Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 24 September 2024.)

Ms THOMPSON (Davenport) (15:59): I rise to speak to the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2024. South Australia has long proven itself as a world leader in decarbonisation and renewable energy generation, and it is fair to suggest that our ambitions in this space are ever-growing. On coming into government in 2022, we moved swiftly to declare a climate emergency and to progress our vision for a net zero emissions economy, which is work that this bill will expand on.

Today's amendments will enshrine South Australia's short and long-term emissions reduction targets in legislation, all with a view to limiting the extent of climate change and creating a healthier future for our state. As the Deputy Premier has already referenced, this bill increases the state's emissions reductions target to a more ambitious 60 per cent by 2030 and, ultimately, net zero by 2050.

While 'ambitious' is the appropriate word to describe this government's transition plans, it is worth noting that South Australian Labor already has runs on the board. Largely, we have overseen a 50 per cent emissions reduction since 2007, and that is a credit to our renewables sector, which has its own new target of 100 per cent net electricity generation by 2027. Also included in the bill is a requirement for five-yearly interim emissions targets, which will be implemented between 2030 and that all-important date of 2050.

We can set these targets, but why is legislation required to support them? We all tout the success of South Australia's early adoption of renewable technologies, and clearly we have been on the right track for some time. But targets are only as good as the policies and programs that support them, and this legislation is a clear signal to business, investors and the broader community that this government is wholly committed to a net zero emissions future. There is no room for ambiguity, and if our intentions were not already clear then they certainly are now.

What about those opposite? They are the architects of policy initiatives like the Liberal Energy Solution, which promised to cut average household power bills by hundreds of dollars during their term of government. Where did that land us? Well, power prices went up, not down, and then, in an attempt to save face, they shifted some goalposts and set accountants loose on their numbers. They tried to slap a bow on it before moving quickly along, but I think it is fair to suggest that South Australians saw straight through that.

Now they are at it again, wanting to amend the bill to introduce a new reliability target, which, for the benefit of everyone playing along at home, already exists. In fact, the Australian Energy Market Commission has made a final recommendation to extend the interim reliability measure until June 2028. So it is either a silly thought bubble—not first one they have had this week—or a poor attempt at political strategy. Either way, it deserves no further thought.

There is no internal debate on this side of the house as to what our state's future looks like. We are in lockstep and we are getting on with the task at hand, because that is what the community expects its elected officials to do.

A point that I would like to touch on briefly is that the targets we set here are floors, not ceilings. They are ambitious but certainly not impossible, and they will help support a transition that is as economically sustainable as it is socially responsible. In February, we announced that we would bring forward our 100 per cent net electricity target from 2030 to 2027. That is an example of how you can move the goalposts to deliver positive and lasting change. This is not the only target that can be changed, and if there is good reason to do so—for example, a recent scientific development or the introduction of new technology—then we are prepared to do that. As I said, these targets are floors, not ceilings.

The bill before the house today has been subject to extensive consultation, starting in April 2023 at the inaugural Industry Climate Change Conference, which brought businesses and communities together to discuss opportunities for our net zero emissions future. From there, community climate conversations were held in May and December before public consultation commenced in February this year. We took the opportunity to listen, and at each step we heard, loudly and clearly, that people want and expect more. We heard your calls for more ambitious emissions reduction targets, we recognised widespread support for increased renewable electricity generation and we understood concern around the inclusion of offsets in making a claim to net zero. All of that brings us to where we are today.

This bill cements our status as a leader in the push to decarbonise. It is a position we have long held, not just within Australia but right across the globe. This bill is a clear indication that we are not resting on our laurels. We can be proud of what we have achieved today, but we cannot risk bringing that hard work undone through inaction. This is ambitious policy, but if any jurisdiction can meet its targets—the targets set out in this bill—surely it is South Australia.

I would like to thank the Deputy Premier for her tireless efforts in developing this legislation, and I also extend that thanks to all in my community who have participated in the process. I commend this bill to the house.

