A new group has formed to take up the fight against a proposed offshore wind zone off the coast of the Illawarra, and its founders say their views are founded on credible climate science and a precautionary approach to the marine environment.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Responsible Future (Illawarra Chapter) quietly established itself in January this year, registering as an association and setting up a website.
Those behind the association say they are distinct from other groups that sprang up when Energy and Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen announced the draft offshore wind zone in August last year, the most prominent being the Coalition Against Offshore Wind.
"Responsible Future is not the new name for Coalition Against Offshore Wind but we are an association formed by dedicated locals who have actively opposed offshore wind plans," the organisation said in a statement.
From the outset, the organisation is at pains to point out that it is not a climate denialist outfit, and would welcome a mix of renewable technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
"We acknowledge the need to reduce reliance on fossil fuels and reduce CO2 emissions and support evidence-based measures that can ensure these benefits."
Why all the fuss about wind?
Since coming to power in 2022, the Albanese Labor government and in particular minister Bowen have been accelerating efforts to cut Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.
The government hopes to largely decarbonise the electricity grid by 2030, with a target of 82 per cent renewables by 2030.
But with offshore wind not slated to arrive before the early 2030s, it is instead touted as being crucial to provide the large-scale, relatively reliable green energy needed for the green industrial revolution, providing the critical energy source to turn steel, aluminium and cement green.
In the Illawarra, BlueScope's timeline to decarbonise its steel production process would necessitate a new source of large-scale, baseload power in the 2030s.
For the particularly energy intensive iron-making process to remain in the Illawarra, the most viable electricity source at this time is offshore wind.
But not if groups such as Responsible Future have anything to say about it.
Community opposition surges
Large scale community polling on the Illawarra's attitudes to offshore wind is not available, but groups such as Responsible Future believe general sentiment is on their side.
And, to some extent, the data that is available backs them up.
A survey conducted by the CSIRO last year asked Australians around the country about their attitudes to renewable energy infrastructure. The survey also polled those living near the two most advanced offshore wind zones - the Hunter and Gippsland - on their attitudes towards offshore wind.
While the proportion of those in support of the technology remained the same, the number who opposed the technology increased in the Hunter and Gippsland, drawing numbers away from those who were neutral.
It is these people, the undecided or unaware, that the group is hoping to engage as it launches itself officially with a community information session on Tuesday, April 30 and ramps up activities ahead of Minister Bowen declaring the zone, expected in the coming months.
But the data also shows the group may have headwinds of its own. There is general support for renewables across the community and widespread acknowledgement of the need to take action in Australia on climate change.
The association's appearance alongside fringe, anti-renewable groups and climate denialists at a rally in Canberra earlier this year could raise questions about the group's stated acceptance of the scientific consensus on climate change.
In addition, the alignment of Liberal and National party politicians with other anti-wind groups could tarnish the group's reputation in a region like the Illawarra where The Greens outperformed the Coalition on election day in a run of booths in the northern Illawarra.
The group describes itself as apolitical and prospective members are vetted for membership in political parties. Registered to an address in the inner west of Sydney, the organisation states the address meets all the requirements of the establishment of an association.
While accepting donations, it will not take any cash from companies in the oil and gas industry, big corporations, political parties or trade unions.
What's the alternative?
The group's opposition to wind is primarily based on the unknown impacts on the marine environment. While offshore wind has been powering countries such as Denmark for decades, floating offshore wind turbines, as proposed for the Illawarra, are a relatively new technology, with questions about the impact on whales and other marine wildlife, as well as how fishing grounds will be affected.
Instead of wind, the association supports a mix of renewable energy technologies to provide the Illawarra with green energy and the steelworks with a green future. The organisation supports Nationals leader David Littleproud's enthusiasm for rooftop solar and household batteries, which would deliver more of the electricity grid into community hands, rather than projects controlled by larger renewable energy developers.
But even if every rooftop in the Illawarra was covered in solar panels, it would not be enough to supply the 15 times more power that would be required to produce green steel in Port Kembla, something that could be made up with imports of hydrogen, group spokesperson Alex O'Brien said.
That electricity needs to come from somewhere, and as communities around the country push back on renewable projects in their backyard, the group has said the issue is not so much the technology itself, but the way communities have been involved in the process.
"We need to be treated with respect," Mr O'Brien said.
With future rounds of consultation and multiple layers of approvals ahead before any turbine being anchored to the seabed, the organisation is not alone in calling for a change to how community sentiment is gathered and incorporated. After a bruising three month consultation period in 2023, Mr O'Brien said the stakes next time around could not be higher.
"If we get this wrong the consequences could be devastating."