Victoria says it is getting out of gas – so why has it approved a new LNG import terminal?

TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:

"Victoria Approves LNG Import Terminal Amidst Transition to Renewable Energy"

View Raw Article Source (External Link)
Raw Article Publish Date:
AI Analysis Average Score: 7.8
These scores (0-10 scale) are generated by Truthlens AI's analysis, assessing the article's objectivity, accuracy, and transparency. Higher scores indicate better alignment with journalistic standards. Hover over chart points for metric details.

TruthLens AI Summary

Victoria has recently approved a plan to establish a liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal near Geelong, which will facilitate the import of gas by sea from both domestic and international sources. The terminal, proposed by Viva Energy, is expected to allow for the shipment of up to 160 petajoules (PJ) of LNG annually, which constitutes approximately 88% of the state's current gas consumption. Despite the approval from Victoria's planning minister, Sonya Kilkenny, who emphasized the need to balance development with environmental responsibility, the project has drawn criticism from environmental advocates. The Victorian Greens leader, Ellen Sandell, labeled the project as “polluting and unnecessary,” raising questions about the state's commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels while simultaneously increasing its gas imports. The terminal will consist of a floating facility, an extended pier for LNG cargo ships, and associated infrastructure to regasify and treat the imported LNG for distribution through a new pipeline. However, the project still requires federal environmental approval, along with other technical and heritage consents, before it can move forward.

Victoria's gas consumption currently stands at about 180PJ per year, with significant usage for space heating in buildings. The state is on a path to reduce its reliance on gas, aiming for 95% renewable energy by 2035. However, there are concerns about potential gas shortages starting from 2029, as local gas supplies dwindle and coal-fired power stations close. Experts suggest that while transitioning to electric alternatives for heating will take time, the LNG import terminal could serve as a temporary solution to meet the state's gas demands. Critics argue that the LNG supply chain is emissions-intensive and inefficient, highlighting the environmental implications of investing in new gas infrastructure. Industry representatives, however, view the terminal as a necessary step to support the state's heavy industries, which still depend on gas. The approval has sparked a debate about the balance between energy needs and climate commitments, with conservation groups warning that reliance on gas could hinder urgent climate action.

TruthLens AI Analysis

The article highlights the recent decision by the Victorian government to approve a new liquefied natural gas (LNG) import terminal, which raises questions about the state's commitment to transitioning away from fossil fuels. This seemingly contradictory move is positioned within a broader context of energy needs, environmental concerns, and political discourse.

Government's Justification and Balancing Act

Victoria's planning minister, Sonya Kilkenny, emphasizes the need to balance development with environmental responsibility. The approval of the LNG terminal is framed as a necessary step to ensure energy security while claiming it will not impede the state's goal of achieving net-zero emissions by 2045. This rationale seeks to present the project as a transitional measure rather than a step back in the fight against climate change.

Opposition and Environmental Concerns

The Victorian Greens leader, Ellen Sandell, criticizes the decision as polluting and unnecessary. This sentiment reflects broader environmental concerns regarding fossil fuel dependence, especially as the state pushes for renewable energy. The article illustrates a clear divide between government justification and opposition perspectives, which may influence public perception and political dialogue.

Public Perception and Potential Manipulation

The framing of the article suggests an attempt to manage public perception regarding the state's energy policies. By highlighting both the government's rationale and the opposition's concerns, the article could be seen as trying to foster a nuanced discussion about energy choices. However, the choice of language and the emphasis on the environmental implications may indicate underlying agendas aimed at either supporting or undermining the government's decision.

Impact on Communities and Future Projections

The approval of the LNG terminal could have significant implications for local communities, especially those concerned about environmental degradation and climate change. The potential dredging of seabeds and construction of infrastructure may face opposition from environmental groups and local residents. This situation could lead to broader political ramifications as public sentiment shifts in response to local and global environmental movements.

Economic Implications and Market Reactions

The development of an LNG import terminal may influence energy markets and stock prices, particularly for companies involved in gas production and distribution. Investors may view this as an opportunity or a risk, depending on their perceptions of long-term energy trends. The article indirectly raises questions about how this decision will resonate within broader energy policies and economic frameworks.

Global Context and Relevance

This development aligns with global trends towards energy diversification, particularly as countries grapple with transitioning from fossil fuels to renewables. The approval of the terminal could signal a strategic move by Victoria within the context of national energy security discussions, especially as other regions also seek to balance energy needs with environmental commitments.

The article presents a complex narrative that reflects the tensions between energy policy, environmental responsibility, and political dynamics. The juxtaposition of government approval against public opposition suggests a landscape where information is contested, and narratives are shaped by varying interests.

