Gas veteran says mixture of fossil fuel and renewables would be ­rational response

Gas industry veteran Richard Cottee believes natural gas has a vital role to play in any ‘rational’ transition towards a net-zero ­future, warning against zealotry in the ­nuclear debate.

Gas industry veteran Richard Cottee believes natural gas has a vital role to play in any “rational” transition towards a net-zero ­future and warned against the emergence of zealotry in the ­nuclear debate.

Mr Cottee said the nuclear power debate failed to register the important role gas could play in future electricity generation.

“If the holy grail is net zero at any costs, well, I think there is no choice but nuclear because in­evitably we can’t build enough dams for hydro,” he said. “But we should be pulling all stops to have natural gas in the meantime. It’s the only way we can survive this coming dearth of electricity that will affect the vulnerable. I can’t understand why people are ­objecting to natural gas.”

Peter Dutton is pitching his nuclear power policy to average Australians, declaring the Coalition has a plan that is “going to keep the lights on”.

Gas could play an important role in electricity generation. Picture: Patrick Hamilton/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Richard Cottee. Picture: Mark Cranitch

However, gas would play a reduced role in the overall energy mix under the Coalition plan because nuclear would act as the main backup option. The ­Coalition said lower demand for gas-powered generation would ease price pressure for industrial gas users.

Brisbane-based Mr Cottee is the executive chair of State Gas Ltd and managed the Queensland Gas Company’s rise from a $20m company to a $5.7bn sale to British energy giant BG Gas in 2008.

He has been involved in most parts of the energy sector, including working at NRG Europe, and said a mixture of sources was the most logical position to ensure consistent electricity supply.

“We need to have reliable power. To say in a heatwave when the wind is not blowing we will just turn off airconditioning in an old people’s home will end up in deaths,” he said. “Recently in England, for example, because of what they call a wind drought, 72 per cent of electricity had to come from burning emergency natural gas. So I would think that a mixture of fossil fuel and renewables would be the ­rational response.”

The nuclear debate has became a political football, with the Coalition and the Labor government seemingly ideologically on opposing sides.

The nuclear debate has became a political football, and it appears to have descended into zealotry. Picture: Matthieu Rondel/Bloomberg via Getty Images

The Coalition claims its plan to build nuclear reactors on up to seven sites around the country would cost about $331bn over 25 years, according to modelling by Frontier Economics.

They have compared that to Labor’s plan, which includes far greater adoption of renewables, batteries and storage, which it calculates will cost $594bn.

Labor has disputed the costings, saying they have rejected the work of the CSIRO and the semi-­government Australian Energy Market Operator.

Mr Cottee said the debate appears to have descended into zealotry.

“You can’t have rationality with zealots. Life is always a fight between emotion and rationality, and balancing between your emotional response and logical response,” he said. “There’s zealotry on this particular issue and rationality seems to have been thrown out of the window.”

Gas & Energy Transition Research Centre director David Close said natural gas should play an important part in any transition towards net zero emissions: “The longer we can use natural gas to back up the system the better; if we don’t build nuclear, gas will become increasingly critical.”

Originally published as Gas veteran says mixture of fossil fuel and renewables would be ­rational response