Alexander Downer (Mayo, Liberal Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Hansard source

First of all, let me say this in terms of Australia fulfilling its international obligations on climate change: today the national greenhouse accounts were published and they show that Australia is on track to meet the target that was set for Australia under the Kyoto protocol. What is interesting is that the statistics show that, in the period from 1990 to 2004, Australia reduced its emissions per capita by 12.7 per cent. On the measure of emissions per dollar of GDP, Australia has improved by 35.2 per cent. That highlights the fact that this government is taking seriously the need for Australia to contribute to the issue of greenhouse mitigation.

More generally, the Australian government is taking a very practical international approach to this issue. The AP6 initiative—bringing together Australia, China, the US, Japan, South Korea and India, which constitutes around half the world’s population and economy in emissions—has had an initial series of working group meetings in the United States and is making good progress. It is making such good progress that countries like the United Kingdom; more broadly, the European Union; and, most recently, during the Prime Minister’s visit, Canada, have been showing a real interest in this initiative. Canada, I understand, may have some interest in joining it.

It simply illustrates that the view around the world—if not everywhere in this country—is that new thinking is needed, new technologies are needed and all forms of energy need to be considered. For example, the amount of nuclear energy worldwide produced from Australia’s uranium exports saves in the amount of carbon emissions the equivalent of all of the emissions Australia generates every year. In other words, it could at least be argued that our uranium exports already effectively neutralise Australia’s global emissions contribution. There is no doubt that Australia’s role in the nuclear fuel cycle, through our uranium exports, is a useful contribution to addressing the issue of climate change.

This stands in stark contrast to the opposition’s position on these issues, which is to say that it rejects nuclear technology and thinks that the future rests entirely in renewables. We on this side of the House agree with the broader view in the international community that there is a role for renewables. But, to put that into some perspective, it has been estimated that you would need a wind farm occupying 3,200 square kilometres to produce the equivalent energy of a medium sized power station. Some perspective needs to be kept about what can be achieved with renewables. I heard the member for Kingsford Smith on the radio this morning being interviewed by the redoubtable Fran Kelly.

See this speech in context