S.E. ANDREWS (Gibson) (16:05): I rise in support of the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2024. This bill:

updates the state's emissions reduction targets to a more ambitious 60 per cent by 2030, and to reach net zero by 2050;

updates the state's renewable electricity generation target to 100 per cent by 2027;

requires a state emissions reduction plan to help achieve South Australia's emission reduction targets;

requires a statewide climate risk assessment to be prepared to identify risks and opportunities to inform adaptation planning—an entirely thorough approach;

introduces an ability for the Premier to nominate a public sector entity to prepare a climate change plan for an entity or sector;

provides for public sector action and reporting on reducing emissions and managing climate risk in government actions; and

requires five-yearly interim emissions targets to be set between 2030 and 2050.

We are leaving no stone unturned in our goals to meet these targets.

The Malinauskas Labor government makes an election commitment to update our state's targets in this Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction Act. When the act first came into operation under the Rann Labor government, it was the first of its kind in Australia. It has guided policy and planning in our state to achieve world-leading outcomes in renewable energy, generation and climate mitigation, something of which we are all very proud and have the opportunity to build even further upon.

This government takes climate change seriously. We declared a climate emergency in May 2022, soon after forming government—something of which I know my community in Gibson is very proud—and we committed to restoring a safe climate by transforming the economy to zero net emissions. This bill continues the work and enshrines in the legislation South Australia's short-term and long-term emissions reduction targets to help limit the extent of climate change. Importantly, it also strengthens policy and planning provisions in the act to allow the targets to be achieved.

As the member for Davenport has said, this is ambitious policy but entirely achievable because we are all so committed to this policy work. I thank the Deputy Premier and all her staff who have worked so hard on this legislation, and I commend the bill to the house.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (16:08): I rise to make a contribution to the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2024. This bill was introduced into this place on 29 August 2024 by the Deputy Premier and follows on from the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Targets) Amendment Bill 2021, which was introduced into this house by the then Minister for Environment and Water, the Hon. David Speirs MP. The bill included targets such as net zero by 2050, reducing net emissions by more than 50 per cent by 2030 from 2005 levels and achieving 100 per cent net renewable energy generation by 2030. The bill never got to be debated before parliament was prorogued.

It should be noted that most of the reduction in the state's greenhouse gas emissions has occurred in the energy industries and land use and forestry, and I will talk about land use a bit more later on, with large changes occurring in 2020-21 and 2021-22 and coming after the summer bushfires in 2020.

The bill, in regard to the 2050 net zero emissions target for the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2024, seeks to replace the existing South Australian target to reduce by 31 December 2050 greenhouse gas emissions within this state by at least 60 per cent to an amount that is equal to or less than 40 per cent of 1990 levels with a target to achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. A new interim 2030 target is proposed to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 50 per cent by 31 December 2030, and that is from 2005 levels.

The 2014 renewable electricity generation and use targets in the current act have been achieved and will be removed. The bill proposes to update the renewable electricity target in the act to 100 per cent net renewable electricity generation by 31 December 2027.

In regard to five-yearly interim targets, section 5 of the act will also be amended to include a requirement for the minister responsible for the act to set interim five-yearly emissions reduction targets for the state between 2030 and 2050, with each target to constitute a greater reduction in net greenhouse gas emissions in South Australia than any preceding targets, including the 2030 target. So these dates are set at 31 December 2035, 31 December 2040 and 31 December 2045.

An amendment is proposed to section 14 of the act to introduce a requirement to prepare a publicly available statewide emissions reduction plan that will be reviewed and updated in line with the five-yearly targets. The plan must set out the government's objectives, policies, programs and initiatives for reducing, limiting or preventing greenhouse gas emissions. The bill also proposes to add another subsection under section 14(1)(a) allowing the minister to develop a policy or policies that would outline how government agencies should consider and manage climate-related risks in their operations and activities.

I just want to talk about that for a moment, because coming off the land I am very concerned about what could happen in primary industries. Farmers have been doing such a great job for 30 or 40 years with either minimum till, or mainly now zero till operations in reducing carbon, in caring for their country, in increasing plant growth, increasing plant root growth by these excellent farming practices. We have certainly seen that in this very tough year.

As many farmers have said to me—and the member for Chaffey indicated it earlier today—it is a year where we have had not much rain and now we have been impacted by heavy frost, with severe damage right across the state. Even my property, which I have leased out, for the first time in my life I have seen whole patches of frost in wheat, where the wheat has just gone white and there will be nothing reaped there, mainly on the slightly sandy country, and we just have to see what happens in the end.

