Wednesday, 22 March 2023

Production of documents

Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain

Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (15:18): I move:

That this house:

(1) notes the reports that the Minister for Trade and Investment was recently in Japan finalising funding for a coal-to-hydrogen project known as the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project;

(2) requires the Leader of the Government, in accordance with standing order 10.01, to table in the Council, within three weeks of the house agreeing to this resolution:

(a) any and all briefings related to the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project provided by the Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions, the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action, and any other agency or public official, to the Minister for Trade and Investment and the Minister for Climate Action, and any former related portfolios, since January 2020; and

(b) all assessments, analyses, examinations, modelling and consultancy reports created since January 2020 relating to the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project.

We are living in a climate crisis. After decades of inertia from governments the window to take action is frighteningly narrow. The latest IPCC report, released just this week, paints a dire picture and represents what some have called a final warning to governments. We are currently at 1.1 degrees of warming above pre-industrial levels. If governments do not dramatically change course, we will lock in 1.5 degrees of warming before the next IPCC report is due. Many think that 1.5 degrees in the next decade is inevitable; it is just a matter of whether we can stabilise there or whether we shoot past it.

These are not just abstract ideas. The consequences of this rise impact every aspect of our existence on earth. We are starting to see what that looks like: increasingly frequent and severe weather events, impacts on our ability to produce food and on access to water, rising sea levels, loss of entire ecosystems, conflicts and security threats. These are not just things that are happening elsewhere, allowing us to turn a blind eye. Victorian communities are being impacted and will continue to be.

The speed and scale of change required cannot be understated. Governments looking for steady change seem to be living in some parallel universe. Steady change might have been an option 30 to 40 years ago. The time lines are now not of our choosing. They are being dictated by science, and time is almost up. There is still hope, but it requires resolute leadership. António Guterres, the UN Secretary-General, said:

This report is a clarion call to massively fast-track climate efforts by every country and every sector and on every time frame. Our world needs climate action on all fronts: everything, everywhere, all at once.

It is in this context that we see the absurd prospect that the Labor government may be throwing a lifeline to brown coal in the form of the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project, otherwise known as HESC. Make no mistake, this is a new fossil fuel project. Brown coal produces more emissions than any other form of coal, and the market for it has rapidly dried up with global efforts to address climate change. It is difficult to export, and efforts to find new markets for it – for example, underground coal gasification or use as a fertiliser – have been dismal failures.

What is the HESC? The project aims to produce hydrogen, a fuel source, using brown coal. Hydrogen gas is made by splitting water and hydrogen in a process known as electrolysis. The power for this can come from renewable sources – so-called green hydrogen – or from fossil fuels; this is the so-called grey, black or brown hydrogen, or just fossil hydrogen. Green hydrogen projects are in development across the world and in Australia and are likely to form part of our renewable energy mix going forward, but we are not talking about green hydrogen with this project. This is a fossil hydrogen project made from dirty brown coal. It aims to export 225,000 tonnes of liquid hydrogen annually from a coal gasification plant located at AGL’s Loy Yang coal power station in the Latrobe Valley to Kobe in Japan. The project is being developed by a consortium of some of Japan’s biggest industrial conglomerates, and the Victorian Treasurer Tim Pallas recently visited Japan in relation to this project. While attempts are being made to sell this as some sort of clean energy, nothing could be further from the truth. Such descriptions are cynical greenwashing.

Let us look at some facts. It is actually more emissions intensive to use hydrogen produced by fossil fuels like brown coal than to just burn the fossil fuels themselves for energy. This is because fossil hydrogen is really inefficient, as so much energy is lost in the conversion process. To put this in context, this project will actually increase emissions by up to the equivalent of 735,000 new petrol cars on the road. So how can the proponents of the HESC claim that this project will actually reduce global emissions by 1.8 million tonnes per year? It turns out some very dodgy accounting and what I will generously call magical thinking are behind the claim. The case for the HESC relies on a Victorian government led carbon capture and storage project called CarbonNet. Carbon capture and storage has never been demonstrated to work at this scale anywhere in the world. Where it has been done it has either been woefully underwhelming or a total failure. Take, for example, the WA Gorgon project, which claimed to be able to capture 80 per cent of emissions but captured less than 30 per cent. Carbon capture and storage as a technology is a furphy. Moreover, CarbonNet will not exist until at least 2030, if ever, so the HESC’s emissions claims rely on an entirely separate project that has nothing to do with the HESC. CarbonNet is based on failed and expensive technology, and the project does not even exist.

But let us put this inconvenient fact aside and assume that by some miracle CarbonNet eventuates and it works. The HESC is still not zero emissions. In a best-case scenario it is still going to increase emissions. The HESC with a fully functional CarbonNet would just produce 1.8 million tonnes less carbon dioxide than a HESC without it, and even this fanciful best-case scenario is likely to be incorrect. There are questions about the data that has been used to make this calculation.

So, in short, it is hard to see how anyone could call the HESC ‘clean energy’ and keep a straight face. It is astounding to have read comments from some politicians and stories in the media that appear to just be parroting the marketing material of the HESC without question when there are so many obvious concerns about it. There was actually a pilot project for which Victorian taxpayers chipped in $50 million, and a further $57.5 million was paid for out of federal taxes. Despite being described as ‘clean’, the pilot did not even use carbon capture and storage, as it says it will do for the HESC. It simply offset emissions, a practice that is not considered clean under Australia’s National Hydrogen Strategy, because offsets have been shown to overwhelmingly lack efficacy and integrity.

