John Englart

When is a $1.5 billion fossil fuel subsidy not a subsidy? When the Federal Minister says it is not (Sic).

You have to admire the hypocrisy of the Minister for Resources and Northern Development Madeleine King in Question time in Federal Parliament on 22 June regarding the Middle Arm development in Darwin..The Federal Government has blocked an enquiry into the Middle Arm Development. This development will largely be used for processing gas for petrochemicals, for LNG export, and xcarbon sequestration and storage (CCS). It enables a market for fracked gas from the Beetaloo basin and from the Barossa Gas project, north of the Tiwi Islands.

A background briefing paper Environment Department bureaucrats sent to Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s office in July 2022, said the project was central to the expansion of Beetaloo basin gas production, as well as to the “feasibility” of proposed offshore carbon capture and storage. The Federal money is for shared infrastructure such as harbour infrastructure which will primarily be for gas transport. The Northern Territory has dropped all mention of petrochemicals processing from the project website.

Federal Infrastructure Minister Catherine King had said previously the money for Middle Arm was “not a subsidy for fossil fuels” but rather “an important way of setting up our economy for a sustainable future”. Greenwashing at its best. See Middle Arm planned to support the growth of huge gas projects FOI document shows (NT Independent, May 18, 2023)

Gas company Tamboran Resources was one of five companies the Northern Territory had provided with land at the development, with the company announcing plans for an LNG plant to export fracked gas from the Beetaloo Basin, according to The Monthly (Middle-finger development, 14 June 2023).

The Albanese government knew ‘sustainable’ Darwin harbour project would be used for gas export, FOI documents show, argues the Guardian report (8 June 2023)

Opposition by Larrakia first nation people to Middle Arm development

The project development is opposed by the Larrakia people with likely destruction of significant petroglyphs and cultural sites.

Speaking on behalf of multiple family groups, Larrakia Elder Bill risk said the development was not supported by Traditional Owners.

“We do not want to see this hub, whatever you want to call it, go ahead,” Mr Risk said.

“We do not want to see the industrialisation of Middle Arm.”

“You want to talk about free, prior and informed consent? There isn’t any.

“We haven’t been spoken to. We would say quite clearly we do not want it. They haven’t reached out. They haven’t spoken to us.”

National Indigenous Times: Traditional Owners raise concerns over proposed gas hub’s impact on ancient rock art, 12 May 2023

Federal Labor isn’t being transparent and is trying to greenwash this gas project.

Middle Arm will produce Petrochemicals and plastics

The 2020 business case for the Middle arm development shows the extent of the gas processing and products produced which includes LNG for export, ethane for Ethylene and propylene to make plastics such as polyethylene and polypropylene, PET. Plastic bottles and synthetic turf. Making methanol and ammonia from gas has large carbon emissions.

House of Representatives QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct

Ms STEGGALL (Warringah) (14:16): To the Prime Minister: your government has backflipped and blocked an inquiry into Middle Arm in Darwin, despite $1.5 billion of taxpayers’ money allocated to this project, extensive self-interested lobbying and seemingly no independent business case or assessment of risks and benefits to the Australian people. FOIs show the key purpose is as a gas export terminal. Why is the public funding key infrastructure for a private gas company to make record profits from exports?

Ms MADELEINE KING (Brand—Minister for Resources and Minister for Northern Australia) (14:17): I think the member was trying to impute that there is a subsidy for fossil fuels in Middle Arm. That is not the case, and we have made it very clear that that is not the case, and it will continue not to be the case. We will continue to work with the Northern Territory government on the development of the sustainable development project there in the Northern Territory, on Middle Arm. It is very important for the Northern Territory to diversify its economy. It does have challenges to its economy, and the Albanese Labor government will continue to support and work with the Northern Territory government. As the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government has said before, this government will have an equity stake in that project, and we’ll continue to work right across northern Australia, and particularly in Darwin, where this project is very important for future export industries.

