Harry Quick (Franklin, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I welcome the opportunity to speak to the report of the Standing Committee on Science and Innovation Between a rock and a hard place: the science of geosequestration. This report, with its dissenting component, will hopefully generate widespread interest in this topic, along with the ramifications of the five recommendations agreed to by the majority of the committee.

The committee was charged with inquiring into and reporting on the science and application of geosequestration technology in Australia, with particular reference to, firstly, the science underpinning geosequestration technology; secondly, the potential environmental and economic benefits and risks of such technology; thirdly, the skills base in Australia to advance the science of geosequestration technology; fourthly, regulatory and approval issues governing geosequestration technology trials; and, finally, how best to position Australian industry to capture market applications.

The five terms of reference highlight for me the need for all Australians to seek to understand the complexity and importance of the whole issue of geosequestration as it relates to the issue of global warming. No-one can be ignorant of the mounting evidence that shows that human activity is contributing to a dramatic change in global weather patterns. Report after report by the most eminent world scientists have, in my mind, shown this fact to be absolutely conclusive. If we fail to act on this issue, we will jeopardise not only current generations but also those born in the future. One has only to spend a week in China to see at first hand the impact that unbridled industrial development has on the weather patterns of a country and the living conditions of its citizens.

Australia, as the report notes, is between a rock and a hard place. As a nation we have been blessed with an abundance of black and brown coal reserves. We are the largest exporter of coal in the world, and our energy sector is 83 per cent reliant on coal as a cheap source of fuel. As Australians, we are therefore presented with the real challenge of reducing our greenhouse gas emissions whilst remaining so very dependent on coal. As our report states, CCS—or carbon capture and storage—provides a real solution to these competing demands. In a carbon-constrained world, if Australia is able to demonstrate and commercialise CCS technology then it will protect both our environment and our labour-intensive coal industry.

The committee received evidence of the nine CCS demonstration projects currently underway across Australia. These include the CO2CRC project in the Otway Basin to extract naturally occurring CO and methane from the Buttress natural gas well and inject and store 100,000 tonnes of COtwo kilometres below the earth’s surface. In addition, there is the Monash Energy project to build a world-scale coal-to-liquids plant, at a cost of $5 billion, to convert brown coal to ultra-clean, synthetic diesel. A third project is the Zerogen project, managed by Stanwell Corporation, which proposes to build a 100-megawatt plant with capture technology. This project will convert pulverised coal into a synthesis gas, removing COand other gases to produce a hydrogen-rich fuel used to generate electricity.

There is no doubt that Australia possesses the skilled workforce and the technology to be a world leader in the area of geosequestration. What is currently lacking is a national legislative and regulatory framework, and a leadership role by federal, state and territory governments, to ensure that industry is given the support and encouragement to maximise the potential of work currently being carried out here in Australia.

I thank the chair of the committee, my fellow committee members and our dedicated secretariat for their support during the hearing processes. I hope that this report receives the coverage and support it so richly deserves.

See this speech in context