope 3 – Emissions that occur because of the company’s activities, but from sources not owned or controlled by the company.
The emission sources in Table 1 have been included in the inventory, including the source, methodology and the level of uncertainty.
The primary source of emission factors for calculating emissions data is obtained from the Ministry for the Environment emissions
guidance (MfE, 2023). The latest relevant Ministry for the Environment emission guidance available at the beginning of each reporting
period has been used consistently for the entire reporting period.
Table 1
Scope
Emissions
Category
ActivityData Source
Data
Collection Unit
Methodology, Data Quality,
Uncertainty (Qualitative)
Scope 1
Mobile
Combustion
Diesel fuel for:
*Mobile plant (cranes,
forklifts & trucks)
*Floating plant (tugs
and pilot vessel)
*Vehicles
Invoice/Fuel records
from provider
Litres
Fuel based method. Accurate
records from billing system. Low
uncertainty.
Scope 2
Purchased
Electricity
Electricity
consumption
Invoice/Billing data
from supplier
kWh
Location based method. Sub
metering used for billing. High
quality data and low uncertainty
due to complete invoice sets.
Scope 3
Business Travel
International air travel
Domestic air travel
Air New Zealand
Emissions reports
TCO2e
High quality data and low
uncertainty due to accuracy of
reports provided by airline.
Upstream
transportation and
distribution
(Freight as a
Service)
Out of region cargo
coming into Napier
Port via rail and road
Monthly reports from
relevant departments
Tonne/Km
Manual process. Potential
to miss data. Medium to low
uncertainty.
Employee
Commuting
Emissions from the
use of personal
vehicles to commute
to and from work
Manual data
collection. Survey
completed by staff,
average distance is
from suburb using
GIS mapping
pkm
Higher level of uncertainty due
to calculation assumptions e.g.
an assumption has been made
that people are commuting 5
days per week (for all available
working days). For those that
have not completed the survey,
it is assumed 75% drive a petrol
car and 25% diesel. High/
medium uncertainty.
Purchased good
& services (Water
supply)
Water consumption
at all Napier Port
sites that operate
within organisational
boundary
Invoice data from
Napier City Council
K/litres
Assume all water usage use is
captured on invoices. Accurate
records from billing system. Low
uncertainty.
Fuel and energy
related activities
Transmission and
distribution losses
associated with
Scope 2
Invoice/Billing data
from supplier
kWh
Accurate records from billing
system. Sub metering used for
billing. Low uncertainty.
Waste generated
in operations
Emissions associated
with end-of-life waste
disposal to landfill.
Emissions associated
with waste sent to
recycling facilities
Monthly reports from
Waste Management
Tonnes
Assumed weights correct. Low
uncertainty.
+
Metrics and Targets
NZ CS Requirements. An entity must disclose:
+
The metrics that are relevant to all entities regardless of industry and
business model
+
Industry-based metrics relevant to its industry or business model
used to measure and manage climate-related risks and opportunities
+
Any other key performance indicators used to measure and manage
climate-related risks and opportunities; and
+
The targets used to manage climate-related risks and opportunities,
and performance against those targets.
in this inventory were identified with reference to the methodology
in the GHG Protocol and ISO 14064-1:2018 standards. We use
BraveGen’s GHG emissions inventory software to record and
report these emissions. With a robust emissions inventory in place
the same GHG emission sources were able to be reported on in
FY2023 and FY2024 and compared to our FY2022 base year.
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Methodology
Napier Port has been measuring its Scope 1, 2 and limited Scope 3 emissions for several years which have been reported in the Annual
Report and on the Napier Port website. During FY2021, we reviewed and redefined our GHG inventory to enable a better understanding
of our emissions profile. During FY2022, our focus was creating the baseline year, so we took this expanded GHG inventory and
collected the associated data to create a new base year for emissions reporting. Reported emissions for FY2022 included a wider range
of scope 3 emissions (including freight and employee commuting) and was externally certified by Toitu Envirocare. Reported emissions
for FY2023 and FY2024 have been collected and certified on the same basis as FY2022 (our baseline year). The FY2024 audit
certification can be found on our website at:
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
19
18

GHG Emissions Reporting
In FY2024, our total carbon emissions were 8,740 tCO2e, which was an increase of 0.3% from 8,712 tCO2e tonnes in FY2023.
