Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023 implements Australia's international obligations under the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, referred to as the London protocol. The intention is to ratify both the 2009 and the 2013 amendments. This bill will amend the Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Act to allow permits for the transboundary movement of carbon dioxide streams from industrial processes for the purpose of sequestration in sub-seabed geological formations. It would also allow for the placement of waste or other matter from marine geoengineering activity. As Senator Whish-Wilson has referred to: where things don't stack up, they won't happen. I do appreciate his passion in this debate, but, where projects are not going to stack up, they won't happen; but, where they do, they will.

In 2009 we agreed as a country to an amendment to the London protocol which does enable the export of carbon dioxide for the purposes of carbon sequestration in sub-seabed geological formations. Carbon capture and storage has been talked about for a very long period of time across the world and in Australia. There are a variety of views. There are projects that have shown great promise, and there are others that have not. This bill does not pick them. It merely enables the structure for us to explore these and stay in line with our international obligations.

The 2013 amendment was to allow the placement of waste and other matter for marine geoengineering activities such as ocean fertilisation for the purposes of scientific research. This kind of scientific research could have a significant impact on how we deal with the challenges of our future. It will enable legitimate scientific research to be undertaken to determine the feasibility of methods to reduce atmospheric carbon dioxide. Examples of these scientific activities include microbubbles, which is the process of injecting tiny bubbles into the ocean surface or sea foam to increase sunlight reflectivity; marine cloud brightening or seeding; ocean alkalinisation, which is adding alkaline substances to seawater to enhance the ocean's natural carbon sink—a huge natural carbon sink that we can enhance to help us deal with the challenges we are facing into the future and our desire to hit net zero; the ocean has huge potential here—and, macroalgae cultivation, which is large-scale growth of algae that converts dissolved carbon dioxide into organic carbon through photosynthesis.

Any permits for the above type of activities can only be granted after a robust, comprehensive assessment process, which would ensure that any activity is in accordance with the London protocol and has a minimal impact on the marine environment in Australian waters. The intent here is not to cause damage to the ocean, as laid out by Senator Whish-Wilson. That is absolutely not the intent here. The intent here is to use every option we have available to us to reach net zero by 2050, to reduce emissions and to ensure that we stop the planet warming.

The proposed amendments will meet Australia's international obligations under the London protocol and protect and preserve the marine environment from potential environmental risks. Passing the bill will enable the government to administer permits for these internationally emerging activities and ensure legal certainty. Regulating this type of activity through a robust application assessment and approval process would ensure that only legitimate scientific research activities which explore options to reduce atmospheric CO2 proceed. This amendment also provides for regulating other potentially harmful marine geoengineering research activities, should they emerge in the future.

This bill is also important because it will help our international partners, particularly the Timor-Leste government, in the development of the Bayu-Undan carbon capture and storage project. As the foreign minister said during her visit to Timor-Leste in July, Australia:

… will keep striving to be the best possible partner, and a partner who will stand by you—

Timor-Leste—

today and throughout your future.

We share the belief in the Timorese people's fundamental right to decide their own future, and the Australian Labor government has a deep appreciation of just how much economic resilience is key to Timor's sovereignty. Our support for their economic resilience and sovereignty is why we strongly support Timor's ambition to convert the Bayu-Undan field. It has been a main contributor to the Timor-Leste economy for over 16 years, and Australia wants to work with Timor to transition it to a commercial carbon capture and storage project.

We know that this project is important to Timor. That's why it's so disappointing to see the narrow political interests of our friends in the Greens party claiming that everything that may happen under this bill will be a disaster, that it's all about encouraging fossil fuel activity, when nothing could be further from the truth. We want to help our friends in Timor. We also want to ensure that, in Australia, we can sequester as much carbon as we possibly can and that we use every opportunity available to us to deal with this problem. The future is important. We cannot be narrow minded as we look at ways to address the challenges we face.

We've seen the inquiries. The House had an inquiry. The Senate had an inquiry. There's plenty of material and plenty of submissions talking about the upsides, the potential risks and the concerns. But, overwhelmingly, the evidence was not in line with Senator Whish-Wilson's passionate speech. It was more in line with a balance—yes, concerns that if it's not done properly there are risks. But it will be done properly, and we will manage those risks.

Submitters to the inquiry included CO2CRC, who argued that carbon capture and storage is an:

… increasingly cost-effective technology that can deliver large-scale reductions in emissions for a wide range of industries.

They argued that projects enabled by this bill are:

… an essential and urgent priority that is accepted as a critical component of the national and global emissions reduction strategies.

Other submitters argued that reaching net zero by 2050 will be virtually impossible if we don't use all options available to us—and that includes the options that we may have in the ocean. They argued that carbon capture and storage is a technology with decades of experience globally—a proven technology for some applications.

CCS plays a unique role amongst a portfolio of emissions reduction technologies as it can address emissions from existing facilities, mitigate emissions from hard-to-abate industries and support low-carbon hydrogen production and underpin large-scale carbon removal. Geoscience Australia have urged that we have an opportunity to continue to promote best practice through this bill by setting and adopting standards for environmental information that is used to understand the benefits and impacts of offshore carbon capture storage and geoengineering activities.

Net zero by 2050 is this government's unequivocal priority in our fight against global warming. This bill is a critical aspect to us reaching that goal, and I urge the Senate to pass the bill.