The Victorian public deserve to know more. What were the results of this pilot project that Victorian taxpayers helped to fund? While the government has said it is not yet committed to the HESC, why go all the way to Japan and lend the weight of one of our most senior government ministers to this project? What taxpayer money or other support is being provided? How does the HESC stack up in the midst of the climate crisis? According to Tim Baxter, a senior researcher at the Climate Council, there is a school of thought that says that climate change is such an urgent problem that we need to throw every available option at it, including things like fossil-derived hydrogen. The counterpoint is that climate change is such an urgent problem that we cannot afford to waste time by beginning new fossil fuel industries. Fossil hydrogen is a whole new fossil fuel industry, regardless of whether carbon capture and storage is attached to it. It results in extraordinary greenhouse gas emissions. It is not a climate solution. Let us make no mistake: the HESC is an emissions-intensive fossil fuel project. The claims that it is clean energy are completely misleading, something even a superficial analysis reveals. We cannot afford any new coal and gas in Victoria, or anywhere. We must phase out our existing fossil fuels, like brown coal, not try to invent new uses for them. If the government decides to extend the life of the dirtiest brown coal in the world, it is effectively ignoring the latest IPCC report and putting the interests of the fossil fuel industry above those of people and our planet, now and in the future. We deserve to know what is going on with the HESC so we can hold the government to account. In a climate emergency every decision matters.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (15:28): It is my absolute pleasure to rise today and make my contribution on behalf of this side of the chamber and to speak on Dr Mansfield’s motion as a representative of the Greens party. Victoria is a global leader in climate action, with some of the world’s most ambitious emissions targets while transitioning Victoria to cleaner, renewable energy and creating thousands of jobs. The government has not just talked about climate action, we have gotten on with delivering it, and at the heart of this plan we are bringing back the SEC, turbocharging renewable energy production right here in Victoria and investing in clean energy skills to support jobs. Because, you see, there is climate action talk and there is climate action – climate change action. The work is never delivered by the questioning of some members of this chamber or the talking about how it can be done better, it is delivered by the action of Labor governments. Real action on climate change is what Labor offers, and that is what only Labor will deliver.

Victorians remember the SEC. It meant a fair deal for your power prices and good, stable jobs for Victorian workers. But 30 years ago Jeff Kennett and the Liberals sold off our energy networks to private multinationals, who increased prices and have pocketed billions on billions from Victorians, hurting Victorian families and businesses. Now we have told those big privately owned power companies that we are here, and the Andrews Labor government will not stop trying to get a better deal for Victorians. Backed by an initial investment of $1 billion, we are bringing back the SEC to build back new renewable energy projects and bring back government-owned energy to drive down power bills and support thousands of jobs. Along with our other plans for renewables, we are making Victoria a powerhouse for cheap, renewable electricity because no Victorian should have to choose between a pain in the hip pocket from their power bills and staying warm or keeping their lights on.

Victoria is unequivocally and without doubt the country’s leader in climate action, and indeed beyond that our targets make us one of the world’s leaders – right up there. I think of our renewable energy targets of 65 per cent renewables by 2030 and 95 per cent by 2035 as globally leading, and we are proud of it. More than 32 per cent of Victoria’s power came from renewables last year – already. We have world-leading emissions reduction targets of 75 per cent to 85 per cent by 2035 and net zero by 2045. With these targets Victoria’s economy will be decarbonising at one of the fastest rates anywhere in the world. To my point, we are global leaders, and we are proud of it.

We will deliver 59,000 jobs on the way, of which at least 6000 will be apprentices and trainees, as part of our plan. I know that apprentices and trainees are a very important part of the future of renewable jobs, and the minister sitting here, Minister Tierney, is a big supporter of our apprenticeships right here in our state. We have set the nation’s first offshore wind targets and will deliver the nation’s first offshore wind industry within a decade. This will ensure that Victoria is the home of offshore wind, which has the potential to create thousands of jobs and drive billions of dollars of investment. Australia’s first offshore wind zone has already been declared – off the coast of Gippsland – last year. To add to that, 100 per cent of government operations will be run on renewable electricity by 2025 – that is everything from government schools to police stations to hospitals, metro trains and trams. We are investing $100 million to drive zero-emission vehicle uptake among Victorians. We have also released the nation’s first Gas Substitution Roadmap to help our state navigate the path to net zero emissions while providing a greater choice and cutting energy bills. I was absolutely delighted to be a part of the release of that Gas Substitution Roadmap.

That is only the beginning, because the real work is in getting on with it – and only a Labor government gets on with it. Our $1.3 billion Solar Homes program will deliver 770,000 rebates for solar panels, batteries and hot water to Victoria’s teachers, nurses and emergency services workers. Through Solar Homes we have abated 1.7 million tonnes of emissions. That is the equivalent of hundreds of thousands of cars off the road. We have also had over 12,000 battery rebates. We are replacing old coalfield power stations with power stations on people’s rooftops, and we will create 5500 new jobs as we go. What does that mean for Victorians? That means that the power station on their rooftop is slashing $1073 a year off their power bills. That is an extraordinary number.

The Liberals have stood in the way of these new jobs and investments at every step. They voted against increasing the Victorian renewable energy target and also opposed our offshore wind target. They opposed our Climate Change Act 2017 and voted against legislation to deliver the transmission infrastructure our state needs. They could not even remember their own emissions target, and in fact I hear they lied about it on radio.

I have already gone on at great length in my adjournment yesterday, but I will reiterate that the Andrews Labor government is bringing back another round of the $250 power saving bonus to Victorian households who seek out a better electricity deal on the Victorian Energy Compare website. That is opening this Friday. I cannot stress enough how exciting that is for Victorians.

A member: This Friday.

Sheena WATT: That is this Friday. Every Victorian will be able to check, once again, on the best available deal as we head into winter and claim a further $250 to help contribute towards their energy bills. They will join nearly 1.8 million households who have claimed the payment this current round, amounting to over $443.75 million in payments – that is an extraordinary amount – into the pockets of Victorian households. The power saving bonus does not only help out with the cost of living. It also means Victorians are keeping –

Samantha Ratnam: On a point of order, Acting President, respectfully, we are about 7 minutes into this contribution, and while the government is well within its rights to talk about its track record in terms of renewable energy – it is a point of order about relevance and asking the member to be drawn back to the relevance of the motion – this motion is specifically asking for documents relating to the recent visit of the Minister for Trade and Investment to Japan to finalise a coal-to-hydrogen project, the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project, and any documents related to that. I ask that the debate please be focused on the matter before this chamber.