In conclusion, the reliability of the information is bolstered by the inclusion of different perspectives but is also clouded by the political implications of the decision. The article effectively highlights a significant issue while also revealing the complexities involved in energy policy-making.

Unanalyzed Article Content

Victoria has approved a plan to bring in gas by sea from other states and even overseas, giving the go-ahead to a gas import terminal near Geelong.

Viva Energy’s import terminal, which would enable up to 160 petajoules (PJ) of liquefied natural gas (LNG) to be shipped to Victoria each year – about 88% of the state’s gas consumption – still requires approval under federal environmental laws.

The state’s planning minister, Sonya Kilkenny, said her decision to approve the project was “striking the right balance between development and environmental responsibility” and would not undermine Victoria’s target of net zero emissions by 2045.

But the Victorian Greens leader, Ellen Sandell, condemned the decision, calling the project “polluting [and] unnecessary”.

So, why is a state that’stransitioning to renewable energy, andgetting off fossil gas, planning to import more?

Viva Energy’s proposed LNG import terminal is located in Corio Bay, 7km from Geelong and about 75km south-west of Melbourne.

It includes a new floating terminal and extended pier to allow LNG cargo ships to dock and turn, and regasification and treatment plants to store and convert the LNG back into gas, to be fed into the network via a new 7km pipeline. Once built, the terminal will operate for about 20 years.

As well the terminal, pier and pipeline infrastructure, the plan requires about 490,000 cubic metres of seabed to be dredged for cargo ship access.

Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletter

The site is located next to the Port Phillip Bay (Western Shoreline) and Bellarine Peninsula Ramsar Site, a wetland of international significance that regularly supports 20,000 or more waterbirds and contains seagrass beds that are a nursery for fish.

Before it can proceed, the plan still has to gain approval under federal environmental laws, and other technical and heritage consents.

Victoria uses a lot of gas – about 180PJ a year – with the largest share used in buildings, mostly for space heating.

That demand is declining as homes and businesses switch from gas to renewable electricity, and as the share of renewable energy grows towards Victoria’s target of 95% by 2035.

But the Australian energy market operator (Aemo) is still expecting gas shortfalls in Victoriafrom 2029, due to dwindling gas supplyfrom fields in Bass Strait, and as coal-fired power stations prepare to close.

This leaves Victoria more heavily reliant on gas piped in from the north: New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia.

“It’s all interconnected,” says Monash University engineer Graham Palmer. “But the peak demand for gas in winter is greater than what the pipelines can deliver from the north.”

One solution to that gap is to use less gas, hesays, although the process of transitioning the state’s 1.7m homes with gas heating to efficient electric alternatives would be likely to take many years.

The other option in the short to medium term is to store more gas in Victoria, he says – or, as the terminal proposal will allow for, import it as LNG from other states.

“Unfortunately, we’re going to be dependent upon gas for some time,” Palmer says. “On the one hand, there’s the motivation to get off all fossil fuels, but we can’t do it instantly, and this is the challenge.

“People interested in climate change are trying to grapple with the challenge of trying to manage these trade-offs.”

Kevin Morrison, an Australian gas analyst for the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, says the process of freezing gas into LNG and converting it back is inefficient and emissions intensive.

Australia has plenty of gas, most of which is exported as LNG, Morrison says, and about 8% of the gas used to make LNG is consumed in the process of freezing the gas to liquefy it for export.

“The side-effect is that the whole LNG supply chain is much more emissions intensive, because you are using all this energy.”

The Australian Industry Group said the import terminal’s approval was a boost for industry in Victoria, particularly given reliance on gas as a fuel source.

“While overall state gas use is gradually shrinking, Victoria’s heavy industry, in particular, relies on gas and there is real concern that gas supplies could run short in the state within a few years,” Ai Group’s Victorian head, Tim Piper, said. “We need an all-of-the-above energy strategy to avoid that. An import terminal is one important tool in the belt, along with expanded north-south pipelines, local supply development, alternative supply from renewable gas, and efficient electrification.”

“Renewable gas” usually refers to a mix ofhydrogen and fossil gas.

Conservation groups were disappointed by the decision and remain concerned about the effect on emissions and the environment.

“Investing in new gas infrastructure locks us into decades of emissions at a time when urgent climate action is needed,” Jane Spence, a spokesperson for Geelong Sustainability said.

Rivers and nature campaign manager at Environment Victoria, Greg Foyster, said: “As the electricity system shifts to renewable energy, fossil gas could become Victoria’s biggest climate problem. The smartest solution remains helping households and businesses shift to efficient electric appliances.”

Back to Home
Source: The Guardian