This is shown in Figure 1 below.
Table 2
ScopeEmissions CategoryActivityReason for Exclusion
Scope 1
Fugitive Emissions
Refrigerant used by:
• Office buildings
• Vehicles
Estimated to be immaterial. Difficult to obtain data.
Scope 3
Purchased goods &
services
Any purchased goods and services
not identified within the inclusion
table
Emission sources difficult to obtain and possibly unreliable.
Capital goods
Capital goods purchased outside of
significant projects and purchases
Estimated to be immaterial. Difficult to estimate due to the
range of emission sources and lack of data.
Indirect GHG emissions
from products used by
an organisation
Emissions associated with major
construction projects
Estimates involved. Long supply chains. Medium to very
high uncertainty. No material activity.
One time capital goods
Estimated to be immaterial. Estimates involved. Long supply
chains. Medium to very high uncertainty.
Freight for goods purchased
Estimated to be immaterial. Manual process across multiple
departments. Medium uncertainty.
Indirect GHG emissions
from transportation
Fugitive emissions from refrigerant
leakage from containers
Estimated to be immaterial. Shipping lines own the
containers and are responsible for refrigerant maintenance.
Use of sold products
Visiting vessels fuel use while within
Port boundary
Unclear boundary and difficult and costly to calculate. No
immediate data available. High uncertainty.
Scope 3
Not deemed to be relevant to Napier Port
Upstream leased assets
Leased buildings and assets where
a port entity is a tenant (electricity,
fuel and gas) if not included in Scope
1 & 2
No data available/Not relevant
Downstream
transportation and
distribution
On road vehicles or rail delivering
cargo (outside Port boundary)
No data available/Not relevant
Processing of sold
products
Processing of wholesale products
sold in the reporting year by
downstream companies
No data available/Not relevant
End of life treatment of
sold products
Rendering wasteNo data available/Not relevant
FranchisesApplies to franchise operationsNo data available/Not relevant
Investments
Applies to financed emissions
and the downstream impacts of
investment and lending activities
No data available/Not relevant
Additional Scope 3 categories are not reported where they are not relevant to our business and/or not technically
feasible or cost effective to be quantified. The excluded Scope 3 categories are shown in Table 2 below:
Organisational boundaries were set with reference to the methodology described in the GHG Protocol and ISO14064-1:2018 standards.
Within the GHG Protocol, Napier Port has elected to use an operational control consolidation approach to account for emissions.
Accordingly, any joint venture partnership is excluded as there is no operational control.
Industry Based Metrics
Napier Port measures and reports total Tonnes of Carbon
Dioxide Equivalents (tCO2e) and tCO2e per tonne as our industry
based metrics as they are considered to be most relevant to
our business activity and the entire New Zealand port industry,
whether significant container operations exist or not.
Napier Port is a participant in the NZ Ports Environmental
and Sustainability Group (NZ Ports) which has a mandate to
investigate forming a common approach to measuring and
reporting on carbon emissions that would fairly represent
comparable industry climate-related risks and opportunities.
Specific guidance is also being considered for developing Scope
3 inventory guidelines, together with calculation tools tailored to
NZ Ports’ needs. This work is expected to be completed during
FY2025.
Napier Port is currently using an internal shadow emissions
price per tCO2e when undertaking emission scenario and
financial analysis when assessing procurement and business
case opportunities. The central base price used is aligned to the
central region carbon shadow price as developed by New Zealand
Treasury (FY2024: $100/tCO2e), however this may be varied
depending on the analysis being undertaken.
