Renewables projects at risk of a climate trigger hold-up

Australia’s biggest employers are concerned the PM will break an ‘iron-clad guarantee’ and apply a climate trigger to environmental approvals.

The Business Council of Australia has warned that applying a climate trigger to environmental approvals would put Anthony Albanese’s Future Made in Australia and net zero transition under threat. Picture: AFP

Australia’s biggest employers are concerned Anthony Albanese will break an “iron-clad guarantee” and apply a climate trigger to environmental approvals, warning the move would have the ­unintended consequence of ­delaying the rollout of major ­renewables projects.

As Tanya Plibersek on Wednesday introduced Environment Protection Australia legislation, the government quietly launched consultation on stage three of its Nature Positive reforms that include ­consideration of “interaction ­between environment and climate laws”.

With the Coalition opposed to the bulk of Labor’s environmental reforms, industry is concerned the government could strike a deal with the Greens and crossbenchers on a climate trigger that would that would scuttle major projects that don’t meet emissions ­reduction thresholds and delay the renewables rollout.

Amid community concerns over wind farm projects and large-scale renewables projects, Business Council of Australia chief executive Bran Black warned that a climate trigger would “simply swell the number of projects ­captured by the EPBC system”. “I’m concerned that the government may be about to drop its iron-clad guarantee and now include a climate trigger as part of the Nature Positive reforms,” Mr Black, who represents the nation’s biggest companies, said. “This change could open Pandora’s box and risk investment needed for the net-zero transition and the Future Made in Australia policy.”

BCA analysis of Department of Climate Change and Environment data shows renewable ­energy generation and supply has overtaken mining as the No.1 ­industry being referred for EPBC assessment. Across the last two ­financial years, there have been 109 renewables referrals compared with 72 for mining.

A Herbert Smith Freehills and Clean Energy Investor Group report last month warned that EPBC assessments are “the single biggest challenge for delivering renewable energy projects in Australia, putting investment decisions and the likelihood of Australia meeting its clean energy targets and decarbonisation goals at significant risk”.

As the government faced immediate resistance from the ­Coalition, Greens and independents over its EPA legislation, Labor ministers offered mixed messages on whether a climate trigger could be included under the Nature Positive plan.

Mr Black said a climate trigger would subject more projects to greater bureaucracy and shift EPBC system resources “away from protecting habitat, threatened species, and the natural environment”.

“Ironically, including a climate trigger will mean project approvals – including those for renewable energy – get pushed out. The government recently dropped its commitment to fast-track offshore gas approval in a deal with the Greens, which is why we are concerned about commitments given under the Nature Positive reform,” he said.

BCA members, including companies subject to slashing emissions faster under the safeguard mechanism, are investing heavily in the net-zero transition and backing the renewables rollout.

A three-page Nature Positive law reform document confirms “consultation focus will be on feedback received on climate-­related reforms, including the ­interaction between environment and climate laws”.

“Next steps … consultation will be undertaken with a targeted representative group of stakeholders to test their recommendations and requests, and determine whether additional analysis may be required to support government decision-making,” the departmental document said.

The government is already struggling to win support for stage two of its Nature Positive reforms, establishing a “tough” green cop to administer the EPBC Act. The Coalition and Greens on Wednesday criticised Labor for proposing an EPA before overhauling environmental laws.

Opposition environment spokesman Jonno Duniam said Labor had “put the cart before the horse with this $120m new ­bureaucracy administering the same broken laws that professor Graeme Samuel (who reviewed the EPBC Act) described as ‘woefully inadequate’.”

Greens environment spokeswoman Sarah Hanson-Young said the government had “sold-out the environment in favour of the bulldozers, the chainsaws and the fossil fuel polluters”.

Climate groups said establishing an EPA without fixing the “broken” EPBC Act was a waste of time, while the BCA is concerned about delegated ministerial powers influencing project decisions “without proper accountability and with the risk of sidelining the broader social and economic benefits of a specific project”.

Ms Plibersek said the new body would make faster, better decisions under Australia’s environment laws, undertake compliance and enforcement and issue stop-work orders to address or prevent serious damage in ­urgent circumstances. The Greens warned “this is just the beginning of the balance-of-power parliamentary war” on fossil fuels.