Q&A: In Australia which urban, regional and mining town electorates are driving climate policy compromise? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key points

Urban "Teal" and inner-city seats push stronger climate targets[1] Regional independents and city-regional hybrids force trade-offs[2] Coal-mining electorates shape policy on jobs and transition funding[3] Queensland mining and regional seats are decisive at the ballot box[4] Compromises lead to policy packages pairing emissions targets with regional transition measures[5]

Teal city seats and regional mining towns together are forcing the Federal Government to compromise on climate policy.

Australia’s political landscape on climate change is shaped by an unusual alliance of forces. 

Urban electorates are demanding more ambitious emissions cuts, and regional or mining town seats are prioritising economic stability, jobs, and community investment.

Urban drivers: the Teal and inner metropolitan seats

Inner-city and wealthy suburban electorates such as Kooyong, Wentworth, Mackellar and Warringah have elected independents or shifted strongly towards Greens and climate-forward candidates. 

These Teal MPs wield significant influence, leveraging their balance-of-power potential and high media visibility to push for stronger emissions targets and faster renewable energy rollouts^[1].

At the State level, seats like Sydney (NSW) and Prahran (VIC) mirror these priorities, using their influence in hung parliaments or tight chambers to drive climate-aligned legislation, often linking it to urban transport and energy-efficiency programs.

Regional independents and city-regional hybrids

Electorates such as Indi (VIC) and Clark (TAS) represent a hybrid political culture: socially progressive on environmental issues but deeply pragmatic about regional infrastructure and industry^[2]. 

State seats like Shepparton (VIC) and Noosa (QLD) show similar patterns. MPs from these electorates often champion rural healthcare, water security, and local job creation alongside renewable energy projects, shaping policies that combine climate resilience with tangible local benefits.

Mining towns and resource electorates

Federal electorates in coal and gas basins — Maranoa, Flynn, Capricornia, and Hunter — carry significant sway over climate legislation^[3]. They anchor political debates in the realities of resource-dependent economies, extracting commitments for just transition packages before supporting national emissions frameworks.

State electorates such as Pilbara (WA) and Callide (QLD) amplify this stance, using their political clout to demand infrastructure spending, retraining programs, and local content rules for renewables development.

Why these mixes force compromise

Canberra’s climate negotiations are a balancing act between two competing imperatives: the urgency of decarbonisation and the need to protect communities tied to high-emissions industries^[4]. 

This tension produces policy hybrids — for example, pairing national renewable targets with regional hydrogen hubs, or funding major transmission upgrades alongside support for coal-worker redeployment schemes.

Queensland the bellwether of mining politics

Queensland remains central to national climate politics because it holds a dense cluster of mining seats whose votes can decide federal elections. 

Winning these electorates often requires a platform that blends climate ambition with explicit economic security guarantees for mining regions^[5]. 

Even urban-focused climate policies are often re-framed through a Queensland lens, highlighting regional benefits such as export potential for green hydrogen or job creation in manufacturing renewable components.

Electorates Driving Climate Compromise

Urban / Teal Seats Federal: Kooyong (VIC), Wentworth (NSW), Mackellar (NSW), Warringah (NSW), North Sydney (NSW), Curtin (WA) State: Sydney (NSW), Prahran (VIC), Nedlands (WA), South Brisbane (QLD) Regional Independents & Hybrids Federal: Indi (VIC), Mayo (SA), Clark (TAS), Calare (NSW), Bass (TAS) State: Shepparton (VIC), Frome (SA), Murray (NSW), Noosa (QLD) Mining & Resource Electorates Federal: Maranoa (QLD), Flynn (QLD), Capricornia (QLD), Hunter (NSW), Durack (WA), O'Connor (WA) State: Callide (QLD), Upper Hunter (NSW), Pilbara (WA), Kalgoorlie (WA)

Political consequences and examples

Recent policy compromises include the federal government’s net-zero pledge supported by a multi-billion-dollar regional transition fund. 

This funding stream underwrites battery manufacturing plants in regional Victoria, hydrogen pilot projects in Gladstone, and workforce retraining in the Hunter Valley.

At the State level, WA’s Labor Government has combined coal-closure timetables with a pledge for thousands of renewable-sector jobs in the South West, while Queensland has passed legislation locking in state-owned renewable energy investment, directly shaped by negotiations with mining-seat MPs.

What’s at stake

Parties that fail to bridge the urban-regional climate gap risk losing critical marginals. 

For major parties, this means simultaneously holding climate-forward urban seats against independents while fending off challenges in resource towns from opposition or populist candidates.

For communities, the stakes are tangible: the speed and fairness of the clean-energy transition will dictate whether climate action is seen as an opportunity or a threat.

Conclusion

The interplay between urban Teals, regional Independents, and mining-town MPs is shaping a uniquely Australian model of climate compromise. 

