The chair of Australias largest group of clean energy investors has described the federal Coalitions push for nuclear power as a gas Trojan horse, and a political wedge intended to douse investment in renewables and prolong the use of fossil fuels.

John Martin, CEO of renewables developer Windlab and chair of the Clean Energy Investor Group, on Monday named wedge politics as one of the biggest issues holding back the shift to renewables in Australia, describing the current industry status quo as really, really challenging".

Australia is the land of wedges, Martin told the 2024 Clean Energy Investor Conference in Melbourne.

When I think of the whole nuclear debate, I dont see that as really about nuclear. Its a gas Trojan horse, Martin told the conference.

If you do any modelling, what will happen? The coal will go, nuclear will take forever, none of us are going to invest in renewables knowing we cant compete against government-funded nuclear, [so that] big gap will be filled with gas. So theres a wedge there thats being aimed at us.

Painting renewables as a natural enemy of the environment and wildlife is another fantastic wedge strategy, Martin says, that likewise threatens to derail progress on decarbonisation, while doing nothing to address the urgent need to reform Australias environment and biodiversity protection rules.

I met a senior conservative politician who started to tell me, he said, John, Im really concerned about the koalas.

That is the first time this person, hes quite a good friend, [has been] worried about koalas. And suddenly I realised, you know, its a great opportunity, here, to wedge environmentally minded people between climate change versus biodiversity.

Environment, and in particular the shortcomings of the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, were key topics at the conference, with a presentation from Australian Conservation Foundation CEO Kelly OShannassy putting the plight of the nations endangered species in stark relief.

We cant be getting the balance right if, since the EPBC Act came in place weve cleared 7.7 million hectares, or the size of Tasmania, of threatened species habitat, OShannassy said.

Lets have an Act that actually does what it says on the can and protects nature, and then we can develop this nation sustainably.

Speaking on the same panel, Peter Briggs from law firm Herbert Smith Freehills, sees problems on the renewables side of the equation, too.

I think the renewable sector has had a very limited impact on biodiversity, as a matter of fact, even though the impost on the industry through the current system has been great.

So I dont think weve got that balance right either, and I think Kelly [OShannassy] and I are on the same page. We need to stop land clearing, theres no question, and we need to protect areas theres no question about that.

But the question is whether we should be imposing burdens on just one or two sectors and whether the burden being imposed on renewables outweighs the other benefits that the industry actually contributes.

On both the conservation and development side, the call is for more clarity from the government, which according to Windlabs John Martin includes giving developers a quick no when a project is proposed for the wrong spot.

I dont believe the wedge thats being aimed at us, which is, youve got to choose [between renewables and the environment], he said.

I think you can do both. Its not a trade-off.

In fact, many of us are on the same page. We need to get the same solution, but weve got to watch were not being wedged by the fossil fuel industry, which is well funded and organised.

Republished from Renew Economy, August 20, 2024