It is very hard work, with farmers looking at this and right now calculating whether or not to let the crops go through to harvest or cut them for hay. That creates another issue where if the crop is not long enough it will fall out of hay rakes as it is raked into rows and will not be able to be baled. That comes at a considerable cost in the cutting, raking and baling of that hay, if that is the option taken. People are making critical decisions.

As I said, I must commend our farmers for what they do. I saw beans sown on my property in ground that had been well prepared on the little bit of limited rain over summer, sprayed out, browned out, beans that were sown in what I thought was dead dry, and yet they germinated on some of the slightly sandy soils. It is amazing how the crops came up and have grown.

This is what happens with these advanced farming methods that farmers are using right across the state to make sure they get the optimum growth and optimum carbon retention into the soil. Farmers have been doing this, as I said, for 30 or 40 years. In the old days we used to go across our paddocks multiple times, sometimes eight to 10 times, whether we were working the paddocks with cultivators or harrows, and now, once all the preparation is done over summer and making sure there is no loss of moisture where possible with spraying weeds out, in one pass you can go in and sow your crop.

I certainly asked these questions in estimates, and what farmers are concerned about going into the future is what they will be required to do to make excellent farming practices even better. They acknowledge they have to keep up this high standard of agriculture but, as I asked the agriculture minister in the other place during estimates, where is your baseline point for measuring improvements in agriculture? You can only wring so much out of the land. But in saying that, I note that people with these practices are caring for their land even more every year because if they do not they do not get these yield results.

Even with a year like this, where it has been so tough—and it is tough—apart from the frosted areas, it is a green drought in many areas. There are some paddocks that have essentially died. Some people have put sheep on crops just to get something out of them. Farmers need to know that they have the ability to put their crops in into the future in a responsible way without having too many impingements and noting that they need to be rewarded for the amount of stubble that is left behind with their wide-row spacings, the ability that they use to sow between rows, whether it is with tined implements or disc implements, disc seeders, and making sure that they are recognised for that work that has been going on for decades.

What concerns me, because farmers are thinking about this type of legislation, and rightly so, is that we do sort out the appropriate baseline where we start this work so we can measure the carbon inputs. I am concerned that we will not get the appropriate carbon monitoring that we need to in regard to noting the work that farmers do in making sure that they are not overworking their soil, that they are actually managing emissions with one-pass farming and doing a great job. And it is of great concern to me if there is a serious impediment as to how farmers operate in this state. But they will work through it. Apart from this legislation and all the agencies having to respond, our farmers have a very serious year that they are working through right now.

The bill seeks to amend the act to require the preparation of a statewide climate risk assessment within two years of the enactment of the amendments, and after this the risk assessment will be reviewed every five years. It is proposed within the bill to introduce a new section, section 14B, which will introduce an ability for the Premier to nominate that a public sector entity prepare a plan for an entity or sector relating to emissions reduction or climate change adaptation or both.

Also, an amendment is proposed in regard to section 16 to clarify that sector agreements are intended to cover climate change adaptation measures, as well as strategies and methods to meet state targets for emissions reductions or renewable energy.

There will also be clarifying provisions that are included to outline the status and effect of policies and plans under the act. A new section is proposed to require government agencies and other public entities to include information in their annual reports about how they are addressing climate-related risks and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. We, on this side of the house, are also seeking to move amendments, including:

a residential power price guarantee—seeking to legislate a target to reduce power prices for the average households in this state with the target to be the average household bill as specified in the ESCOSA retail prices report as at December 2021;

a small businesses power price guarantee—seeking to legislate a target to reduce power prices for the average small business by 31 December 2027, with the target to be the average small business bill as specified in the ESCOSA retail prices report as at December 2021;

a grid reliability guarantee—seeking to legislate a reliability standard to keep the lights on, and based on AEMO's reliability standard of unserved energy in South Australia being no more than .0006 per cent of the energy demand; and

inclusion of an objective detailing the importance of the agriculture sector, as I have just outlined, to South Australia, and acknowledging the fluctuation of emissions from this sector.