Capital Deployment
Napier Port undertakes long term planning including an
infrastructure master planning and financial models to capture its
current plans and forecasts. Financial forecasts incorporate future
climate related spending plans where identified and quantifiable,
and in the cases where future spend is considered probable
but not yet reasonably quantified, general capital provisions are
incorporated into forecasts and reviewed periodically.
To date, Napier Port has had limited expenditure directly and
solely related to climate-related risks and opportunities. It is
currently undertaking capital works to reinstate sections of its
sea defences that experienced some damage during Cyclone
Gabrielle in 2023 and to deploy rock bag protection to its eastern
beach area to protect against future site and infrastructure
damage from erosion. Additionally, Napier Port is currently in the
process of renewing elements of its mobile plant fleet with lower
emitting replacements. The combined value of these projects is
approximately $14.7 million to the end of FY2024, and for which
additional spend is being incurred in FY2025.
Figure 1: Total Carbon Emissions tCO2e
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
FY2020FY2021
FY2022
(certified)
FY2023
(certified)
FY2024
(certified)
Scope 1Scope 2Scope 3
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
21
20

FY2024 Scope 1 emissions (tCO2e) were 6,785 tonnes, up
506 tonnes from the 6,279 tonnes recorded in FY2023. Higher
volumes following the recovery from Cyclone Gabrielle resulted in
increases in crane, truck and stationary energy (diesel generators)
fuel usage while reduced marine emissions attributed to fewer
vessel calls and secondary movements provided a partial offset.
Prioritising the use of our more fuel-efficient tug, Kaweka,
wherever possible added positively to the marine offset.
The reduction in forklift emissions is related to the acquisition
during FY2023 of two Eco Reachstackers, which are classified
as forklifts in our emissions analysis, and have contributed to the
decrease in fuel usage for the forklift fleet during FY2024. Fuel
usage data collected so far has shown the Eco Reachstackers
fuel usage averaging 17 litres of diesel fuel per hour compared
with the legacy Reachstackers which average up to 25 litres per
hour - this represents a 32% reduction.
Our purchased electricity (Scope 2) emissions decreased to 1,012
tonnes from 1,487 tonnes in FY2023. This reduction has occurred
despite a 10% increase in electricity consumed during the year.
The main driving factor behind the decrease was the material
drop in the Ministry for the Environment purchased electricity
emission factor, which is used to convert electricity consumption
into tCO2e.
Partially offsetting the Scope 1 increase is a small decrease in
Scope 3 emissions.
Scope 3 emissions decreased to 943 tonnes from 947 tonnes in
FY2023. The main contributors to this decrease were a reduction
in waste/recycling emissions and transmission & distribution
losses (T&D) emissions. The waste/recycling reduction is
attributable to a reduction in container throughput through
our warehousing operations and our depot container services
contractors. The T&D emissions decrease is linked to the Scope
2 purchased electricity emissions reduction. Offsetting the overall
decrease was an increase in employee commuting emissions.
Our ‘per cargo tonne’ intensity metric decreased 7.2% from
0.00189 t/CO2e in FY2023 to 0.00175 t/CO2e in FY2024, as
shown in the below chart. This is primarily attributable to being
able to hold overall FY2024 emissions to a small increase (0.3%)
despite an 8% increase in annual tonnage for the year.
Key insights into our carbon footprint and our FY2024
emissions are represented by the charts below:
1) Total emissions broken down by scope
Scope 1
Scope 2
Scope 3
1
,
0
1
2
9
4
3
6
,
7
8
5
T/CO2e
FY2024
Scope 1
Scope 2
Scope 3
T/CO2e
FY2023
9
4
7
1
,
4
8
7
6
,
2
7
9
Figure 2: Carbon Emissions tCO2e Per Tonne
0.0020
0.0015
0.0010
0.0005
FY2020FY2021
FY2022
(certified)
FY2023
(certified)
FY2024
(certified)
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
23
22

2) Scope 1 emissions broken down by top emission sources
Scope 1 emissions produced by mobile plant and marine assets contribute 77% of Napier Port’s total FY2024 emissions (up from 72%
in FY2023). The emissions source with the biggest change was stationary energy which saw a 393% increase when compared with
FY2023. This is attributable to FY2023 reefer TEU volumes being impacted by Cyclone Gabrielle resulting in lower than anticipated
stationary energy emissions for the year. FY2024 saw a 28% increase in reefer export TEUs which required the hire of additional
generators to manage the increased volumes.
