A steam turbine CHP system with the option for co-firing biomass was examined under current carbon pricing legislation and the proposed emissions reduction policy of the newly elected Federal Government in Australia. When the boiler was fuelled by coal, the system was liable for the carbon price and was unprofitable indicating that the carbon price was successful as an incentive to reduce emissions. This result held only whilst carbon prices were at the values assumed in the analysis. The system would be more financially beneficial under the new Government policy, as it would not be penalized for its high emissions. All systems operating with a natural gas-fuelled boiler were unprofitable. In an attempt to reduce emissions, a co-fired boiler with biomass and coal was proposed. Emissions at 20 % biomass were still above the threshold determining liability; therefore, co-firing was not able to eliminate carbon pricing liability. Due to the high price of biomass, the carbon price could not be offset and was therefore not an economical solution for reducing emissions. However, when biomass pricing was adopted from more established markets, co-firing became somewhat conducive only when the carbon price was repealed.