David Limbrick: On the point of order, Acting President, it is my belief that Dr Mansfield opened up this debate very widely in her opening contribution, and Ms Watt is entirely entitled to respond to that with the government’s views.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Bev McArthur): Thank you, Mr Limbrick. Ms Watt, you may continue, but maybe come back to the motion at hand.

Sheena WATT: Thank you, Acting President. Can I take a moment to thank Mr Limbrick for acknowledging that, yes, the remarks made by the mover of this motion were in fact very wideranging, and to that wideranging contribution by the mover of this motion I would like to respond equally with my final thoughts on our work in response to climate action needed for our state. I will say that climate action must not leave anyone behind, and that is why I am really proud of the work that we do in climate action that makes sure that vulnerable energy consumers – those with limited access to technology and other such challenges – are not left behind by initiatives to address climate action. It is true that the energy assistance program has in fact supported those that need it most. The expanded energy assistance program was launched in February 2022, and it reaches 10,000 households a year. There is no climate action if we leave people behind, and we absolutely will not do that. That is why I am really proud to get up here and talk about the 2020 energy assistance program, which supported more than 6000 vulnerable Victorian households to navigate the energy market, with an average saving of over $500 a year.

We are also working closely with the Commonwealth to deliver additional power bill relief as soon as possible, and we know that it has been and will be felt this year, with winter only weeks away. There is of course more for me to say about our work, looking to our friends in Canberra and the work that we are doing in looking to the cap on prices of coal with the Commonwealth government. I know that other contributors to this will have more to say on the federal government, the federal government’s action on climate and why only now we have got partners in Canberra that are very, very keen to move to action on climate change in Canberra to equal the enormous ambition of our Victorian state government when it comes to real action on climate change.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (15:38): I am going to make a reasonably brief contribution on motion 42 from Dr Mansfield. It is a straightforward motion. It notes that the Minister for Trade and Investment, on one of his laps of honour around the world, went to Japan and began finalising funding for a coal-to-hydrogen project known as the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain (HESC) project. Then it seeks via a normal standing order 10.01 documents motion a set of the briefings relating to the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project and the assessments, analyses, examinations, modelling and consultancy reports since January 2020 as they relate to that project. The opposition supports this motion. We support greater transparency. We see good sense in these documents being in the public domain, as we generally will with a documents motion of this type. So that is the first key point.

It is also true that Dr Mansfield opened up the debate very wide. I always counsel people to keep them narrow because these motions otherwise go on for an enormous period of time as people get into their ideological moments, with justification sometimes and other times not. The point here is that this is actually in essence a very simple document. The chamber has the power to call for documents, and the chamber has the power to demand those documents be brought to the chamber in a reasonable period of time. These are documents of public interest. The HESC project, which Ms Bath will have more to say about, I am sure, in light of the somewhat wider than normal debate, is an important project. It could potentially deliver significant outcomes for Victoria. Nonetheless it is important to look at the background of this and what assessments the government does have and how those matters are being financed. Is it Japanese money? Where is the money coming from? How does this apply? And on what basis is the government proceeding? I know there is federal money in this project as well, and I am sure there will be commentary around that too, but in essence it is relatively simple.

I do note the IPCC report that has been referred to and that we have seen this week. It does make a series of significant statements that we all need to engage with, and I do not in any way resile from that. Do I think that hydrogen has an important role in us meeting the energy challenges into the future? Yes, I do. There are the different types of hydrogen. I understand that fully, but it might be that more than one type of hydrogen has a significant role in our energy future. I make that point on the way through.

I do feel duty bound in this circumstance to respond to Ms Watt on a number of points about energy costs. The costing of the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project and what it would deliver is unknown, and one of the purposes of this motion is to understand that better. But in terms of energy costs, this government has dropped the ball and consumers are being thumped and are going to be thumped even harder. This reflects the failure of the Andrews Labor government over nine years now to put in place a proper system that deals with energy transition. They have failed on this score, and Victorians will now pay a huge price in terms of reliability of energy supply and a huge price in the literal sense of that word as they go to pay their bills every week, every month. Households can feel this. Not only are they facing the surging interest rates but they know that energy costs with respect to gas have surged and now we know the electricity costs are going up by a minimum 31 per cent in Victoria. That is a huge slug on everyday families.

Ms Watt opened up this discussion point. She wanted to talk about the government’s rebate. The government’s rebate will be a very modest contribution to the clobber that most families are going to feel and are already feeling as these prices surge upwards, hitting family budgets and making it hard for people as they struggle to meet those increased living costs – inflation, interest rates and gas. We have been very clear about our view that gas is an important transition fuel. It is a fuel that we should have proper work done on on land to bring forward non-fracked gas, conventional gas, to manage the costs not just of energy provision but also of the feedstocks. Gas is an important feedstock for so much industry.

The role of hydrogen going forward in being put into our gas lines is also a significant point here. Hydrogen gas is available. We know 5 to 10 per cent can be put down the lines now. It is very clear that a number of the suppliers can, through their normal maintenance schedule, upgrade piping to see hydrogen gas carried to households and to industry in a constructive way as an energy source. That is one option that exists into the future, and we ought not to close that off in an unsophisticated and thoughtless way. It is clear, I might say, that the source of the hydrogen is an important aspect in all of this, and I do not resile from that. I do not count out options in the Latrobe Valley. Ms Bath will have more to say about that, but I do not count out the fact that hydrogen can also come from green sources and a range of other sources that may well provide options for not just mobile energy but fixed energy needs and hydrogen delivered via pipes that could provide an option for people.