Urgency motion in the Senate on Middle Arm development

On Wednesday 21 June Independant Senator David Pocock moved an urgency motion in the Senate regarding Middle Arm Development. The motion was defeated with Greens and David Pocock voting in Favour and Labor lining up with Coalition parties and One Nation to vote against.

Senator DAVID POCOCK (Australian Capital Territory) (16:17): I move:
That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:
“The climate and health risks from the Middle Arm development which will receive $1.5bn in Commonwealth funding. Noting the project’s proponents have confirmed it will be used as a major processing and manufacturing centre for gas fracked out of the Beetaloo Basin rather than the ‘Sustainable Development Precinct’ the Commonwealth and NT governments have falsely claimed. Also noting that the expansion of the fossil fuel industry is contrary to advice and warnings from the International Energy Agency, IPCC and UN.“

In 2022 Australians voted for climate action. They voted against the shameless promotion of fossil fuels in a climate crisis. It is here. We are seeing the effects of climate change. The 2019-20 bushfires will be seared into Australians’ memories. We look at what’s happening in Canada; this is the new normal. We are entering a climate that is unprecedented and not well suited to support humanity. Yet we have a new government that continues to back the fossil fuel subsidies of the Morrison government.

The most problematic of these decisions is the $1.5 billion for what they are now trying to call the Middle Arm Sustainable Development Precinct. Let’s be very clear: Middle Arm is far from sustainable. The driving force behind the whole development is gas extracted from new fields in the Beetaloo—and maybe Barossa, and maybe other offshore projects—and yet the details of why and how this decision was made remain shrouded in secrecy, and some of what has happened is truly bizarre.

I asked the department of infrastructure and Infrastructure Australia if they were aware that the whole site at Middle Arm will likely be underwater by 2100. They had not even considered this risk. So why is this going ahead? How much of this precinct will be driven by gas projects? And what studies have been done to consider the potentially horrific health impacts that will flow from a petrochemical plant so close to Darwin? We just don’t know. We don’t know how much of this has been looked at.

I’ve been asking questions about the project in estimates. The Environment and Communications References Committee, chaired by Senator Hanson-Young, has considered the issue as part of an inquiry into oil and gas exploration and production in the Beetaloo basin. In fact, they saw fit to recommend that there be a separate inquiry into the project, and I look forward to the government supporting that inquiry and participating in it.

One thing is clear: that federal funding for Middle Arm so that it can become a gas processing and export hub will be bad for the climate and bad for the health of Darwin residents. The Beetaloo basin, according to the Northern Territory government, has 500 trillion cubic feet of gas. That’s the equivalent of 3,177 years of household use in Australia. The scale of these projects that Labor is promoting and using our money to fund is just extraordinary when we know that the International Energy Agency is clear, the IPCC is clear and the UN is urging countries, particularly developed countries like Australia, to stop expanding our fossil fuel industry.

You’re going to hear from Labor that we need gas for the transition and this is about jobs and development.

You’ll hear from the coalition that this is about creating a new industry in the Northern Territory. What good is a new industry in the Northern Territory when Darwin and other parts of the NT will likely be unlivable within the next seven years if we continue down this path? Look at the heat. Look at the humidity. There are a number of peer reviewed papers saying that in large parts of the NT, if we continue down this path of expanding fossil fuels, humans will not be able to live there.

The immediate health impacts on people in Darwin look dire. We have a huge amount of research from the US looking at Cancer Alley, the notorious section of the Mississippi River where petrochemicals have led to the deterioration of so many communities in the area. There are 2,000 papers published on this topic. We know that the processing of gas in the heart of Darwin will cause increased cardiovascular disease, asthma presentations, leukaemias, pregnancy complications, congenital birth defects and stillbirths and generally higher rates of premature deaths. How can we do this as a Senate? How can the government go ahead with a project like this when we know the impacts? We know the impacts on people in Darwin and we know the impacts on the health and wellbeing of all of us and on the future of us and of future generations.

Labor’s Senator CHISHOLM provided Labor’s response outlining the $1.5 billion provided is for “an investment in common-user marine infrastructure that supports industries critical to achieving the government’s commitment to net zero, including specialist product wharves, modular offloading facilities for manufacturing and dredging of the shipping channel.”

