Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise today to speak in favour of the motion moved by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. I'm grateful to see such a motion brought before the House. The people of North Sydney remain incredibly concerned that, despite all the right words having been said by the government, we're yet to actually see any tangible impact from the new policies. Indeed, many were devastated to read the news last week that Australia's emissions have gone up in the last 12 months.

Globally, the number of countries announcing pledges to achieve net zero emissions over the coming decades has grown, and this is to be welcomed. The question of how to transition to a net zero energy system by 2050 while ensuring stable and affordable energy supplies, providing universal energy access and enabling robust economic growth is one that every country and every economy making such a commitment must face. It is a huge undertaking, and it is not a question that can be answered unless we are prepared to break it down to its smallest possible parts. Setting out a cost-effective and economically productive pathway that moves us towards a future focused economy supported by a clean, dynamic and resilient energy economy dominated by renewables like solar and wind instead of fossil fuels is a challenge that will require many shoulders to be put to the wheel. The path to net zero emissions is narrow. Staying on it requires immediate and massive deployment of all available clean and efficient energy technologies.

Ultimately, it will require all of us, the government, industry and the community, to work together, sector by sector, to share the burden and reduce our emissions as quickly as practicable. In that context, today's motion is a welcome development; however, I observe that the motion doesn't specifically direct the Climate Change Authority to overlay a holistic approach to emissions reduction.

What I'm seeing in my urban electorate is that the nexus between electricity and energy, transport and the built environment is critical in optimising emissions reductions pathways. The efficient electrification of buildings and transport will add loads to the electricity system, not just at the transmission level but also at the urban distribution networks—the poles and the wires between high-voltage substations and individual buildings. Distributed energy resources from rooftop solar and batteries to hot water systems, air conditioners and EVs all have a role to play in optimising the transition to zero emissions energy. As we struggle to balance a reduced reliance on fossil fuels, stretching the limits of current renewables technology and understanding new market dynamics for the various inputs, it is also incumbent on each of us to consider how we will conserve energy to ensure the processes we currently rely on during the transition phase are as efficient as possible, and for the government to continue to support energy-efficient initiatives at the community level. Things like making buildings thermally energy efficient through sensible insulation, glazing, window treatments and draught stopping are critical first steps, as is turning out the lights in high-rise buildings when no-one is in them. Those, and the efficiency dividend of electrified appliances and vehicles, can significantly reduce our primary energy needs.

Demand management means we have fewer renewables to build out in the first place. Using smart, orchestrated distributed energy resources means we can optimise the use of power when it's being overproduced and reduce the use of power when there's a shortage in the renewable generation. That will massively reduce the need for grid-level storage. For example, energy tariffs could be used to encourage electric vehicle owners to soak up excess solar during the day if chargers were available where people park their vehicles in the day; ditto for electric hot water heaters.

We need to ensure that the distribution network providers and electricity retailers are incentivised to optimise the use of these distributed resources because that will minimise the need for expensive upgrades to the distribution networks in our cities and towns. While a sectorial pathway can more readily allow for a critical detailed analysis of the peculiar challenges facing each sector, to allow us to understand synergies and tensions in pathways, where our quicker wins might be had, where investment in R&D and infrastructure is best allocated—and what the potential is for each sector to provide its own circular economy solutions—it is also essential that the Climate Change Authority be directed to avoid looking at the sectorial pathways as silos, and to overlay thinking about how the various sectors, holistically, can unlock new opportunities to reduce the costs and complexity, and accelerate our emissions reduction.

Question agreed to.

See this speech in context