Hydrogen and Renewable Energy Bill

Wednesday September 27, 2023

Mr BELL (Mount Gambier) (16:59): I rise to make some brief comments in support of the government's Hydrogen and Renewable Energy Bill. It is pleasing to see forward planning that will accommodate large-scale developments and the government actually being proactive, in terms of highlighting areas of Crown land or pastoral leases that may be suitable, and developing those opportunities in a thoughtful and constructive manner. I think it does put our state in very good hands to have potential proponents be able to come to the government or the government to put out to tender these projects, and that it be done in a systematic way. We are talking about large-scale developments where this will prevent an ad hoc mismatch of approvals perhaps in areas that may not be ideally suited or perhaps could have been done in other ways or in other locations.

I would like to highlight, and perhaps put front and centre in the government's mind, the idea of genuine consultation. When projects are being developed it is really important to engage meaningfully with communities. I have seen a number of large-scale developments where some have done that really well while others have treated it as a side issue or a box that needs to be ticked. When the community rallies against a proposal it can gather momentum to the point where it means that the viability of that project really comes into question, so social licence, community consultation is extremely important.

I would also like to reaffirm the weighting given to generation of renewable energy, and also hydrogen, in that there is an increased weighting for energy to be used in South Australia. Why I say that is that Mount Gambier and much of the Limestone Coast is in a cross-border region. We have developments where proponents wanted to develop in South Australia, on land or at sea in South Australia, yet the power is diverted or generated purely for use in Victoria. Whilst I am not against that if the project stacks up, I think the weighting needs to be for those developments to be supplying power into South Australia.

Probably the more contentious one around that would be South Australian waters—not federal waters; we are talking two kilometres out to sea being South Australian waters—and the delicate balance that needs to be struck between existing industries, in our case the crayfish industry, and recreational fishing that occurs within those state waters to make sure that it is managed appropriately and for the benefit of all users of South Australian waters, not just a proponent of renewable energy.

In closing, I keep promoting the South-East as an ideal place for hydrogen generation. When you think about it, putting electricity through fresh water to separate the hydrogen and oxygen atoms you of course need fresh water, and you need—if it is going to be green hydrogen—renewable energy. The South-East is abundant in both of those categories. It has more fresh water probably running out to sea every day than nearly any other part of South Australia, and with the renewable energy in solar and windfarms along our coastlines it has abundant renewable energy.

The other component that you need to have a hydrogen hub would be a major end user, and the South-East has those as well, with Kimberly-Clark being a big consumer of energy and then, into Victoria, Alcoa making aluminium at the Port of Portland. Of course, if you are going to transport hydrogen out of the country, you need a deep-sea port. Again, the Port of Portland provides that facility.

Whilst I applaud and certainly support the government looking at many areas across South Australia for hydrogen development and production, the South-East is ideally suited, along with other areas, for that hydrogen. This type of legislation will lead proponents who want to bring their dollars to South Australia to invest in South Australia with these developments, creating jobs and renewable energy, in particular hydrogen. I am very supportive of the government's direction.