The world’s largest renewable energy proposal was recently lodged with the WA and Federal Governments and it is mind-bogglingly large. At 70GW and covering a phenomenal 22,690 km2, the Western Green Energy Hub on Mirning Country in the south east of Western Australia is a harbinger of both hope and apprehension. The proponents intend for the mega project to stretch 280km along its longest boundary from the Cocklebiddy roadhouse to the WA/SA border. For anyone who has driven across the Nullabor you will know just how far that is but for those who haven’t, that is roughly equivalent to the distance from Sydney to Canberra or Perth to Margaret River. That is a lot of wind turbines and solar panels!
Benefits vs Impacts
Similar mega scale renewable energy projects are being planned in other parts of the country including large offshore wind projects, the Cannon-Brookes backed Sunshot proposal in the Northern Territory and the Australian Renewable Energy Hub in the Pilbara just to name a few. While not all the mega projects on the cards will come to fruition and even the most progressed have multiple approvals still to obtain, the ambition and scale of these proposals are staggering. When it comes to the rubber hitting the road of climate action (or the sun hitting the solar panel) this seems to be precisely what the doctor (or scientist) ordered.
But what about all the vegetation, animal species, habitat, migratory pathways and cultural heritage that may be in those same places? How do we balance the need to end the polluting reign of the fossil fuel industry and drastically reduce global emissions while also protecting the natural places of our planet?
This is the profound conundrum the environment movement is currently facing. Different groups and people will have varying opinions on what is an acceptable level of impact to nature for the sake of emissions-free energy. But there will be impacts. Where and how much is what’s up for debate.
The Double Crisis
It is an important discussion to have because we need to get this right. Not only are we in a climate crisis, we are also in an extinction crisis and Australia is the culprit in chief. We have the highest mammal extinction rate in the world with 38 mammals extinct in the last 250 years. Large swathes of the continent have already been cleared for agriculture, logging, housing and mining with much of the remnant vegetation home to some of the rarest and most vulnerable species on the planet. Is then clearing more land for renewable energy really the best option? How do we protect threatened species while still investing in the necessary scale of renewable energy?
Beware the Fossil Fuel Agenda
These are important questions but the discussion comes with a note of caution. In the absence of consensus on this issue, a couple of risks are likely to arise to the benefit of the fossil fuel industry. One is that Australia’s nature-conscious public will over-concentrate its environmental concern on the impacts of the renewables industry rather than on the supremely damaging fossil fuel industry. This is exactly the strategy being employed by certain cynical political operators in their attempt to discredit renewables. Which is not to say full and proper scrutiny of renewable projects should not occur or that certain concerns are not legitimate. There should absolutely be a robust and clear environmental assessment process (and having updated Federal Environmental laws would help!) but it is important to be aware that some bad-faith actors are deliberately stoking divisive fear-mongering narratives about renewable energy.
Their aim appears to be the creation of doubt and distrust, delaying the build out of renewables. Such delay means fossil fuel companies, the ultimate environmental vandals, will continue digging, dredging, drilling and polluting. In the battle for energy precedence, the incumbent fossil fuel oligarchs will be quick to capitalise on any weakness or delay from their primary competitors in the renewable energy industry.
Secondly, the largest of all red-herrings might swim straight into the breach – nuclear energy. The phenomenal furphy that is nuclear energy in Australia will eagerly be pitched as the alternative solution and is precisely the political play unfolding at the moment. As we know, nuclear energy would arrive much too late, leaving the energy door open to gas polluters to keep pumping out emissions (not to mention the massive costs, risks of spills and accidents, water use and radioactive waste that come with nuclear reactors).
Establishing the Guardrails
As a movement, it seems we need to be willing to accept some level of nature impact in the rollout of renewables but this needs to be absolutely minimised and carefully planned to avoid damaging ecologically important natural ecosystems and species habitats. We cannot allow an open slather approach that allows profit-motivated renewable energy companies to enact their plans without clear, efficient and strong processes and parameters. There must be no-go zones when the direct impacts outweigh the long-term benefits. Additionally, we must prioritise already cleared areas for renewable energy projects. If done well with proper planning, consultation and community benefit, renewable energy projects can add to the economic resilience of regional areas.
As it stands, our natural world is facing massive threats, the biggest of all being climate change. Without major investment in renewable energy, the wildflowers, marsupials, whales and coral species we all love will be at grave risk from extreme weather events and warming temperatures. What we can and must do is ensure the creation of careful, stringent rules and guidelines to minimise any impacts, closely monitor processes, require proper rehabilitation of sites and the recycling of materials. Stronger national nature laws are a fundamental starting point.
The mention of recycling is worth highlighting here as it goes to the missing conversation in all of this. Do we have to keep expanding our energy use and creating ever-more demand? How do we make our economies more circular? Why don’t we provide more reward for energy efficiencies and demand reduction? Perhaps this is a conversation not just about balancing nature and climate impacts but also about challenging the mindset of endless energy growth?
Stepping Carefully in the Right Direction
There is already good work being done on some of these matters and importantly there are some encouraging examples of renewable energy companies improving their engagement with local communities to incorporate benefit sharing arrangements and involvement of First Nations groups (thanks to the work of groups like the First Nations Clean Energy Network). Such measures help to get closer to the right balances, but there is definitely more work to be done.
Our world is reaching multiple limits with tipping points imminent for so many species, ecosystems and, of course, the climate. While the challenge is great, let’s be careful not to let the fossil fuel industry win by pitting climate advocates and environmental defenders against each other. Let’s keep working together to get the settings right so that renewables are put in the right places, benefit the right people and industries, and adequately safeguard the future of all species.