I note what has been happening in this state in recent years, and certainly I was here in September 2016 when the lights went out across the whole state. I am proud to say that for the four years when we were in government that certainly did not happen. We had put up the policy of EnergyConnect through to New South Wales, building that new interconnector through to New South Wales, and initially the current mining minister was all in favour of it.

I am a bit unsure where he stands because he comes in here talking that interconnector down, which will be a magnificent project that when completed—the South Australian side has been completed and we just need to see the New South Wales side completed to augment that line—will mean that renewable energy that we generate here, whether it is sun or wind, solar or wind, can be transferred through to New South Wales so that it can be more utilised there because we do have a huge amount of renewable energy in this state, and if we can do more to reduce emissions, not just here but right across the eastern connected section that we are in, that will be great work.

But we have heard the minister in recent times say that this EnergyConnect interconnector is no good. Yet, looking at comments that the minister made on 21 December 2023 with the completion of the South Australian side of EnergyConnect, he said, 'What a great thing,' and 'Isn't it great that we will have the ability to export this renewable power to New South Wales.' I am just not sure where the Minister for Energy sits on this.

We also have the issues with the so-called state prosperity plan. I for one hope that we do see prosperity in Whyalla and the northern areas, but there are so many billions of dollars that need to be invested. I have said it here before that certainly with the hydrogen plan no-one of any scientific ability—professors or engineers—can tell me how it will work because essentially there will be thousands of wind turbines go up and thousands of hectares of solar panels go in and 80 per cent of that power will be lost in the transition to hydrogen and that is if they can make the hydrogen work.

We had the Premier finally admitting in the house yesterday that there will be gas essentially making it work. I have said for a long time that, unless there is a big gas pipe up the back of that hydrogen plant, it will not work.

I am concerned, as we all are, about the GFG steel plant in Whyalla. The plant in Whyalla has been in place a long time and I just hope that that survives. Whenever the pegs go in for this hydrogen plant, which I think will blow out in cost by at least double and then only work because it is supplemented by gas, we will just have to see what happens into the future.

But we certainly do want to see how things progress. I want to hear in committee the government's answers to what happens in a sustainable way with the removal of wind towers after they reach their 30 or 40-year lifespan, whether it is the blades that currently have to be buried in landfill or whether it is the towers, which are probably the same thing. We heard from the climate change minister today about the problems with lithium batteries. In a world where we are trying to reduce emissions, we need to find out how to sustainably do something about disposing of lithium batteries that just are not operational anymore and the same goes for solar panels.

I have had solar panels on my farmhouse for many years and they do a great job in collecting power and utilising it for the house during the daytime, but, as we have seen over time with all of these issues, whether it is wind turbines or solar panels or batteries, what is the sustainable way in this carbon-constrained world to dispose of those suppliers of energy when their life comes to an end? If someone can hit me with that answer, I would be glad to hear it, but we certainly need a carbon-constrained way that can be done so that, if we are really serious about climate change and emissions, we can do that in a sustainable way for the state. I note the legislation and welcome the debate in committee.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (16:28): I also rise to speak in support of another incredibly important bill, one that delivers on yet another election commitment of the Malinauskas Labor government, which is seeking to update the state's targets in the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction Act. Labor governments in this country have been at the forefront of big changes that have helped shape the country as we know it and it has been Labor governments that have not shied away from the big challenges.

When the Climate Change and Greenhouse Emissions Reduction Act 2007 came into operation, it did so under a Labor government, which of course at the time was the Rann government, marking the first piece of legislation in the country that aimed to tackle one of the biggest challenges that we face in our time—climate change.

The act has undoubtedly helped to propel South Australia to the front of the pack domestically and has helped shine a light on South Australia on the international stage to showcase what is possible when it comes to our progress in adopting renewable energy generation and climate mitigation strategies. Due in part to the massive success we have had in achieving our goals, we need to modernise the act to fit the situation that we currently find ourselves in, which is why the bill will see an update to the state's emissions target to a more ambitious target of 60 per cent, given data which has indicated that South Australia has achieved a 57 per cent emissions reduction in recent financial years.