The make-up of Scope 1 emissions is represented in the charts below:
Forklift
Marine Plant (Incls Tugs)
Crane
Stationary Energy
Light Vehicles/Trucks
Scope 1
(T/CO2e)
FY2024
6
3
5
8
3
6
1
,
1
5
8
2
,
3
7
4
1
,
7
8
2
Forklift
Marine Plant (Incls Tugs)
Crane
Stationary Energy
Light Vehicles/Trucks
1
,
1
2
6
1
7
0
1
,
9
6
1
2
,
4
0
6
6
1
6
Scope 1
(T/CO2e)
FY2023
3) Scope 2 emissions broken down by top emission sources
12% of Napier Port’s total FY2024 emissions related to Scope 2 emissions (FY2023: 17%).which arise from purchased electricity off
the national electricity grid. Consistent with FY2023, the top emission sources within this category are powering reefer containers,
operational wharf and street lighting towers, and tug shore power and related infrastructure.
4) Scope 3 emissions broken down by top emission sources
11% of Napier Port’s total FY2024 emissions related to scope 3 emissions which is consistent with FY2023 (11%). Breaking down the
Scope 3 emissions data further, 46% of total Scope 3 emissions are attributable to employee commuting and 28% is attributable to
freight (trains and trucks) operating between Napier Port and Manawatu Inland Port.
Other - Air travel/Water Supply m3
Electricity T&D* losses kWh
Waste - landfill with gas recovery
Container Freight - diesel tkm*
Employee commuting
Scope 3
(T/CO2e)
FY2023
Other - Air travel/Water Supply m3
Electricity T&D* losses kWh
Waste - landfill with gas recovery
Container Freight - diesel tkm*
Employee commuting
4
3
1
7
7
1
1
7
5
6
2
6
2
Scope 3
(T/CO2e)
FY2024
3
9
7
7
3
1
3
6
7
6
2
6
5
*T&D = transmission and distribution
*tkm = tonnes per kilometre
NB: FY2023 container freight has been restated to
265 tonnes from 325 tonnes (as reported last year)
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
25
24

Setting Targets - Decarbonising Napier Port
Napier Port is committed to decarbonisation and reaching net
zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Our initial Emissions
Reduction Strategy illustrates incremental progress over time
aligned to the removal of technological and economic adoption
barriers whilst considering the potential impacts. Consequently,
Napier Port is not able to set any realistic short or medium
time-bound reduction targets at this time. Achievable reduction
targets will be set once the appropriate asset masterplans have
been refreshed to incorporate the feasible emission reduction
technologies required to achieve the ultimate net zero by 2050
outcome.
Our sustainability strategy includes placing a focus on climate
action and energy and supporting national net zero 2050
targets. As a result, our initial Emissions Reduction Strategy was
developed, providing a framework for possible adoption of low
emission technology and to establish a high-level pathway for
Napier Port to reach net zero by 2050.
At a high level, the strategy aims to:
• Focus on the reduction of diesel consumption given it is the
primary source of our current emissions
• Align investment in low emissions technology with:
• Our asset renewal program
• Any future transformation of Napier Port container terminal
operating modes
• The availability of emerging technology
• Grow our electrical infrastructure through potential electrical
capacity upgrades
• Establish a decision-making framework that considers
low emission technologies and incorporates emission
considerations in investment or business development
decisions.
This strategy framework will continue to be further developed and
involves further investigations into the viability of alternative fuel
sources and the array of new low emissions technology.
