Chris Hayes (Werriwa, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to lend my support to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Bill 2010 and the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage (Safety Levies) Amendment Bill 2010. The fact is that, with 80 per cent of Australia’s electricity generated from coal, no serious response to climate change can ignore the need to clean up coal and our coal fired industries. As I, and most people on this side of the chamber, have said in this House before, we as legislators need to ensure that we have the regulatory environment that encourages the commercialisation of technologies that will play a part in our overall energy needs for the future.

Central to that is carbon capture and storage, geosequestration—the ability to strip carbon from coal fired power stations and inject that into the ground. That is going to be a central theme if we are going to be serious about cleaning up our industry and meeting our power production needs as they climb and also if we are going to be serious about encouraging renewable energy into this power mix. Carbon capture and storage is essential for the long-term sustainability of coal fired power electricity generation and to realise the potential of new industries. I know the Minister for Resources and Energy, who is at the table, has been very passionate about coal-to-liquid technology, which would improve Australia’s liquid transportation fuels security.

The coal industry is highly significant not only in relation to Australia’s economic prosperity but also in relation to the world’s current and forecasted energy needs. As I stated a little earlier, coal currently provides 80 per cent of Australia’s electricity generation capacity. But, in terms of the world’s needs, it provides something like 40 per cent. So coal is not something that is going to disappear. Therefore, we need to concentrate on those technologies that can ameliorate the effects of emissions. One that is central to that is carbon capture and storage. This legislation will do a number of things, but it will not cause people or industries to go out and start investing in carbon capture and storage. What it will do is start finessing some of the regulatory aspects that are going to be essential to improve this aspect of the industry.

Like the member for Maribyrnong, I too worked with the Australian Workers Union. Essentially, my responsibilities for a long period of time included the North West Shelf. I represented workers on various offshore facilities, ranging from the North West Shelf of Western Australia up to the Timor Sea. I know firsthand the challenges involved in the exploration industry and I have seen firsthand the dangers that are apparent in that style of industry. It is a highly competitive industry and it is quite remote from the mainland and certainly remote from the general reach of regulators. I support the call from the member for Maribyrnong regarding our need to work to ensure that safety on offshore facilities is paramount. One of the things that this legislation seeks to do is finesse the regime in terms of, for example, safety around wellheads for people such as derrickmen and tool pushers. This will be absolutely critical for their safety in the workplace.

I am talking about carbon capture and storage as a technique for assisting the amelioration of emissions. I have just come from a meeting of climate change scientists—Professor David Griggs from Monash University and Professor Ove Hoegh-Guldberg from the University of Queensland. They have also been talking to other members—and, as a matter of fact, they are lunching with other members at the moment. They wanted to talk to us about the science associated with climate change. Due to the regrettable issues associated with one chapter within the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the hacked emails at the University of East Anglia—commonly referred to as ‘climategate’—these particular scientists are very keen to ensure that members of this House understand the reality of climate science and the fact that it is not being seriously contested amongst the scientists working in the field.

I know anyone can go and spend four years at a university and come away with a science degree—and I do not mean to demean people who have science degrees—but not everyone examines the changes that have occurred in the climate. One thing these scientists stressed at their recent meeting with me was that the global climate system has warmed significantly over the last century and continues to warm. They sought to bring the evidence forward that increased global temperatures mean that there is going to be lower atmosphere and surface temperatures, an increase in the heat and content of global oceans, and an increase in sea levels. They say these are now matters of fact in terms of the empirical evidence from the scientists in this field; that it is beyond contention.

Despite the issue of hacked emails—and, perhaps, scientists being overly bureaucratic—and despite the paragraph that appeared in the report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, this should not deter people from thinking that the reality is that climate change is real. It should not be taken that there is some new-found science—and this applies to our colleagues on the other side of the House—that gives weight to the arguments of the climate change sceptics and deniers.

We are committed on this side of the House to getting on and doing the job that we were given at the last election—that is, moving to address climate change. I know we are experiencing very serious frustrations in the Senate at the moment. I know a policy change has occurred on the other side of the House that being a climate change denier now is no longer something that should be sneered at. It seems that they have a policy which has gone a long way to accommodate the views of the climate change deniers. But this is not a matter of politics. We must now rely on the best science we have available and use that science to project a methodology that will advance this country and allow us to play our role in terms of a world response to climate change.

This bill makes minor policy and technical changes which will, importantly, pave the way for the establishment of a National Offshore Petroleum Regulator, improve the ability of the National Offshore Petroleum Safety Authority to regulate the structural integrity of facilities, wells and well related equipment, and clarify the way a range of provisions regarding titleholders relate to situations where a title is held by two or more titleholders.

It is important to recognise that there will be no adverse effects on industry from this legislation. By way of background, all the money the Commonwealth receives from industry fees under the act and related acts is presently paid to the states and territories. In order to fund the establishment of the National Offshore Petroleum Regulator, the government intends to retain those fees paid under the registration fees act. However, as the minister stated in his second reading speech, he will review the fees collected under the act and associated acts to ensure that the states and territories will be able to continue carrying out their regulatory functions on behalf of the Commonwealth until such times as the regulator is established.

The adjustments in this legislation provide another step towards working out a greenhouse gas storage reality. This is something that needs to occur and must occur if we are serious about addressing the issues of climate change, having regard to the fact that we are reliant on carbon based energy sources. I commend this legislation to the House.

See this speech in context