[Theme Music Starts]

ANGE:

From Schwartz Media. I’m Ange McCormack. This is 7am.

Australians love to heat their homes and cook their meals with gas - but the future of gas in our households has a limit.

Victoria’s Premier, Daniel Andrews, has taken a big step in phasing out gas - by banning it in new homes by 2024.

But it provoked anger and outrage among conservative commentators, and some members of the public, who insist gas is best.

So, does Australia have any hope of reaching net zero if even our kitchen stoves have become politicised?

Today, national correspondent for The Saturday Paper, Mike Seccombe, on how having gas in the home became a new front in the culture wars.

It’s Tuesday August 1st.

[Theme Music Ends]

Archival tape – Channel 7:

“Victorians are facing a major energy shake up with a ban on gas in all new homes set to kick in from the start of next year.”

Archival tape – Channel 9:

“All new residential homes that are built in this state will not be connected to gas.”

Archival tape – Sky:

“As part outfits plan to reach net zero by 2045, so a little earlier than the national target.”

ANGE:

Mike, last week the Victorian Government announced it was banning gas connections in new homes and the reaction was very strong from a lot of people. Why did it stir up so much criticism?

MIKE:

Yes, it certainly did stir up some criticism. So here's what happened. Last Friday, the Victorian Energy Minister and the Planning Minister gave a press conference where they made the announcement that any new homes built in the state would have to be all electric in future, or from the start of next year. There would be no gas connections. But you’re quite right, the reaction was absolutely unbelievable.

Archival tape – Kyle Sandilands:

“You know that government sucks arse, that wandering old flop down there can't have the Commonwealth Games because he can't budget. Now he thinks, 'Oh, I'll get all the woke losers to vote for me by getting rid of the gas.' You're a flop.”

MIKE:

If the shock jock, Kyle Sandilands, had an enormous rant about this, he said he was sick and tired of everyone thinking we're idiots. “These laws are for idiots”, he said.

Archival tape – Kyle Sandilands:

I mean, they’ll be banning BIC lighters next, we’ll be rubbing two sticks together to get a cigarette lit.

MIKE:

And then, of course, Matt Canavan, Mr. Fossil fuel industry from the National Party, went on Sky News and said it wasn't about climate at all, this was all about control, you know, this is the government trying to control our lives.

Archival tape – Matt Canavan:

“This is all about control. It's all about a group of politicians that like to control what you can do, what car you can drive, where you live, how you live, in this case, how you even heat your home.”

MIKE:

So, you know, for some in the media — and in politics — this has rather bizarrely become an issue about personal choice and government overreach and control. And, of course, this comes at the end of the gas industry over many decades now doing a really good job at selling gas as a superior product, particularly for cooking.

Archival tape – Ad:

“Barry doesn't always make the best choices, but one of his better ones was to connect his home to natural gas. Have you got gas? Visit us at thenaturalchoice.com.au.”

MIKE:

They've been on that for years and years and years, saying it's much better for cooking, that if you're serious about making a nice meal, you need, you know, an open flame to do it. And you know that you'll have hot water and hot showers whenever you want it.

Archival tape – Ad:

“Honey, what's wrong? It's gone cold. Avoid the next chilling episode. Choose natural gas hot water.”

MIKE:

So we've seen a lot of ads like that, you know, not only saying that it's superior in cooking, but also that it's actually a useful transition fuel, to get us off coal, which is a very dodgy way to advertise because, you know, gas is itself a fossil fuel.

ANGE:

And Mike, let's talk about what a phase out of gas looks like, because ultimately we are going to be seeing more Australians living in a home without gas. What will that mean for them?

MIKE:

Well, people living in homes without gas will be better off, that's for sure. There’s a cost advantage of electric over gas, and that's only grown as the share of cheap renewables in the energy system is increased, and as the technology of electric appliances has improved. For instance, you know induction stovetops, better than gas stovetops, reverse cycle air conditioning, much more efficient than gas, heat water pumps, electric water pumps, vastly more efficient than their gas equivalents. And there's a stack of analysis, a growing stack of analysis, that suggests that if you have gas, you're the ones that are losing. Collectively, households that are using gas are paying billions of dollars more for their energy than they need to.

The Climate Council — you know, very authoritative body — released numbers for all the state capitals and found that annual savings would range from about $800 in Perth to almost $1900 in Canberra and Hobart. So big, big savings to be made by not being on gas.

