House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Second Session (51-2) 51 2 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Grievance Debate Peak Oil Theory PEAK OIL THEORY Ms FOX House of Assembly Bright Ms FOX (Bright) (15:44): I rise today to speak for the second time in this house on the issue of peak oil. I was the first person to do so a year ago and, since that time, I have learnt a great deal— Mr Hanna House of Assembly Mr Hanna: I was the first one. Ms FOX House of Assembly Ms FOX: Were you? I would like to apologise. I was unaware that the member for Mitchell had previously discussed peak oil, and I would like to celebrate him for having done so. Mr Hanna interjecting: Ms FOX House of Assembly Ms FOX: Yes. So, I was the second person, but perhaps the first woman. Mr Hanna House of Assembly Mr Hanna: Yes. Ms FOX House of Assembly Ms FOX: Since that time I have learnt a great deal about peak oil theory and its potential impact on my electorate, this state and our country. Sadly, some people do not take these theories entirely seriously, perhaps in the same way that global warming was not taken seriously 30 years ago. The confused involvement of certain fringe elements in the debate certainly does not help. After learning about peak oil theory, I asked a student who was part of the parliamentary internship scheme at Adelaide University, Mr Tyson Retz, to prepare a report into the impacts of peak oil on the state seat of Bright. I thought it would be interesting to see how something we discuss on a global scale would affect my constituency here. For those listening in the house today, I will briefly remind you about peak oil theory. This theory suggests that oil production rates in any given area eventually reach a peak and then begin an irreversible decline. Peak oil theorists maintain that oil production follows a bell-shaped curve where production rates increase only so long as new reserves and extraction techniques are developed. The peak is a reservoir's maximum production rate, which typically occurs after roughly half of the resource in a reservoir has been produced. The International Energy Agency predicts a peak around 2015. Other experts say it will come in 2035. Let us look at the electorate of Bright and oil scarcity. Given its low population density of around 1,060 people per square kilometre and its distance from the Adelaide CBD, Bright is situated in an area of locational fuel price disadvantage. It is clear to me that in the future the citizens of Bright will need to develop programs which reduce their global footprint if the transition to the post-petroleum age is to be a smooth one. Mr Retz's report is particularly strong on the matter of thinking locally. Hopefully, this will become less of a slogan and more of a daily reality. As in most western cities, since the 1940s Adelaide has engaged in low density sprawling growth. This has progressively separated where people live from where they work, shop, attend school and engage in leisure pursuits, requiring considerable land and energy for transport. People in Adelaide are heavily reliant on cars. Adelaide's south-western suburbs are no exception to that trend. Mr Retz's report says that Bright is 'an inefficient and highly dependent user of fossil energy'. Mr Retz also says that those living in the southern sector of the electorate will be the most severely affected by rising fuel costs, simply because they manage more debt than those in the northern sector and live further away from essential services. On the whole, those living in the southern part of the electorate are younger, have less disposable income and are more dependent on cheap fuel to cover greater travel commitments. So, what about solutions for the future? Firstly, we need to acknowledge the problem. Governments worldwide have not been good at looking into the future and accepting theories that make them uncomfortable. Global warming is perhaps the most pertinent example. Until very recently, many western governments only paid lip service to the reality of climate change and its consequences. I think that peak oil is comparable. It is not an issue which should rest on the fringes of political dialogue with extremists and loopers. The peak oil debate must be brought into the political mainstream. Secondly, the outlook for Bright is certainly not all doom and gloom. With a relatively low population density and reasonably productive soils, proper bio-regional planning in Bright should allow communities to be largely self-sufficient in food production. Indeed, it may be an idea for local councils, community groups and the state government to enlist the support of a diverse range of sustainable city experts and eco-architects to form a peak oil board. Finally, and I know that various road lobby groups will not be thrilled to hear me say this, we will eventually have to substitute road programs for public transport networks. We will have to place particular emphasis on integrated transport networks which allow greater circumferential movement. We should consider the ways in which the collective road lobby is going to resist the shift towards non road-based transport, and we are going to have to think about how to deal with that.