Coalition Senators' Additional Comments

Introduction

1.1The Coalition continues to strongly support agricultural producers in Australia – including in relation to the protection of, and continued production in, the Great Artesian Basin (GAB).

1.2Additionally, the Coalition remains supportive of carbon capture and storage (CCS).

1.3In the previous Government, the Coalition supported the development of CCS with over $300 million in investment into a range of CCS projects.

1.4The Coalition also made multiple acreage releases for offshore greenhouse gas storage.

1.5CCS has a multi-decade history and is a tried and proven method of greenhouse gas abatement. However, it is critical to ensure that a balanced approach is taken to CCS and prospective projects, particularly ensuring long-term risks to water resources or agricultural production are mitigated.

Agricultural production and the Great Artesian Basin

1.6However, the Coalition does not support actions which unnecessarily threaten or impede agricultural development.

1.7Australia has a long and proud history of agricultural production, for both domestic and international consumers. Australia’s farmers have fed the world with their production, and we will remain an important agricultural producing nation in the future.

1.8Our agriculture and resources sectors have worked cooperatively for decades, and these two sets of industries both deliver extraordinary benefits to the Australian economy.

1.9The GAB is one of the largest underground freshwater resources in the world. It supports agricultural production across Queensland, and into New South Wales, the Northern Territory, and South Australia.

1.10According to the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment, and Water (DCCEEW), the GAB generates approximately $33.2 billion in economic benefits to Australia per year. It is a vital resource for 180,000 people, 7,600 businesses and 120 towns.[1]

1.11Particularly in Queensland, it is clear that the GAB is a vital source of water for agricultural production, and is susceptible to drought and other events that can impact its water resources.

1.12This is why the Leader of the Nationals, the Hon David Littleproud MP, on behalf of the Coalition, proposed an amendment to the Nature Repair (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2023, in December 2023.

1.13When moving the amendment, Mr Littleproud said that ‘this is the opportunity for this parliament today to give that confidence and greater investment confidence for carbon capture storage into the future, and to do that in harmony with Australian agriculture, our environment and particularly our communities.’[2]

1.14Unfortunately, this amendment was not supported by either the Government or the Greens.

Carbon capture and storage

1.15As noted in a number of submissions, CCS provides a practical pathway for hard-to-abate industries like steel, cement and plastics to offset their emissions.

1.16As the International Energy Agency states, ‘momentum has grown substantially in recent years, with over 500 projects in various stages of development across the CCUS [carbon capture, utilisation and storage] value chain.’[3]

1.17Further, with the passage of the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023, Australia now has the opportunity to support its strategic partners in continuing to develop CCS projects as they attempt to offset emissions.

1.18As Australia continues to explore the benefits of emerging and existing technologies in the pathway to net zero 2050, all technologies and policy options should be explored and progressed.

1.19As the Mining and Energy Union Queensland District stated in its submission, ‘new technology takes time, investment and research; and projects which progress the development of critical technologies to underpin our industries of the future should be supported.’[4]

1.20The Coalition believes all emission reduction technologies, including CCS, should be properly considered.

1.21All proposals and their potential impacts should be carefully explored in conjunction with the local communities, particularly in our great agricultural-producing regions.

Conclusion

1.22The Coalition accepts, and agrees with, the majority of the content of the main report.

1.23We also understand the reasoning behind the main report’s recommendations.

1.24In addition, we acknowledge that the Queensland State Government has now ruled that the Glencore project is not suitable to proceed, and that further CCS projects in the GAB in Queensland should be prohibited.

1.25The Coalition therefore supports-in-principle Recommendation 1, whilst acknowledging that it is a State and Territory issue to work together on consistent policy approaches to the GAB.

1.26The Coalition supports-in-principle Recommendation 2. We believe that the GAB is a unique and critically-important national resource and that Glencore’s proposed project has therefore necessitated a special level of attention and scrutiny.

1.27However, in framing any amendment to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act), we do not agree that there should be any blanket and/or mandatory requirements for a Federal water trigger assessment (including an override of State and Territory decisions) in relation to all CCS projects across the country.

1.28As we observe in the section on ‘Carbon capture and storage’ above, we believe that each CCS project should be assessed on its individual merits. In almost all cases, these assessments are also best made (and best informed) at the State and Territory level. This approach is consistent with the findings of multiple past reviews – including the Samuel Review of the EPBC Act – that strongly caution against increased duplication of Federal, State and Territory responsibilities for the environment.

Footnotes

[1]Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment, and Water (DCCEEW), Great Artesian Basin (accessed 10 July 2024).

[2]The Hon David Littleproud MP, Leader of the Nationals, House of Representatives Hansard, 7December 2023, p. 9219.

[3]International Energy Agency (IEA), Carbon Capture, Utilisation and Storage(accessed 10 July 2024).

[4]Mining and Energy Union Queensland District, Submission 16, p. 2.