The other side of the coin, of course, is that there's also a growing body of evidence that warns us about the dangers of having gas in the home. It's arguably healthier to use electricity for heating and cooking, because when the gas is not lit, it can leak. And elements of what's in gas are toxic. And when it burns, it releases fine particulates, which are very bad for people with breathing problems, particularly asthmatics. So while people might feel strongly about having a gas heater in winter or particularly making their dinner on a gas stove, the obsession with gas isn't isn't warranted, frankly, on just about every measure, not only climate, just about every other measure, electricity is better.

ANGE:

Okay. So it probably wasn't much of a surprise that Victoria made this move. Are other parts of the country going to follow suit?

MIKE:

It wasn't really a surprise that Victoria was heading in that direction. It was a bit of a surprise that they did it as quickly as they did last week. But no, the ACT had already done a similar thing. In fact, they went even further. They not only banned new gas connections, they also set 2045 as a date to have gas fully phased out of all homes. So that puts a little more pressure on the Victorian Government to follow suit. But so far, no, the other states haven't floated any similar plans. I spoke with the other big eastern states, which is New South Wales, South Australia and Queensland. None of their governments plans to do the same at the moment, which is unfortunate obviously, both for the climate and for the household finances, because it will cost, you know, thousands of dollars for those people who wind up moving into houses that have gas connected, whether they like it or not. And I think the reason that governments have been slow to act goes back to this idea that they don't want to be seen to be taking away people's choices. Actually, until recently, oddly enough, governments themselves in some cases were limiting people's choices. For a long time some governments not only encouraged the connection of gas to homes, but they compelled it. Until last year, Victoria, for instance, all new housing developments had to be connected to gas, which resulted in something like 80% of homes in Victoria having a gas connection, whether they wanted it or not.

So there's a bit of an irony here, which is that, you know, is the smart people, and the people who can afford to do so, are ditching gas because it's expensive. And as more people leave, the energy companies are only going to charge those who remain more, because they will have to make up the costs of all the infrastructure that they've sunk into reticulating gas. And so it will force up the prices for everyone else. So what you could end up with here is what's called a death spiral, whereby fewer and fewer gas customers face higher and higher costs until eventually the whole system collapses.

ANGE:

After the break – how Australia’s gas network is facing a death spiral, and why it will hit poor households the hardest.

[Advertisement]

ANGE:

So, Mike, fewer and fewer Australians will be using gas in their homes. It's already expensive to use gas, but it's going to get even worse. What impact will this death spiral that you're talking about have on those homes?

MIKE:

Yeah, right. So the price of gas is rising, and it's rising faster than the price of electricity. And I think people are starting to wake up to that. And those rising prices are, in some measure, kind of an admission that gas doesn't have much of a future. They are a recognition of the fact that demand for gas is falling, and will fall further in the future. And without wanting to get too technical, but in the most recent round of price negotiations between the energy regulator and Victoria's gas networks, the companies applied for, and got, accelerated depreciation for their assets. So what that means is they're essentially writing off all their networks faster, on the assumption that there will be fewer people to pay for those networks in future. So what they're doing is they're front loading payments now before too many people leave the network. And they’re left with, you know, fewer customers and a bunch of stranded assets. Essentially, they want to write off those assets before they get stranded. And a number of civil society groups, including the Brotherhood of St Lawrence, have expressed great concern about this, is that the people who are more likely to transition off gas early are those who own their own homes, and can actually afford to switch over their appliances, because, you know, at the moment the electric appliances tend to be a bit more expensive, just like electric cars. So it will be the relatively well-to-do home owners who will lead the shift. Whereas the people who will be left behind on the gas network are the ones without the means to quit. They will be lower income households, and they will be people in rental accommodation who don't really have control over what kind of appliances they have in their homes. So when you consider that some gas providers have also been charging households enormous exorbitant amounts of money to actually disconnect from the gas network, they're trying to lock people in. And the ones who will be most affected by this are those who can least afford it. So, there's a big equality issue here. You know, while we have these right wing commentators saying they don't want their gas taken away, well, sure okay, they can keep it. Kyle Sandilands is worth millions of dollars, he can afford it. But there are plenty of customers out there who will want to get off the network and potentially won't be able to afford to leave. As we know, there's already a cost of living crisis, which is affecting the least well-off the worst, and the cost of getting off gas is just another impost on those people. And of course, the elephant in the room here is that gas is a fossil fuel. And the science says it's absolutely clear that we should be reducing our reliance on gas.