We have got to be somewhat open about this, but what is severely lacking in this area is sensible leadership from the Andrews Labor government. We have seen prices go up and up and up, and we are about to see a much greater surge. So it is all very well for Ms Watt to talk about rebates, but they are rebates from a massively increased payment that households in particular are being forced to pay – and small businesses, the small businesses that are being clobbered with these energy costs. It is very, very significant in the impact it is having. In any event, we support the provision of these documents.

David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (15:45): I would urge you, Acting President, to prepare yourself, because I am about to say something nice about the government.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Bev McArthur): I will try.

David LIMBRICK: Yes. Thank you, Acting President. This project is a fantastic achievement, and I am going to support this documents motion, because I think we need to understand exactly the process that the government went through to get to this great outcome. Here we have over $2 billion of investment from Japan that is going to go into an area that is going to be suffering job losses around about that time. This is a great achievement.

Japan understands that they need to scale up their hydrogen industry. They are very big on hydrogen. I actually went to Toyota’s hydrogen energy centre in Japan a few years ago, and it was fascinating. They were saying there that they want to use it for things like heavy industry to replace things, like for steel smelting. At the moment there are currently no real good options for replacing coking coal in steel smelting. Japan wants to use hydrogen to do that. Other systems such as heavy vehicles, like buses and things like that – they want to use hydrogen in that. They are even experimenting in personal automobiles, but I am a bit sceptical as to how big that will be.

The other thing that we are going to do here is build a new technology system around carbon capture and storage. The Greens are sceptical about this. They do not like it. Well, let the Japanese pay for it. I mean, we are not paying for this. I know there is going to be some federal money here, but we have got massive foreign investment that is going into this to utilise a massive resource, and we are in the amazing position where we have got a reservoir we can pump the carbon dioxide into. So if foreign companies want to try and reduce emissions and produce hydrogen to get it up to scale – my understanding is that Japan do not see producing hydrogen from brown coal as an extremely long term thing. Longer term of course they want to use nuclear – of course using hydrolysis, like the Greens were saying before, but they are going to use nuclear to do it.

This brings me back to the Greens talking about the climate emergency. I feel like they like the emergency more than they like the solutions –

A member interjected.

David LIMBRICK: Yes. I mean, the Greens’ track record on low-carbon energy is appalling. You have got to think of their origins. Their origins where in opposing hydro energy in Tasmania. Then in 1998 they outlawed, through an amendment – collaborating with the Democrats and, I think, the Liberal Party – new nuclear reactors. They still oppose these technologies, because this is like a religious belief for them, that we cannot use fossil fuels and we cannot use nuclear for some reason. They have even started with their language manipulation, like they do with these other things. They are calling it brown hydrogen and black hydrogen and green hydrogen. This is all manipulation of the public mindset because it does not fit into their cult-like beliefs about this. If we want to go forward – and we are going to have an energy-hungry future; we know that energy prices are rising – we need every technology on the table, and this is what Victoria is doing in this case. We are letting these Japanese companies develop this technology. It is going to create thousands of jobs for Australians, for Victorians. I think it is a fantastic project, and I urge the government to stand up to these extremists and not let them get in the way of this project and make sure it goes ahead as soon as possible.

Ryan BATCHELOR (Southern Metropolitan) (15:49): I rise to speak on Dr Mansfield’s motion seeking the production of documents under standing order 10.01 in relation to the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project – obviously an expansive debate. I might come to some of the comments that were just made in a moment, because there are a few things Mr Limbrick has said that I take particular umbrage with, not least of which who was responsible for stopping the damming of the Franklin River. But I do not want to get distracted from the important task of talking about why it is important for the chamber to debate whether this is a motion requiring the production of documents, because I do know that it is important for us to consider the terms of the motion and speak to them.

There have been some more expansive contributions made, and I for one was glad to hear about the amazing work that the Andrews Labor government is doing in relation to climate action, which Ms Watt spent a very long time talking about, because frankly there is a lot to talk about. So I will get to that in a bit of detail shortly, but I will say the government obviously takes requests such as this very seriously and consistently upholds the obligations placed upon it when the Parliament passes motions like this requesting documents. I am sure, should this motion pass, due consideration will be given to the production of the documents requested, subject to the normal considerations regarding legal advice on executive privilege and the form and content of those matters so that the integrity of our document production and management system can be upheld.

Also, the other point to make is that the hardworking and diligent public servants who will be undertaking the task shortly, one suspects, of finding these documents, doing thorough searches for them, are the very same public servants who we know are working hard delivering the Andrews Labor government’s strong action on climate, our strong action on renewables and undertaking all of the various good work – hard work – that previous speakers have articulated.

Obviously there has been a bit of debate here about the particulars of the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project, and whilst I cannot profess to be an expert in the various technical elements of projects such as these, it is safe to say that the government is working through this proposal and conducting due diligence to determine whether there is any support for it to proceed beyond the pilot phase.

The contributions that have been made previously do, in terms of both the motion itself and the manner in which the debate in the chamber today has unfolded, give us the opportunity to talk about exactly how much this government is doing on climate action. I do not think we should ever, ever stop talking about just how ambitious and successful Victoria is being as a global leader in climate action. We have some of the world’s most ambitious emissions reductions targets. While we are transitioning Victoria to cleaner, cheaper and renewable electricity, we are creating, as we do that, thousands of jobs across the state and also, in particular, in my colleague Mr McIntosh’s Eastern Victoria Region with the commitment we have got to creating jobs in and around the Latrobe Valley and the broader Gippsland region. We know it is really important that we take climate action, build renewable energy and create jobs right across this state. It is what this government has been about for the last eight years, and I think you are only seeing an acceleration of action on climate and renewable energy under this government as we do things like bringing back the State Electricity Commission – 100 per cent government-owned renewable energy –delivering the sort of future that Victoria wants and escaping the privatisation past imposed on our state by the Liberal Party. So when we see talk about climate action and climate change, what you see from this government is action to try and address the harmful effects of climate change and build Victoria with a renewable energy future. We are doing a lot. I am keen to talk about it. I hope that is okay with other people.

