The Australian government will face decisions on whether to greenlight 30 fossil fuel developments, mostly to export coal or gas, that together could result in more than 20bn tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere.
Climate groups have calculated the potential total climate pollution from fossil fuel developments currently submitted for environmental approval. Including emissions released both during production and when the fossil fuel was ultimately burned for energy – often in overseas power plants – they found the developments could lead to an additional 22bn tonnes of CO2 being pumped into the atmosphere.
This is about 10 times greater than estimates of Australia’s remaining 1.5C “carbon budget” – the total amount the country can release at home in the years ahead if it is to play its part in limiting heating to the global goal of 1.5C.
Expressed another way, it is about 40% of annual global emissions.
Because the CO2 would be released overseas if the developments go ahead, most of the emissions would not count against Australia under international climate accounting rules. But campaigners say it shows the impact of the country’s exports is likely to dwarf the emissions reductions being embarked on at home, and the government cannot claim to be addressing the climate crisis without addressing both.
Giving an annual climate statement to parliament on Thursday, Bowen said he was pleased with the government’s progress as it “within striking distance” of its 2030 emissions target – a 43% cut compared with 2005 levels – but he was “not yet satisfied” and the “job is far from done”.
Shiva Gounden, Greenpeace’s head in the Pacific, said Australia made an outsized contribution to global emissions as the world’s third-largest fossil fuel exporter. He said he was frustrated by Australia’s lack of ambition going into the UN Cop28 climate summit, which began in the United Arab Emirates on Thursday.
“Does Minister Bowen think we will be so distracted by progress towards 43% that we can’t see the colossal elephant in the room – the 22bn tonnes of emissions generated if these new coal and gas projects all went ahead?” Gounden said.
“Against the backdrop of the hottest year on record, Cop28 must be a moment of reckoning on fossil fuels. There is no scenario where expanding coal and gas is compatible with limiting warming to 1.5 degrees.
“By exporting fossil fuels we are simply exporting climate damage.”
Speaking at the Art Gallery of New South Wales on Thursday before flying to Cop28, Vanuatu’s climate change minister, Ralph Regenvanu, said the Australian government had told him it expected many fossil fuel projects in the pipeline would not go ahead.
“We hope that’s the case, and call on Australia to take a stronger position to stop them,” he said. “I’m still concerned because there hasn’t been much in terms of stopping production and fossil fuel subsidies.”
The list of developments was compiled by Greenpeace using data from Climate Analytics, Sunrise and documents submitted to the government by fossil fuel companies.
The biggest fossil fuel development up for approval is the multi-stage expansion of gas extraction and processing in northern Western Australia, centred on the Burrup Hub. It includes the Scarborough and Browse gas fields and a proposed 50-year extension for Woodside Energy’s north-west shelf liquified natural gas (LNG) processing facility. Taken together, it was found it could lead to 6.1bn tonnes of emissions.
Other large emitting developments on the list include expansion of two open-pit coking coalmines operated by the BHP Mitsubishi Alliance. It said a potential 93-year-life extension for the Peak Downs mine could lead to 2.3bn tonnes of CO2, and a 90-year extension for the Blackwater South mine could contribute 2bn tonnes.
The list of projects is a more concrete account of what could be developed than the often-cited 118 developments listed as in the pipeline by the industry department, which includes some at pre-development and feasibility stages.
With one exception, the projects on the list have been submitted to the federal environment department or the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority for approval.
The exception is Tamboran Resources’ Beetaloo Basin gas development, which was included due to its strong support from the Northern Territory government.
A spokesperson for Bowen said the new emissions estimate were almost entirely based on “scope 3” emissions released overseas, and under global carbon accounting rules these did not count against the country providing the fossil fuels.
“For instance, Japan doesn’t include in their emissions accounting the transport emissions in Australia from Japanese made cars, and nor should they,” the spokesperson said.
They said large emitters within Australia that released more than 100,000 tonnes of CO2 a year had to reduce emissions each year under the reformed safeguard mechanism to deliver a combined 200m tonnes reduction by 2030.
Changes to the safeguard mechanism that passed parliament this year under a deal between Labor and the Green require new gas fields that supply LNG facilities to offset all reservoir CO2 emissions, and shale gas projects in the Beetaloo Basin to offset direct emissions.
The resources minister, Madeleine King, told a recent WA energy summit that if Australia stopped supplying LNG to its neighbours that did not necessarily mean they would stop using it. “They might simply look elsewhere for those supplies, and if they do Australia’s voice in our region would be diminished,” she said.
Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics, said it was likely the 22bn tonnes was “if anything a bit of an understatement”. He said Australia’s approach to exports doesn’t really contribute to the fossil fuel phase out we need and it fails in the face of what the International Energy Agency says is necessary”.