ANGE:

Yeah, let's talk about lowering emissions. What impact would there be if more and more Australians got off gas? How much gas do Australian homes actually consume?

MIKE:

Well, there's about 5 million, or so, homes using gas one way or the other, you know, for heating or cooking, or something. And in total, that accounts for about 17% of the total gas consumed in Australia. So it's a fair whack. And obviously, you know, 17% of greenhouse gas emissions that result from the burning of that gas. The Grattan Institute, a pretty authoritative body, put out a report last month. And I can do no better, I think, than quote the first sentence which said “Australia will not hit its 2050 net zero emissions target unless we get off natural gas.” So that's pretty categorical. And it was also calling for all governments to start ensuring that all homes in Australia become fully electric.

ANGE:

Right. So without all the other states and territories getting on board and doing what Victoria has done, can Australia really get to its net zero by 2050 target?

MIKE:

They're clearly not on track for it at the moment, you know. I think that the governments of New South Wales, Queensland, etc. should have their feet held to the fire about this. Because, you know, banning new connections is not really such a big step. It's just saying no new people can join. It's not saying anything at all about those already in the system, but ultimately that's what it requires. Ultimately, it means closing down the whole reticulation network. So last year, a couple of giant commercial landlords, Lendlease and the GPT Group, they joined an organisation called the Global Cook Safe Coalition, which is devoted specifically to making kitchens all electric. And just about a week ago, a bunch more came on board. Cook Safe says all up total assets and funds that have shifted behind the campaign is now $127 billion. So that's a pretty impressive number. But it remains the case that most developers, I'm afraid to say, still go with gas. And this is largely driven by consumer preference, and that is all about cooking. The director of Cook Safe told me that people don't really care that much about what heats their water or their houses, but what they do care about is gas cooking. The problem is that people have not yet caught on to the fact that advances in induction cooking mean it now outperforms gas. And they continue to believe these claims from the industry about the superiority of gas.

ANGE:

Mike, I'm wondering if this story is an illustration of how difficult the transition to net zero is going to be when something as seemingly small as cooking with gas can be blown up into a culture war issue and become so politicised. What does this say about the future of Australia's ability to enact policies to combat climate change?

MIKE:

Well, it's a very good point. The amount of uproar about something as relatively small as consumers changing from gas to electric is interesting, and kind of worrying, really. It's a bit startling to see how provocative this has become. So the debate around energy in Australia has gone way beyond the question that we should be addressing. You know, the core question of climate change. Somehow it's become a political thing, and this makes it harder to tackle climate change, which is already, let's face it, a really hard job.

If even our kitchen stoves become politicised it's not a good sign. It's not just our homes. You know, if you look at the issue of electric cars, you know, remember the election before last, Scott Morrison was out there saying that Labor wanted to steal your weekend and would take away tradies ute's, all lies of course, but presumably effective. But let's look on the bright side here, which is that you can't fool people forever. Once they understand the benefits of new technologies. You know the sales of electric cars, Australia's still behind the world, but sales are now starting to boom, they have been for the past couple of years, and no doubt they will boom further as the price of EVs gets closer to parity with internal combustion vehicles. Look at rooftop solar, where Australia leads the world. The reason for that is because people realised that it wasn't just greener, but it was cheaper. And I reckon the same will happen with gas once people realise its manifest advantages, and I don't think that's really sunk in with a lot of the public yet. But it needs to happen and it needs to happen fast because right now the way 5 million of us cook our meals is also helping to cook the planet.

ANGE:

Mike, thanks so much for speaking with me today.

MIKE:

My pleasure.

[Advertisement]

[Theme Music Starts]

ANGE:

Also in the news today…

Independent senator, David Pocock, will introduce a private members bill to the senate today that would mean politicians have to consider whether their decisions would cause climate harm to future generations.

The duty of care would theoretically prevent politicians from making decisions that risk the health and wellbeing of current and future children in Australia.

And…

The Matildas have won their group match against Canada, and will proceed to the next round of the women’s world cup.

Australia will enter the round of 16 finalists along with Switzerland, Norway, and other countries yet to be determined by the group stage.

From Schwartz Media, I’m Ange McCormack. We’ll see you tomorrow.

[Theme Music Ends]