Petro Georgiou (Kooyong, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Science and Innovation, I present the committee’s report, incorporating a dissenting report, entitled Between a rock and a hard place: the science of geosequestration, together with the minutes of proceedings and evidence received by the committee.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

This report makes an important contribution to our knowledge of the science of geosequestration and its potential applications in Australia. Geosequestration, or carbon capture and storage, involves the capture of CO emissions at their industrial source and the transportation of compressed CO to an underground geological site where it is injected and stored for potentially thousands of years. The report recognises the potential of CCS technology to reduce the negative impact of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions on the global climate. Given that fossil fuels will continue to play a substantial role in power generation in the 21st century, CCS may become an essential mitigating strategy.

The potential of CCS is particularly important for Australia. Australia relies heavily on coal for domestic electricity production and export revenue. In a carbon-constrained world, if Australia is able to demonstrate and commercialise CCS technology it could prove beneficial not only to the environment but to our significant coal industry.

The science of CCS is well understood. Australia has a solid skills base in the fields of geology and engineering, which are essential for CCS. It already has a reputation as a world leader in the development of CCS technology. The major challenge for the science and technology of CCS is its implementation at large—greater than 500 megawatt—coal-fired power stations. The very high volume of emissions from power stations presents the challenge of capturing, transporting and storing CO on a scale that would approximate its future application were CCS to become a genuine mitigation option. The expense of such an endeavour is difficult to establish. The estimates the committee received were wide ranging and the variables that affect the cost are many. While the committee found that Australian industry recognises the potential of CCS technology, without large-scale ventures the costs cannot be further pinpointed.

The report’s central recommendation is for the Australian government to fund one or more major projects to demonstrate CCS at a large coal-fired power plant. Such a project would meet the demands of demonstrating the science of CCS in a large-scale application, furthering our understanding of the cost of CCS and advancing Australia’s already world-leading skills in this area. The committee recommended that this funding take the form of a competitive tender process that would enable the demonstration of desired technologies while minimising government interference in commercial practice.

Australia is endowed with a large number of potentially suitable geological storage locations, many in suitable proximity to major emission sites. It is important that research continues to focus on geological storage. The committee recommends that the Australian government provide funding to CSIRO to progress research into the storage potential for permanent CO sequestration in sedimentary basins in New South Wales. The greatest environmental risk associated with CCS is the potential for CO leakage. This risk can be mitigated through careful site selection and rigorous post-injection monitoring.

It would be remiss of me not to note that there is a dissenting report. Four committee members conclude:

Climate change is a natural phenomenon that has always been with us and always will be. Whether human activity is disturbing to the climate in dangerous ways has yet to be proven.

Their view is that most of the public statements that promote the dangerous human warming scare are made from positions of ignorance. Let me make my position clear. I totally affirm my conclusion, and the committee’s conclusion, that the evidence is compelling and the link between greenhouse gas emissions, human activity and high temperatures is convincing. Equally, I do affirm the right of others to dissent. I have the responsibility of correcting a number of substantially incorrect statements made in the dissenting report and I will be doing this.

I thank the committee secretariat and the committee itself and I particularly thank the member for Franklin for his wisdom and guidance. I commend the report to the House. (Time expired)

See this speech in context