Environment Victoria has alerted me to this discussion group & all the valid questions of why AGL would choose to develop in an internationally significant wetland, or continue spending money on gas infrastructure instead of clean energy options?
I'm sorry for the delay, we've been working through answering many questions as a result of the alert from Environment Victoria.
We fully recognise these concerns and the strongly held views about the unique environmental significance of Western Port.
Energy is an industry in great transition, moving towards reliable power for customers that’s low cost and low carbon.
Gas will play a critical role in this transition.
Right now, we have $1.9 billion worth of energy supply projects under development, with a further $1.5 billion subject to feasibility.
These projects range from upgrades to our existing sites to new renewables projects. A number are gas-firming projects which play an important role in this transition period to ensure clean, reliable and affordable electricity.
We understand that gas is only a medium-term fuel, and while some would like us to jump straight to renewables we need a reliable supply of lower emission fuel to generate the firming capacity needed to make an effective transition to renewables in the next decade.
Gas-fired power generation has proved to be a relatively low cost, low emissions source of synchronous generation and has provided critical network stability, along with other technologies.
We are also aware that there are some key challenges ahead, if gas is to lead the transition. Most pressing is access to gas. AGL supports initiatives that bring more supply and a diversity of suppliers to the market, including domestic gas resource development and potential imports of gas and LNG.