This will then be built on with five-yearly interim emission targets between 2030 and 2050, with new targets required to improve upon previous targets and the statewide emissions reduction plan to be reviewed with the new interim targets.

On this side of the house, we are taking climate change seriously and we have been up-front and honest about it. We are steadfast in delivering on the commitments that we made to the South Australian public at the election, which is why we declared the climate emergency upon coming into government and why we are debating the bill before us in this place today.

Among a raft of other measures that have passed through this place since coming into government, we committed to doing something and, once again, we are delivering. Meanwhile, those on the other side of this place are intent on putting up amendments that appear to be without substance, amounting to nothing more than meaningless and obstructive politicking.

Let us not forget that it was the Liberal Party who in 2018 took to the election their Liberal Energy Solution that would reduce the average household electricity price by $302 a year compared with that of the 2016-17 financial year. The numbers do not lie, because by the end of the Marshall Liberal government's short one-term government they finished it out with the average price of market offers sitting at $2,041 according to the regular retail price comparison report from the Essential Services Commission of South Australia.

This would be well and good if $2,041 was a $302-a-year reduction on the average price at the time of their commitment, but instead it was actually a $65 increase—not exactly a commitment delivered. This does not really boost confidence, nor does it boost trust. The South Australian people were let down by this commitment in this space and appear to have a very short memory about it, as do those sitting across from us in the chamber today.

As the Premier has often been quoted as eloquently saying, when commitments such as these are made, nine times out of 10—well, you know the rest. The reality is that the way to help address the cost of living, such as the price of electricity bills, is not by making up commitments to trick the public—be it a commitment to do what you cannot deliver or by distracting the public with energy solutions like nuclear that are not really economically viable—but instead looking to set up solid foundations that allow the growth of high quality and secure jobs.

As is highlighted in our state's Economic Statement, our commitment to reducing emissions, boosting our renewable energy capacity and pioneering hydrogen production are all significant opportunities for our state and for the green reindustrialisation of our wider community. It will be South Australians who will benefit greatly from this, as we have to date from 2004-05 whereby our emissions have reduced by 57 per cent and our gross state product has in turn increased by 39 per cent.

To suggest that we as a state do not have it within us to get our emissions down and still compete in the economy absolutely neglects the great work that has been undertaken across the many sectors of our community to achieve just that.

Providing for short-term and long-term emission targets and legislation strengthens our policy and provides a clear environment to allow this to happen. It is not one or the other. It is not a focus on emission targets to the neglect of other challenges that exist in the community because, of course, we debate this bill at the same time this government has gone about delivering some of the biggest cost-of-living relief packages that we have seen in recent budgets, in direct acknowledgement of the challenges that do exist across the community and to lend a helping hand where it is needed most.

This has included, as part of the government's recent state budget, a total of $266.2 million committed to address the rising cost of living and set about delivering an expanded electricity payment scheme for our state's most vulnerable households, delivering up to $800. This expansion followed the earlier $51.5 million commitment which allowed for the extra once-off additional Cost of Living Concession payment of $243.90 to be received by all eligible recipients of the Cost of Living Concession payment in that financial year.

Let us also not forget the 3,500 public and community sector homes which will also benefit from significant energy bill savings through the government's $35.8 million social housing energy upgrade initiative, and, just recently, the government opened applications for small businesses to apply for grants of up to $50,000 to help reduce their energy bills through round 2 of the Economic Recovery Fund, helping them to invest in new power supply and generation equipment, energy-efficient appliances, technologies to promote greater energy efficiency and building in improvements to heating and cooling—and that is just the recent work.

We have a challenge on our hands when it comes to dealing with climate change. Each and every one of us has a responsibility, there is no doubt about that, but we must have serious legislation in place that can set up the state to be able to tackle this challenge, and that is going to be done with the interim targets, setting a date to get to 100 per cent net renewable energy generation, adaptation planning, sector planning and true leadership—all things that the opposition's amendments lack.

This is not going to be achieved through meaningless politicking that lacks substance. It is going to be achieved through sensible reforms and commitments that prioritise the magnitude of the problem we face, with a government in charge that is determined to see South Australians benefit from any such changes. With that in mind, I commend this bill to the house.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Odenwalder.