It is a model defined by constant negotiation, regional equity measures, and a recognition that lasting climate action must have both city and country on board. 

We can expect more policy bundles that link higher emissions targets to concrete, funded transition programs in resource-heavy regions.

Footnotes

1. The Australian — Nation's top teal suburbs revealed
2. Climate Council — Election 2025: Unpacking the impact of climate on Australian voters
3. The Australia Institute — Adani impact by Queensland electorate (report)
4. ABC News — Boom, bust and a sense of distrust in central Queensland's coal country
5. Climate Council — Election Policy Scorecard 2025

Back to top

Global Alarm: Climate Change, Heat, Courts and a Closing Window - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key points

July 2025 ranked among the hottest Julys on record, continuing an accelerating heat trend.[1] The UN’s Emissions Gap analysis shows current pledges still leave the world far from 1.5°C pathways.[2] The International Court of Justice issued an advisory opinion strengthening legal duties on states to curb emissions.[3] Scientists say 2025 is pacing among the warmest years, raising the odds of new temperature records.[4] Despite technical solutions, rapid policy delivery and finance are the binding constraints to near-term cuts.[5]

Global warming is faster and the legal and political pressure to cut emissions is rising.

July 2025 was ranked among the hottest Julys on record, with the Copernicus dataset reporting a July global mean that sits well above the 1991–2020 baseline.^[1]

Regional extremes punctuated that global average, with national and local temperature records broken across Europe and East Asia in early August 2025.^[1]

Scientists note that the 12-month running mean around mid-2024 to mid-2025 has flirted with and in places exceeded 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.^[1]

Year-to-date and the trajectory

Multiple datasets and monthly bulletins show 2025 pacing as one of the warmest years on record, a continuation of the record-setting 2024 baseline that now elevates the probability of further hottest-year records in the next five years.^[4]

That statistical pacing matters because it raises exposure to compound heatwaves, droughts and fire seasons, even where long-term averages are still calculated over decades.^[4]

Emissions: the gap remains large

The UN Environment Programme’s Emissions Gap Report shows current national pledges and policies fall short of the cuts needed to keep a credible 1.5°C pathway alive, estimating deep reductions, roughly 42% by 2030 and steeper by 2035, are necessary to close the gap.^[2]

The same assessment emphasises that the technological potential exists now, with solar, wind, storage, and nature-based solutions able to bridge most of the gap, but that political will, finance and supply-chain scale-up are the binding constraints.^[2]

Law and accountability: a new lever

In July 2025 the International Court of Justice delivered an advisory opinion that framed greenhouse-gas emissions and climate harms in terms of existing international obligations, signalling expanded legal duties on states to prevent trans-boundary harm from climate change.^[3]

Legal experts and campaigners say the opinion does not itself create new treaty rights but strengthens the normative and juridical architecture that could underpin future claims and domestic litigation pathways.^[3]

Impacts: on people, food and finance

Around the world communities are already facing amplified impacts: heat stress on health systems, disruption to crop seasons, and insurance markets straining under rising losses from fires, floods and storms.

These impacts drive new political attention to adaptation finance as a complement to mitigation, but current flows remain far below assessed needs, especially for vulnerable and low-income countries.

Technology, markets and the narrow path ahead

Technologies for rapid decarbonisation are proven and falling in cost, from renewables to batteries and low-emissions industrial pathways, creating a toolbox that policy can deploy at scale.^[2]

Yet markets and permitting regimes are lagging, and the report authors and analysts warn that without faster deployment and without equitable finance for front-line countries the emissions trajectory will remain above the safer pathway.^[2]

Politics and diplomacy

Diplomatic attention in 2025 is split between implementing pledges, negotiating finance and exploring legal frameworks that the ICJ opinion has brought back into focus.^[3]

Expectations ahead of the next round of Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and the international stocktakes are that some countries will increase ambition, but the aggregate effect remains an open question until those submissions are delivered and implemented.^[2]

Bottom line

Scientific indicators in mid-2025 show a warming system with increasing probability of new temperature records and more frequent extremes; policy and legal developments are tightening the political and juridical pressure to act.

Closing the emissions gap requires immediate, large-scale deployment of existing technologies plus a surge in climate finance and governance reforms to ensure rapid, equitable action.

References

1. Reuters — July was Earth's third-hottest on record, included a record for Turkey, EU scientists say (7 Aug 2025).
2. UNEP — Emissions Gap Report 2024: No more hot air please (Emissions Gap interactive/report).
3. Eco-Business — What the World Court’s landmark opinion means for climate change (July 2025 analysis).
4. The Weather Channel — 2025 pacing to be Earth's second warmest year (analysis, July 2025).
5. Copernicus Climate Change Service — monthly climate bulletins and global temperature data (C3S, 2025 updates).