Current emission reduction initiatives integrated within our
business:
• The operation of three Eco Reachstackers and a further five on
order with delivery due during FY2025
• A continual program of light retrofitting with low energy
consumption LED alternatives to our light towers and storage
sheds
• Replacement of clear lite cladding systems to reduce the need
for interior lighting during daylight hours
• Deliberate deployment prioritisation of lower fuel consuming
tugs
• Reduction in unproductive usage (idle) hours across our
container handling mobile plant through the leveraging of IOT
data and technology systems
• Procurement policy commitments to consider and evaluate
renewable energy technologies and outcomes as a step within
the procurement of higher value assets.
Underpinning our existing Emissions Reduction Strategy and
supporting our wider Sustainability Strategy, Napier Port currently
has the following initiatives underway, each with the potential to
support the decarbonisation of our operation:
• Progressing a decarbonisation and alternate energies
assessment to evaluate in further detail, potential future
pathways of reaching net zero emissions
• Awaiting the delivery of seven battery electric forklifts for use
within our PortPack operation
• Continual refinement of existing operating modes and the
identification of new modes to extract improved working
efficiency
• Partnering with equipment suppliers to evaluate proof of
concept renewable energy alternative equipment.
The decarbonisation and alternate energies assessment will
evaluate currently available renewable energy alternatives, their
wider adoption for use, and the whole-of-life cost and impact
to integrate into our operations. Aligned with broader industry
momentum and appreciating economic factors, a key output is
expected to be the delivery of a more detailed action plan for
progressing decarbonisation within our operations.
Napier Port’s Sustainability Strategy and Action Plan is available
on our website at:
www.napierport.co.nz/sustainability-
strategy-and-action-plan
27
26
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT

References:
1. Climate change projections and impacts for
Tairawhiti and Hawke’s Bay – Prepared for
Envirolink, Gisborne District Council and
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council – November
2020;
2. 2013 IPCC Fifth Assessment Report.
3. 2021 IPCC Sixth Assessment Report.
4. New physical science behind climate change:
What does IPCC AR6 tell us? - Zhou, T – 2021
5. Aotearoa New Zealand climate change
projections guidance: Interpreting the latest
IPCC WG1 report findings. Prepared for the
Ministry for the Environment, Report number
CR 501, 51p. Bodeker, G., Cullen, N., Katurji,
M., McDonald, A., Morgenstern, O., Noone, D.,
Renwick, J., Revell, L., & Tait, A. (2022).
6. Emissions ‘the business as usual’ story is
misleading – January 2020 - written by
Hausfather, Zeke, Glen P
7. Interim guidance on the use of new sea-level
rise projections. Wellington: Ministry for the
Environment (2022).
8. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation,
and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working
Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
IPCC AR6, WGII, Chapter 11. Cambridge
University Press. Lawrence, J., et al. (2022).
9. Coastal erosion, global sea-level rise, and the
loss of sand dune plant habitats. Frontiers in
Ecology and the Environment, 3(7), 351-404.
Feagin, R. A., Sherman, D. J., & Grant, W. E.
(2005), and Future changes in built environment
risk to coastal flooding, permanent inundation
and coastal erosion hazards. Journal of Marine
Science and Engineering, 9(1011). Stephens, S.
A., Paulik, R., Reeve, G., Wadhwa, S., Popovich, B.,
Shand, T., & Haughey, R. (2021).
10. Climate change projections and impacts for
Tairawhiti and Hawke’s Bay – Prepared for
Envirolink, Gisborne District Council and
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council – November
2020 (page 14).
11. Coupled atmosphere-ocean simulations
of contemporary and future South Pacific
cyclones. EGUsphere. Williams, J., Behrens, E.,
Morgenstern, O., Gibson, P. B., & Teixeria, J. C. M.
(preprint, 2023).
12. Climate change projections and impacts for
Tairawhiti and Hawke’s Bay – Prepared for
Envirolink, Gisborne District Council and
Hawke’s Bay Regional Council – November
2020 (page 15).
2024 CLIMATE CHANGE DISCLOSURE REPORT
29
28