“Powering Past Gas”: Climate Council’s reality check for gas exports
Climate Council Media Release
The CLIMATE COUNCIL’s new report, Powering Past Gas: An Energy Strategy that Works, cuts through the noise in Australia’s energy debate, mapping a clear pathway to move beyond gas at home and in our exports.
The report reveals that, if Australia stops opening new gas projects now, supply from existing projects could meet our shrinking domestic gas needs for more than six decades – clear signal that it’s time to turn off the gas tap for good as we accelerate towards a cleaner, more secure energy future.
Climate Councillor Greg Bourne said: “More gas means more harmful climate pollution, endangering our homes and the places we love and putting our kids’ futures at risk. It’s time for Australia to power past gas and turbocharge our switch to clean energy.”
The report emphasises that Australia does not need new gas projects, as the world will shortly be awash with cheap gas at the same time as this fossil fuel will play a shrinking role in our domestic energy mix and that of overseas trade partners like Japan.
“Gas has a small, shrinking and short-term role to play in our energy mix. We can already meet much of our energy needs with renewables, like solar and wind. If we stopped exporting so much gas, current projects would be enough to supply our domestic gas needs for more than 60 years,” said Mr Bourne.
Senior Researcher at the Climate Council Dr. Wesley Morgan highlights the global shifts in energy consumption: “The global energy landscape is rapidly changing. Nations that have traditionally purchased Australian gas, such as Japan, South Korea, and China, are moving to renewables to slash their climate pollution. As we approach 2030 and these countries embrace clean energy, their demand for gas will decline, which means Australian gas expansion is a recipe for economic and environmental chaos.
“Australia must respond to these global shifts or risk being left behind. With new gas projects in the US and Qatar producing massive amounts of new gas, at much lower costs, it’s highly unlikely that new Australian gas projects will be profitable.
“Australia should take control of our own energy and economic future as these global trends accelerate. Now is the moment for Australia to start a sensible phase-out of gas exports as we ramp up the clean alternatives that the Albanese Government has put at the heart of its Future Made in Australia plans.”
The Powering Past Gas report offers a powerful alternative plan to the Government’s Future Gas Strategy, by advocating for a strategic phase-down of gas exports, accelerated electrification at home and a proper domestic reservation policy that prioritises meeting Australia’s shrinking gas needs first.
Dr Jennifer Rayner Head of Policy and Advocacy at the Climate Council said: “The Future Gas Strategy is the wrong response to Australia’s energy needs now. We need new policy thinking, not new gas projects.
“We can accelerate the switch to clean energy in our homes, businesses and industry – including stopping the gas industry itself guzzling up three times more gas than Aussie households use. A responsible domestic reservation policy can then ensure our shrinking gas needs are reliably met, as we prioritise the expansion of clean energy exports that help our export partners cut their climate pollution.”
The Climate Council is Australia’s leading community-funded climate change communications organisation. We provide authoritative, expert and evidence-based advice on climate change to journalists, policymakers, and the wider Australian community.
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.
You can donate through PayPal via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
5 comments
Login here Register here-
paul walter
-
Harry Lime
-
Pete Petrass
-
paul walter
-
B Sullivan
Return to home pageThis a long, long overdue set of comments on this subject.
Whoever wrote it, thanks.
How will the Albo “gas beyond 2050″government deal with these facts? Same way they deal with other unfortunate facts?..Move along ,nothing to see here? The only thing they have going for them is that they are not the other morons…an extremely low bar. Goodbye majority, hello hung parliament.If you really care about this country,vote Teals/Independents /Greens.No more arrant bullshit,we are out of time.
“Greatest moral challenge of our time” is so yesterday.
To my way of thinking if we totally shut down all gas exports the impact to Australia would actually be very little. These big multinational companies are virtually getting our gas for free by paying almost no royalties or taxes so what do we really lose??? The big companies will lose, big time, and why should we care about them since they don’t care about us???
We can get our own domestic supply ourselves, for as long as we need it.
Harry Lime,
The millenials will have to fix it. We will be long gone.
We don’t need LNG at all.
Hydrogen is a green alternative source of gas. it can be produced from water-H2O, with electricity. The cheapest way to generate that electricity is with renewables like solar and wind power. Land devastated by farmers so they could raise the sheep they need to sustain their cruel and shameful export industry could be converted with solar panels and whenever the sun shines a crop of hydrogen gas will grow. OK so the gas stops being produced when the sun goes down. Isn’t that the same for the wheat crop that uses photosynthesis to create the sugars it needs to grow and produce grain. Do they complain about growing crops because they only grow when the sun is shining?
The obvious quickest and cheapest route to lower emissions is to use hydrogen gas to power gas turbine power stations instead of LNG.
However as Labor Ministers have pointed out. There aren’t enough jobs in it to keep CFMMEU workers happy. Solar farms can be set up in a matter of weeks by a small workforce and once they are functioning they don’t require workers to operate nor very much maintenance. Whereas if you go with LNG you have to construct exploration and mining equipment at a cost of billions, employing tens of thousands of workers for many many years (and many years of automatic campaign donations). The refineries will also cost billions to build and maintain, and without billion dollar projects like these the Stockmarket and Financiers can’t skim off their share of the money bonanza. As for the environmental impact? Any problems there can be dismissed and ignored with a rubber stamp of approval by the Minister of the Environment.
This obvious solution to Australia’s energy problem appears to have also been dismissed or completely ignored by the Climate Council. Jobs and the economy are their priority, not emissions reduction to reduce the damage to the environment and halt the rapid loss of biodiversity.