Melina Bath: The horse has left the stable.

Ryan BATCHELOR: Really? That’s outrageous. Let us get into the detail. We have heard – and I am talking in broad terms – about how much of a leader we are in climate action in Victoria and how ambitious our renewable energy targets are: 65 per cent renewables by 2030 and 95 per cent by 2035. We have already smashed our first target. We wanted to get to 25 per cent by 2020; we got 32 per cent of our power from renewables last year. We wanted to be at 25 per cent, and we were at 32 per cent last year.

Tom McIntosh: It wasn’t a ceiling.

Ryan BATCHELOR: It was not a ceiling, no way. I think that gives everyone confidence that the policy agenda that the state government has been prioritising as part of its energy framework for the last eight years is delivering the kind of emissions reduction in our energy sector that we need to see.

While we are decarbonising at one of the fastest rates of anywhere in the world, we are also creating jobs. At the same time as we are taking carbon out of our electricity by creating cleaner, renewable electricity, we are creating tens of thousands of jobs. We estimate around 59,000 new jobs will be created as part of this transition. One of the areas where I think we are making very significant leads – taking leaps and bounds, being a leader in this nation – right off the coast of Gippsland is in offshore wind, because we know that our clean energy transition is in large part going to be powered not only by the sun and the enormous conversion of the rooftops of largely our homes into their own kind of power stations but by changing our renewable energy mix and using offshore wind to generate significant new capacity into our energy market. Our offshore wind targets will bring online 2 gigawatts of new capacity by 2032 – that is enough to power 1.5 million homes – 4 gigawatts by 2035 and 9 gigawatts by 2040. They will ensure that Victoria is home to offshore wind, which has the potential to create thousands of jobs and drive billions of dollars of investment. At the end of last year our first offshore wind zone was declared off the coast of Gippsland, and I think you can see that this agenda is powering on.

We have also announced new solar projects that are going to help power 100 per cent of the government’s operations from renewable electricity for our police stations right to our hospitals and our trains and trams. We are taking action on our Gas Substitution Roadmap to help our state navigate the path to net zero by providing greater choice for consumers and also options for households to figure out how they are going to change their energy mix and cut their energy bills. We believe that our future relies on a range of actions on climate across the energy sector, across households and using a range of technologies to help drive our emissions reductions target.

But I want to spend the last part of my speech just reflecting on and echoing some of the comments an earlier speaker made about not only the work we are putting into generating renewable energy but the assistance that we are providing to households with the power saving bonus. Friday of this week marks the next round of the $250 power saving bonus. We are giving $250 to Victorian households who take the easy step of seeking out a better electricity deal on Victoria’s Energy Compare website, which in addition to getting the $250 potentially saves them hundreds of dollars extra every year. We are providing the kind of relief to the hip pockets of people who are dealing with the consequences of power prices going up, but we are also setting up our energy system for a cleaner future that is creating jobs. That is our commitment to clean energy action in this state.

Melina BATH (Eastern Victoria) (15:59): I am pleased to rise to support the documents motion moved by the Greens’ Ms Mansfield, 42 on the notice paper, and on principle the Nationals do support documents motions because they provide additional transparency to drill into the closed doors of what the government does with a whole variety of entities. In this case it is to do with the Department of Jobs, Skills, Industry and Regions to do with the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain (HESC) project. That being said – and I support the documents motion – this motion really became, from the very outset, a proxy for a substantive motion to have a debate on hydrogen and on, as the Greens put it, ‘dirty coal’. The clarity around this is coal is just coal. Latrobe Valley coal happens to be full of water. Water needs to be removed for it to produce electricity, and that has been done for almost 100 years, so I reject ‘dirty coal’. It is just the way the Greens often phrase those terms.

The HESC project was supported and initially funded with the support of the previous Ryan and Baillieu government, and indeed it was the Honourable Peter Ryan and the Nationals who were very instrumental in putting up that $50 million from the state government back then. It had matching funding of around $50 million from the federal government and a consortium of Japanese government and some very important – particularly in Japan – heavy industry components, Kawasaki and others, to produce a HESC, a supply chain, to see whether or not this could be produced. As the Greens have outlined, it was stationed in Loy Yang A power station. I was actually there at the opening, and it had huge interest, support, passion and enthusiasm from the Japanese contingency who came over. Indeed the Treasurer Mr Pallas was there and spoke in favour of this Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain, and we saw the turning of the sod. I speak often in this place – when I get the chance – about how in doing that we were creating jobs from locally grown engineers, one of whom I happened to teach. So you have got local students going through university and coming back and working in the Latrobe Valley on that particular project. I will say that the government, I think, is under a great sense of tension right now because you have got the Honourable Tim Pallas saying behind closed doors, ‘I think this is a goer, and I will expand a little bit more,’ and then you have got Lily D’Ambrosio saying, ‘No, pull back.’ There is a vacuum of support here from the Andrews government. You see, they talked about everything else but their support for a $2 billion project that the Japanese government and consortium is prepared to put on the table to fund.

The Greens are right to say that the HESC project was never destined to capture that carbon dioxide produced in the relatively small amount of hydrogen that was produced. It was contained, transported to Hastings and then it was put on a specially designed ship and shipped to Japan. The supply chain worked. The next part to this is of course the large-scale manufacturing of hydrogen – and yes, it is gasification of coal. The key element in this is the capturing of the CO₂ emissions and the sequestering of them, whether it be carbon capture and storage or carbon capture utilisation and storage. We hear the Greens saying it has never been done, it is all dodgy carbon capture and storage. Well, that is incorrect. It has been emerging and in facilitation for the last 45 years. There are 32 projects built around the world that capture carbon and store it, and indeed there are about 200 new projects that are underway. In our own Otway Basin, carbon capture and storage organisation CO2CRC has been sequestering that carbon as an inert substance underground for almost the last 20 years and has been looking at about 100 million tonnes of that carbon dioxide sequestering.

