Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to make a contribution to the private member's motion from the member for Dawson. I'm going to outline what the motion speaks to. There are five parts to it. The first talks about the long-term global predictions for coal usage and how that fits in with baseload power and what the alternate energies look like. The second talks about the record-high electricity prices in Queensland in January 2017 at around $14,000 a megawatt hour and the effect of that. The third speaks about the high cost of electricity in North Queensland and the effect that has had on business investment and sentiment. The fourth says that Australia has an abundance of high-quality coal. The fifth says that Australia should utilise its natural advantage.

It would be right for anyone to ask: why would a member from South-East Queensland whose electorate has no power stations and no coalmines have an interest in coal? I'm not on the coast, so I'm not a protector of the Barrier Reef, as such. But my electorate of Wright has the largest take-up in the country of solar power on constituents' roofs. I suggest that they are not installing solar panels on their roofs because they are large supporters of the green movement. To the contrary, they have them on their roofs because they are very close to being able to make ends meet and it's a way of trying to bring down pressures on the household.

I want to go to the issues in this motion that talk about North Queensland. In Queensland we all pay the same price per watt for electricity. There's a service obligation. Whether you're in Cairns or on the Gold Coast, everyone pays the same kilowatt an hour, except if you are a business and the further you are away from the power station, the more you pay. That is the part of this private member's motion that I want to speak to. I'd love to be part of an LNP state team that lobbies this government to look at some of the new HELE power station technology and set that up further to the north. Our government has an agenda to build and develop northern Australia. I remember a small community that was built some 70 years ago, and it really kicked it. It is called Gladstone. We dropped in a couple of power stations there and that place took off. Power stations need power and they need fresh water. The government has already committed to dams in Northern Queensland and northern Australia and it has given that commitment to the state government, pending their approvals of those dams.

If we could take some of the baseload demand off the south-east corner by building some power stations, or at least one, and get the ball rolling in the north, the key would be high-efficiency, low-emission technology. We've got the coal up there. We've got the natural resources. We've got a labour force. We have Collinsville, Moranbah, Tieri and Middlemount—all places where you could buy the entire street for a tuppence if you were looking for cheap real estate. These are towns and communities that have flourished off the back of 150 years of a resources sector boom, and I don't think we'll see that again.

Coal continues to be the backbone of global electricity production and it makes up about 40 per cent of global electricity input. The coal industry in Australia is the second-largest export earner and was valued at around $40 million last year, with coalmining contributing 1.2 per cent of Australia's GDP. Coal is a major driver of economic activity and job creation. Around 44,000 people are employed in coalmining, with the mining sector as a whole employing around 228,000. If I do have coalminers, they are fly in, fly out. The biggest contributor to GDP in my electorate is agriculture, without a doubt. But if we can build a power station, a HELE coal-fired power station, it would provide energy security for my electorate into the future. I commend the motion to the House.

Joel Fitzgibbon (Hunter, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The coal industry in Australia has a very bright future, and that will remain the case for many decades to come. Our coking coal will remain in heavy demand amongst the Asian countries that are making their way out of developing status, and our steaming coal will continue to displace dirtier coal produced in other countries.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 19:00 to 19:21

I was talking about the very bright future of Australia's coalmining industry, both in coking coal and steaming coal. It's a critical sector to the Australian economy. In my region alone, in the Hunter, it's worth around $15 billion to the regional economy. It employs, directly and indirectly, around 90,000 people. I don't need people to lecture me about the importance of the coalmining industry. I invite them to come to my region, to drive on the roads and see the traffic caused by the sector; to walk into any pub or supermarket and identify the high-vis work gear everywhere you go; to go to the local kids' footy and see that the sponsorship for the football jumpers comes from the coalmining industry; or to go to the Cancer Council's office in Singleton to learn that there wouldn't be a Cancer Council office in Singleton without the support and sponsorship of the coalmining industry. It's very important in my part of the world.

The problem with this motion is it's not really about coal generation; it's about the National Party versus One Nation. This is about the concern of the member for Dawson and others in Central and North Queensland about the creep of One Nation into their electorates. The member for Dawson—'Here we go; we'll build a coal-fired generator in North Queensland. That'll save my seat in Dawson, surely.' Well, it's a little bit more complicated than that, I suggest. The member for Dawson hasn't identified who is going to build this coal-fired generator. He hasn't identified who is going to fund this coal-fired generator. He hasn't told us whether it's going to be a high-efficiency, low-emissions generator or a standard coal generator. He hasn't talked about capture and storage. We're just magically going to have a new coal-fired generator in North Queensland.