Senator Duniam for the Opposition stated their position: “I don’t believe that fossil fuels are in any way inconsistent with the notion of sustainable development.”

Senator Waters for the Greens said: “two weeks ago, US fracking company Tamboran announced to the ASX that they had rights to a part of the Middle Arm site to build a gas export terminal that would export 20 million tonnes per annum—bigger than any currently in existence in Australia. So now the Labor government’s cover is blown. It is a monumental fossil fuel subsidy. Now that we know that this money is enabling fossil fuel expansion, the Albanese government cannot proceed with a hand-out of $1.9 billion of public money to a gas company in the middle of a climate crisis. All of the coal, oil and gas facilities currently in operation have us on track to break through the safe 1½ degree limit. We have to phase these out, not keep them going. This puts their 2050 target completely out of reach. The government has to choose.”

Senator Allman-Payne, also from the Greens, said: “The rapid expansion of Middle Arm will set off a carbon bomb that will destroy Australia’s chance of hitting net zero. I am desperately concerned that, in the process of setting off this carbon bomb in the Beetaloo, the people of the Northern Territory are going to be the ones left holding the bag.”

Senator Roberts for One Nation said “I question why we need a dedicated export facility for the Beetaloo Basin’s natural gas. Australia has 10 natural gas export terminals—two in Darwin. Beetaloo output is expected to be huge, and much of it should be used here in Australia, not exported.” He voted against the motion though joining the Labor Party and Coalition Senators.

Greens Senator Dorinda Cox speech in this debate is worth reading in full, too:

Senator COX (Western Australia) (16:42): I rise to speak in strong support of this MPU submitted by Senator David Pocock. My crossbench colleague is 100 per cent right. There are unacceptable climate and health risks posed by this project that is receiving taxpayer money, and I thank him for bringing this topic to the Senate today.

Let’s be clear: Middle Arm is a dirty petrochemical plant and gas terminal and it’s going to impact on the cultural heritage in this area because petrochemicals have been found in the Darwin Harbour. It will also impact on the health of those living close by and the climate. It absolutely cannot go ahead if this government is serious about its emissions reduction target and maintaining Australia’s obligations under the Paris Agreement.

We are in a climate crisis. The Greens have reminded the government of this many times, and we will continue to stand to do so. It is estimated that this precinct will generate 15 million tonnes of carbon emissions per year, increasing the emissions in the Northern Territory by 75 per cent. Let that sink in for a moment. This project alone would increase the emissions just in the Northern Territory by 75 per cent. So much for the 43 per cent emissions reduction target that we legislated.

Further, Middle Arm could increase industrial pollution by over 500 per cent, raising serious health concerns particularly for the community of Palmerston, which is only three kilometres away. The Greens have some serious concerns about this project and the potential implications on First Nations cultural heritage, the environment and also the climate. Middle Arm, the Beetaloo basin and the Barossa projects are all linked. Gas from the Beetaloo basin and Barossa will be funnelled straight through to Middle Arm.

These are three climate bombs that we absolutely cannot afford to set off. These projects alone will blow the government’s emissions reduction target and wreck the surrounding environment of the projects. Both the Beetaloo and Barossa projects are already facing opposition from traditional owners of Larrakia and the Tiwi Islands. So if this government wants to push ahead with Middle Arm, Barossa and the Beetaloo, they will be doing so against the wishes of traditional owners, against scientific advice and against the advice of countless organisations, both nationally and internationally, who know it’s time to move away from fossil fuels.

Carbon Dioxide CCS Sea Dumping amendment

And then there is this legislative amendment by Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek that favours Santos dirty Barossa Project off the northern coast of the Tiwi island….

See Dr Kirsty Howey, from the NT Environment Centre response:

Or Kooyong MP, Dr Monique Ryan…

Here is Tanya Plibersek seconding reading of this bill on 22 June.

References

Senate Hansard, 21 June 2023, Middle Arm Development Debate.

3 comments

Leave a comment