When the Greens talk about CO₂ – it is important that we are good global citizens. It is important that we do take climate action. It is important that we work towards reducing any warming and our CO₂ emissions, without a doubt. But to point the finger at this way of producing energy – when that carbon dioxide is sequestered, the by-product of hydrogen happens to be water, H₂O. The other point is that along the way hydrogen produced from splitting water through the electricity raised from renewable energy – whether that be solar panels, solar plants rather than farms, or whether that be through wind turbines – is a very sensible and important way to transition. It certainly can be part of a very good way of reducing those CO₂ emissions. But what the Greens always leave out – they forget this, and I think it is disingenuous – is the fact that when you produce energy from a solar panel, from a solar plant or from a wind turbine, there has been a pathway of CO₂emissions to get to that point. There is the mining of minerals required to produce the wind turbines and the solar panels. There has been manufacturing, and on an industrial scale, to produce wind turbines and photovoltaic cells, solar cells. There is also the transportation, because we are not manufacturing that here. Only 11 per cent of renewable energy components are manufactured in Australia. Then you have transportation, using large diesel ships, and then you have the installation. That all needs to be factored into the whole carbon dioxide discussion and debate, and I think is appropriate to do that and have that discussion. Then there is the decommissioning, the decomposition and the recycling of those particular forms. There is that in all cases, and I put that on the table. We have seen Hazelwood decommissioned, and the land is being restored back to flat earth now and potentially a lake into the future. So I put that on the table.

We also see the Andrews government talk about the SEC – 100 per cent government-owned. Well, we have just seen recently where the government has gone cap in hand to the federal government saying, ‘Listen, I think we’re going to be a bit short of funds because we have got the Commonwealth Games. We’re not sure. Our budget has blown out astronomically’ – $10 million a day in interest repayments on our debt alone in Victoria under Daniel Andrews – ‘so can you stump up some cash for the SEC?’. So it is disingenuous of the government to talk about ‘wholly government owned’ and ‘they are going out to tender – please support us.’ We in the Latrobe Valley understand. It was laughable during the election when people would come up and say, ‘Oh, SEC, SEC.’ Many, many people just looked at it for what it was: a Labor plug to get re-elected. Labor won 31 per cent of the vote in the valley. So if it was supposed to be resounding, it did not work.

Members interjecting.

Melina BATH: In the Latrobe Valley – 31 per cent of the vote.

All of this should be part of the discussion. I go back to the point: hydrogen energy should be looked at in terms of a holistic view of energy produced with low to no carbon emissions. That is where we all need to have our focus, whether it be in renewables or hydrogen. There is a vacuum in support for anything that the Japanese government is prepared to spend $2 billion on, so I call for a bit of sense in this debate. I support the motion in terms of transparency and documents, but I am calling out both the government and the Greens for being disingenuous.

Harriet Shing: Why don’t you tell everyone how we all suck, Mr Galea?

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:10): Apparently we do all suck on this side of the chamber! What an introduction. I am glad I have two fabulous members from Eastern Victoria on this side of the chamber with me to talk about all the wonderful things that we are doing in this area.

I rise to speak on Dr Mansfield’s motion. Let us start with a simple fact: Victoria is a leader in climate action – a leader in Australia and a leader on the global stage. We have some of the world’s most ambitious energy and emissions targets. Victoria is transitioning to cleaner, cheaper, renewable electricity. We are creating thousands of jobs – many in the Eastern Victoria Region in the Latrobe Valley as well – in the renewables sector. Labor is the only party of government that is willing and able to deliver the ambitious climate action that we need and that Victorians rightly expect. While some parties have talked about climate action and others have denied its necessity, this government has gotten on with delivering.

At the heart of this plan, we are bringing back the State Electricity Commission, the SEC, turbocharging renewable energy production right here in Victoria and investing in clean energy skills to support jobs. Action on climate change is not being delivered by the questioning and pontificating of the Greens nor by the roadblocking of the Liberals but by a Labor government that is getting on with the job. People want the SEC back. They want a fair deal on power prices and good, stable jobs for Victorian workers. They want an SEC like the old SEC and what it used to deliver. Thirty years ago Kennett and the Liberals sold our energy network. The privatisation led to multinationals increasing prices, costing Victoria’s economy and Victorian households billions of dollars. Kennett’s and the Liberals’ privatisation hurt families, it hurt businesses and it hurt Victoria. Now those multinationals are set on leaving the market. While the Liberals look back fondly on Kennett-style privatisation, the Andrews Labor government is taking decisive action to deliver a better outcome for all Victorians.

With an initial $1 billion investment, the Andrews Labor government is bringing back the SEC to build new renewable energy projects and bring back government-owned energy to drive down power bills and support thousands of jobs. An expert advisory panel has been set up, encompassing some of the best minds across the energy and service delivery sectors. Working with the panel to deliver a 10-year strategy prioritising 4.5 gigawatts of government-owned renewable energy, this renewable supply will be the equivalent in replacement capacity of Loy Yang A. This large capacity of state-owned renewable and reliable power will slash energy bills and further enable us to meet our renewable energy target of 65 per cent by 2030.

We will also work with like-minded entities such as industry super funds and others who are focused on a fair deal for Victorians, not just on their profits. The state will have a controlling interest, but we will enable the balance of investment to come from these other entities. We will invest at least $20 million to prepare the SEC for its new role in our energy market, including by setting up an office and headquarters in Morwell. With the SEC and our myriad of sector-leading investment and policy stances, we are making Victoria a powerhouse for cheap, renewable electricity. Victorian households and businesses will not pay any more than they should to stay warm and to keep the lights on. That is what decisive and effective climate action means and what Labor is delivering.