We know that what this really produces is false hope for people. It's simply designed to win the National Party votes in Central and North Queensland. While we're on the subject of false hope, let's look at the most recent example in my own electorate, Liddell power station—a generator that is now 45 years old. It was set to close in five years time, and one day the Prime Minister wakes up with an idea: he's going to extend it another five years; he's going to insist that AGL extend it another five years. That was an argument that lasted two days. The word 'Liddell' dare not ever leave the lips of the Prime Minister or his energy minister any longer, because they were found out. They duped the people of the Hunter region. They led those power generator workers at Liddell to believe that they could extend their workforce for another five years, and it was never, ever true. What we need in this country is an energy mix. Many of our coal-fired generators, thankfully, will be with us for many years to come—for example, Bayswater, in my electorate, across the road from Liddell, will hopefully be open for at least another 15 years. But as time moves on, investment will cease to go to coal-fired generators. The member for Dawson hasn't identified an investor, because he knows there are no investors. We certainly won't get investors in coal-fired generators while we don't have a mechanism for pricing carbon. This is why we've had an investment drought for five years. Ever since the member for Warringah promised to deconstruct our carbon architecture, investment has dried up. That drought continues. Until the member for Dawson and others get on board and join us in a bipartisan approach to the pricing of carbon, we won't get investment flowing back into any form of generation in this country. Without further investment in generation in this country, we will continue to have rising prices and we will continue to see reliability undermined. And the losers under that scenario are, of course, Australian people, generally, in their homes, but of course Australian industry, as well, in particular our manufacturing sector.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Queensland's high energy prices are a huge issue in my electorate of Fisher, as they are in many other electorates around the country and, in particular, in the state of Queensland. The Sunshine Coast is known for its tourism and hospitality industries, but we also already have an established and growing base of high-tech and traditional manufacturing businesses on the Sunshine Coast. These include organisations and businesses like HeliMods and Eniquest, Australian Off Road, Ocean Craft and even a company called My Teddy.

Growing industry is critical to our region's future. It's critical to its economic success, which is why I've been working so hard to develop the Fisher defence industry initiative. This manufacturing on the coast will not grow and provide us with the jobs of the future unless we have reliable, secure and affordable power. Even our traditional industries of tourism and hospitality need affordable power to keep the lights on and the ovens running. Profit margins in these businesses are often low and income is seasonal. Many hospitality businesses are doing it tough. Queensland's astronomical energy prices are driving some business proprietors over the edge.

We must not and will not pursue any emission reduction policy at the expense of security, reliability or affordability of the electricity supplied to Australian households and businesses. As we honour our international agreements, we must also put Australian jobs and consumers first. Australia's emissions per capita and per unit of GDP are currently at their lowest levels in 27 years. Australia is on track to beat its 2020 target of five per cent below 2000 levels by 224 million tonnes. This is better than the 755 million tonnes by which Labor was estimated in 2012 to fall short.

Renewable energy is a part of the problem. However, renewable energy and the latest generation of clean coal technology must work together to deliver secure and affordable power while meeting our emission reduction commitments. The Australian power generation technology report, published in November 2005, concluded that new efficient coal generation is one of the lowest-cost options for maintaining secure and reliable baseload power in Australia. If Australia's current fleet of coal-fired power stations were replaced with ultrasupercritical coal-fired power plant technology available today, total coal-fired emissions would be 21 to 27 per cent lower than what they are now. If replaced by the next generation of ultrasupercritical coal-fired power, advanced ultrasupercritical generation emissions would likely be reduced by up to 34 per cent.

If integrated with carbon capture and storage technology, coal-fired power generation, including high-efficiency, low-emission plants, can reduce carbon dioxide emissions by up to 90 per cent. While the development of carbon capture and storage technology was slow to begin with, its development time frames are now comparable with renewables. As occurred with renewables, the cost of CCS is also expected to fall as more research and development and deployment are rolled out. The government is already investing to help that process along. This includes projects such as the Gorgon Carbon Dioxide Injection Project and CarbonNet in Victoria.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order for the next day of sitting .

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19 :30