Coalition’s rubbery gas numbers can’t conceal disastrous energy plan

Greenpeace Media Release

In response to the Coalition’s newly released gas policy modelling, Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“Peter Dutton’s policy to supposedly achieve meagre changes to gas prices is a distraction from the fact that we don’t need gas and the seismic blasting, methane leaks or fracking it involves, because we already have the technology available to build affordable clean energy to power homes and businesses for the long term.

“Gas is a dangerous fossil fuel that drives worsening floods, bushfires, cyclones and droughts. The Coalition wants to greenlight gas expansion like Woodside’s Browse project and fracking in the Beetaloo Basin, which threaten our environment and the climate.

“The Coalition’s energy policy and its ‘modelling’ on electricity prices simply don’t pass the sniff test. A future-proof policy is one that accelerates the transition to clean, affordable renewable energy, helps Australian businesses electrify and get off gas, and quickly phases out fossil fuels.

“Renewable energy is already the cheapest form of energy, and is reducing or even eliminating electricity bills for millions of Australian homes and businesses today. When it comes to reducing bills, gas simply cannot compete with renewables.

“Australians can’t afford worsening gas-fuelled climate disasters like the Black Summer bushfires, Tropical Cyclone Alfred, and the Queensland floods that have racked up clean-up costs in the billions of dollars.

“The Coalition has also refused to dump its nuclear plans despite criticism from fellow Liberals, and estimates by experts which show that the cost of building nuclear reactors alone will cost taxpayers up to $600 billion. Peter Dutton has provided no plan for how the additional costs of nuclear waste management, insurance, and safety will be funded either.

“The enormous costs of the Coalition’s plan to expand climate-wrecking gas and build risky nuclear reactors in Australia overshadow any paltry gas savings released in its questionable modelling today.”

 

Dear reader, we need your support

Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.

One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.

With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.

Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969