Our renewable energy target of 65 per cent by 2030 and 95 per cent by 2035 makes us nation leaders. Our 2020 target of 25 per cent was achieved and surpassed. Thirty-two per cent of power in this state came from renewables in the year 2022. We do not just have ambitious targets that look good on paper, we have the track record and the policies to achieve and deliver them. Our emissions reductions target is world leading: 75 to 85 per cent by 2035 and net zero by 2045. Our targets put Victoria in line to limit global warming by 1.5 degrees Celsius, meaning Victoria’s economy will be decarbonising at one of the fastest rates in the world.

Our policies will also deliver 59,000 estimated jobs along the way. We are delivering the nation’s first offshore wind targets, bringing 2 gigawatts of capacity online by 2032, which means power for 1.5 million homes. This will expand to 4 gigawatts by 2035 and 9 gigawatts by 2040. Victoria will be the home of offshore wind, driving investment and creating thousands more jobs. Six new solar projects will help us power 100 per cent of government operations on renewable energy, from police stations to hospitals, metro trains to trams. I do wish that the other member for Western Victoria was in the room right now; we would be talking about the tram tracks.

Harriet Shing: She loves the tram tracks.

Michael GALEA: I also see Ms Ermacora in the corner. She loves the tram tracks, Mrs McArthur. I am sure she would be delighted to hear that we are going to have 100 per cent of our tram services powered by renewable energy.

Harriet Shing: Bev wants trams to the Wimmera.

Michael GALEA: Well, trams to the Wimmera might be another project. It is slightly outside of –

Harriet Shing: Nice and flat. Go for days.

Michael GALEA: Go for days. We are leading the way in the uptake of zero-emission vehicles with our $100 million investment. Our target of 50 per cent zero-emission vehicles by 2030 includes all new electric buses by 2025 and 400 low-emission vehicles in our government fleet. To help achieve our target, we have been working with other states in developing vehicle emission standards, taking the initiative to overcome the failure of the previous federal Liberal government. We are delivering $46 million in grants to encourage people to purchase low-emission electric vehicles, $19 million to accelerate the rollout of electric vehicle charging infrastructure across the state, $20 million to green our bus fleet and $15 million to green government and commercial vehicle fleets.

Again we lead the nation with our $1.3 billion Solar Homes program, delivering 770,000 rebates for solar panels, batteries and hot water for Victoria’s teachers, nurses and police. Already almost 240,000 rebates have been delivered across the state, with 215,000 panels going onto rooftops owing to the policies of the Andrews Labor government. Solar Homes is saving people approximately $1070 a year, creating 5500 new jobs and abating 1.7 million tonnes of emissions. We have policies for state-owned energy, offshore wind, solar, batteries, electric vehicles, home solar, a gas substitute road map, ambitious emissions reductions and renewable targets. That is what climate action looks like. That is what leadership is.

The Liberals have stood in the way of jobs and investment at every step. They have demonstrated their commitment to inaction. I do note that there is actually not a single Liberal in the chamber at the moment. I am not sure who their whip is at the moment, but if they were here, I would be looking forward to hearing back from them. Climate action does not look like voting against Victorian renewable energy targets and opposing our offshore wind targets. Climate leadership is not opposing the Climate Change Act 2017 or voting against legislation to deliver critical transmission infrastructure. The Liberals did all of that. At the same time, what was their alternative? A target they could not even be bothered to remember.

How could I talk about the Andrews Labor government’s successful policies in this area without mentioning the power saver bonus. This incredibly successful program is giving $250 to Victorian households who seek out better electricity deals on the Victorian Energy Compare website, potentially leading them to save hundreds of dollars more. The new round of the program, which initially started in July 2022, will be opening this Friday 24 March, in two days time. Every Victorian will be able to check that they are once again on the best available deal as we head into winter and claim a further $250 to help contribute towards their energy bill. 1.8 million households have claimed the payment during the current round, amounting to over $443.75 million in payments. The power saving bonus means that more Victorians will be comparing the market for the best deal, with the compare website helping them to manage the confusing nature of the retail energy market. This will encourage competition from retailers as Victorians shop around for the best deal, helping to keep power prices in check. I look forward to assisting my constituents in the South-Eastern Metropolitan Region to claim the power saving bonus. In particular I am looking forward to joining my colleague in the other place the member for Frankston at a shopping centre stall we will be doing very soon.

Harriet Shing: Great member.

Michael GALEA: Great member. We will be helping the good people of Frankston to claim the $250 bonus and get the best value possible on their energy bills. To assist vulnerable people and those with limited access to technology, we have developed the energy assistance program, supporting those that need it most and helping vulnerable Victorians find the best deal. The EAP gives one-on-one assistance to navigate the market – (Time expired)

Jacinta ERMACORA (Western Victoria) (16:20): I stand here. I would like to show respect for the mover of the motion and for the intent of the motion, and I think the more that we can learn in some regard about all the different approaches to energy production, the better for all of us, and that is a universal statement, really. But in case this chamber missed what was said earlier, Victoria is a global leader in climate action, with some of the world’s most ambitious emissions targets, and I will talk about some examples shortly.

We are heading towards not only cleaner energy but cheaper energy, and only Labor can do that – the commitment to looking after working people and those that need financial support, a fair chance, in this community. The government have not just talked about climate action, we have also gotten on with delivering it. At the heart of this plan we are bringing back the SEC, and that was the primary initiative that really I believe substantially resulted in the 56-seat outcome at the election – renewable, cheaper energy via a new SEC. The work is never delivered by just talking about climate change. It is never delivered by just saying, ‘Do you realise climate change is an issue? Do you realise that there’s a problem and nothing is being done? Do you realise there’s a problem and not enough is being done?’ Real action on climate change is what Labor offers, and as I said, only Labor can deliver the practical outcomes that climate change requires of us.

Victorians remember the SEC. It meant a fair deal on our power prices and good, stable jobs for Victorian workers. So it was not just a powerhouse producing the energy for our state, it was a powerhouse for the economy of our state and for jobs and families. But I really do have to remind everyone of what it was like 30 years ago when Jeff Kennett and the Liberals sold off our energy networks – sold off the crown jewels, so to speak – to multinationals and thereby gave permission to make profit out of our energy production in a state where that was not the case before or where the profits were reinvested into our state. So it is a little bit rich for the opposition to accuse the government of dropping the ball on energy prices when it was their ideological obsession with selling off our state assets to the private sector that caused a steady increase in energy prices in the first place. There is one thing that Victorian households know about energy prices and that is that privatisation equals higher energy prices. When the Liberals were last in power, power prices increased by over 34 per cent, and they did absolutely nothing about it. So they did not drop the ball, they absolutely smashed power prices and the power industry in this state.

Those companies have said to us they are leaving now. They have seen the writing on the wall. And who is going to pick up that ball that has been kicked down the street? It is Labor. The Labor government is going to do that. Backed by an initial investment of $1 billion, we are bringing back the SEC to build new renewable energy projects and bring back government-owned energy to drive down power bills and support thousands of jobs. It is not just the old SEC that is coming back, it is going to be a new SEC.

Michael Galea: Sounds like a better one.

Jacinta ERMACORA: It is going to be new and better. It is going to be a renewable SEC, and this is where the state government will play a role in looking at and addressing affordability of energy prices but also renewable transition. That renewable transition may be a little bumpy along the way, and only a government leading the way through a renewable, government-owned corporation can help to smooth those bumps as we get through to 2030 and 2040.

We have set up an expert advisory panel with some of the best minds from across the energy and service delivery sectors, and we will work with the panel to develop a 10-year strategy prioritising 4.5 gigawatts of government-owned renewable energy – the equivalent replacement of Loy Yang A – slashing energy bills and helping us to meet our renewable energy target of 65 per cent by 2030. We will ensure that the state has a controlling interest, with the balance of funding invested from like-minded entities. This is the brilliance of the structure that is being established – it is a combination of government and private sector investment and enough government investment to ensure control over the policy levers and the settings to use the SEC for what it needs to be used for, and that is to essentially clean up the mess after Jeff Kennett, all these years later.

Along with our other plans for renewables –

Members interjecting.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Ms Ermacora, take a seat for a minute, please. There is far too much noise in the chamber. Can we have some order, please.

Jacinta ERMACORA: Thank you, Acting President. What a rabble. In addition to our other plans for renewables, we are making Victoria a powerhouse for cheap, renewable electricity so Victorian households and businesses do not pay any more than they should to stay warm and keep the lights on. Our government does not just talk about climate action, we get on with delivering it. Victoria is unequivocally the country’s leader in climate action with our ambitious renewable energy targets of 65 per cent renewables by 2030 and 95 per cent by 2035. We have already smashed those energy targets, as was mentioned by my colleague Mr Batchelor earlier, well ahead of schedule.

Harriet Shing: The water sector is extraordinary, Ms Ermacora. You would know this.

Jacinta ERMACORA: Since you mentioned that, I am about to go on, predictably, and use a water example. Our world-leading emissions reduction targets are 75 per cent to 85 per cent by 2035 and net zero by 2045, aligning Victoria with the Paris goals of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Victoria made this commitment to the Paris goals before the previous federal government, who did not make that commitment. We made that commitment, and we have got on with making the settings, structuring the settings, to do that.

So you can see that we are ahead of schedule. A good example of this goal in the south-west region is Wannon Region Water Corporation. Some years ago the Minister for Water at the time requested all water corporations make a pledge on how far they would be on the journey to carbon neutrality by 2025, and Wannon Water committed to 40 per cent. This would have been in around about 2018 – 2025 seemed like a long way away – ‘How far will we be along the journey of carbon neutrality by 2025?’ With a calculation of about 12 to 14 different specific projects, Wannon Water estimated 40 per cent. A recent review of the progress against that goal showed that Wannon Water was smashing that target and ahead of schedule, just like the state. They have now committed to carbon neutrality completely by 2030. I rest my case.

Sarah MANSFIELD (Western Victoria) (16:31): Thank you to all the members who made a contribution to this important debate this afternoon. This is not about ideology; this is about science, and it is about the public’s right to know about the HESC. It is curious that government members essentially did not address the motion and barely mentioned the Hydrogen Energy Supply Chain project at all. As Ms Bath astutely observed, it appears there may be a tension in the government about this project, with some members ready to back the project and others being more cautious. While government members went to great lengths to tell us about some of the laudable things that are being done with respect to renewable energy and targets, and the Greens are proud of having pushed the government to go further and faster with renewables and targets, the HESC has nothing to do with that.

This is about a new fossil fuel project – fossil hydrogen produced using brown coal for export to Japan. We heard from government members that some like to talk climate action while others actually take it, and we agree. Targets and renewables are an important part of climate action but so is ending fossil fuel dependence. Climate action means everything everywhere all at once. The government talked about being a world leader in climate action, but with the HESC we will potentially see them backing a new emissions-intensive dirty brown coal project. Supporting new fossil fuel projects like the HESC is not delivering climate action. Climate action means addressing it on all fronts – investing in renewables but also ending new coal and gas and phasing out fossil fuels.

Government members were at pains to tell us the importance of keeping energy affordable for all Victorians. We do not dispute this. However, hydrogen produced by the HESC is not necessarily cheap, and it is destined for Japan, not for Victorians. There were comments made by Mr Limbrick that we are not paying for this – Japan is. Part of the reason for this motion is to discover if that is the case. We know that Victorians chipped in $50 million to the pilot project. What other taxpayer funding or other resources are being provided to it? And even if we are not paying for it with taxpayer funds, we will all end up paying for it if it is allowed to proceed. Further emissions worsen the climate crisis and just make the task of keeping global warming to less than 1.5 degrees that much harder and that much more expensive. There are many other points I could address. However, I think what this debate has really highlighted is the importance of transparency around the HESC, and it really justifies our motion to produce all relevant documents.

Motion agreed to.