Back to top

Q&A: What is the role of Indigenous land management in reducing emissions and protecting biodiversity in Australia? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key points

Indigenous-managed lands harbour large shares of threatened species. [1] Cultural burning and savanna fire management reduce late-season mega-fires and cut greenhouse gas emissions. [2] Ranger programs create jobs while delivering conservation and emissions outcomes. [3] Carbon-market and government incentives can help scale Indigenous land-management solutions but must respect rights and local priorities. [4]

Indigenous land management is one of Australia’s most cost-effective, culturally grounded tools for lowering emissions and keeping native species alive.

Across Australia, First Nations peoples have shaped ecosystems for tens of thousands of years through sophisticated land practices.

These practices are deeply embedded in cultural traditions, seasonal knowledge, and an understanding of ecological cycles that modern science is only beginning to fully appreciate.

From the rainforests of the north to the deserts of the centre, Indigenous custodians have long balanced the needs of people, plants, and animals.

Today, that same knowledge is being recognised as a critical ally in the fight against climate change and biodiversity loss.

As greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, the ability to reduce wildfire intensity, store carbon in landscapes, and restore degraded ecosystems has never been more urgent.

Indigenous-led programs, when adequately supported, can deliver results that are both environmentally and socially transformative.

They also reconnect communities to Country, strengthen cultural identity, and provide a sense of agency in confronting the climate crisis.

Evidence is mounting that these programs are not just beneficial, but essential for meeting national and global environmental goals.

What Indigenous land management means

Indigenous land management is the active stewardship of Country by First Nations peoples combining traditional ecological knowledge, cultural burning, seasonal calendars and modern science to sustain landscapes and livelihoods. ^[1]

It reflects a worldview in which people are inseparable from the land, water, and living systems around them. These practices are passed down through oral traditions, ceremony, and direct experience on Country.

Many communities integrate these approaches with new technologies such as satellite mapping to monitor vegetation and fire patterns. This blend of ancient and modern ensures that management decisions remain both culturally grounded and scientifically informed.

How it reduces greenhouse gas emissions

One of the most successful examples is savanna fire management, where early dry-season burns prevent destructive late-season wildfires that release massive amounts of carbon dioxide. ^[2]

By breaking up fuel loads, these controlled burns also protect human settlements and sacred sites from fire damage. The reduced intensity of fires means less smoke pollution and improved air quality for communities.

In addition to fire control, Indigenous land management can boost carbon sequestration by maintaining healthy grasslands, wetlands, and forests. Emerging carbon credit projects are helping monetise these emission reductions for reinvestment in local initiatives.

How it protects biodiversity

Indigenous-managed lands cover vast areas that contain a disproportionately high number of threatened species. ^[3]

Habitat protection is strengthened through the use of culturally significant zones where hunting, harvesting, or disturbance is restricted. Seasonal burning promotes plant diversity and provides food and shelter for native wildlife.

These methods often reverse the impacts of past land mismanagement, allowing species to recover. By aligning conservation with cultural priorities, biodiversity protection becomes a lived, everyday practice rather than an abstract policy goal.

Jobs, capability and co-benefits

Indigenous ranger programs create meaningful employment while building skills in conservation, firefighting, and environmental monitoring. ^[4]

They also deliver social benefits such as improved health, reduced incarceration rates, and strengthened community governance. Income from these roles helps keep families on Country and supports intergenerational knowledge transfer.

Beyond the economic impacts, ranger work fosters pride and purpose, especially among young people. These roles are often pathways to higher education, tourism ventures, and leadership positions in environmental management.

Market mechanisms and incentives promise and pitfalls

Carbon markets and biodiversity credits can provide new revenue streams for Indigenous land managers. However, they require careful design to ensure benefits flow equitably and cultural values are not compromised.

Some projects have succeeded in blending commercial opportunities with ecological restoration. Others have faced challenges where market pressures conflicted with community decision-making.

Transparent governance and long-term funding certainty are essential. Without these safeguards, market mechanisms risk prioritising short-term gains over ecological and cultural sustainability.

Challenges and what’s needed

Indigenous land management faces threats from underfunding, climate change impacts, and competing land uses. ^[5]

Workforce shortages in remote areas make it difficult to sustain year-round programs. Policy instability can also undermine trust and continuity in long-term projects.

Increased investment, secure land rights, and respect for Indigenous decision-making are critical to scaling these efforts. 

Collaboration between governments, Indigenous organisations, and scientists will be key to future success.

Conclusion

Indigenous land management is not just a climate solution.

It is a cultural obligation and a demonstration of resilience. ^[6]

By valuing and funding these approaches, Australia can reduce emissions, safeguard biodiversity, and strengthen communities. This is a pathway that delivers benefits for all Australians while honouring the knowledge of the world’s oldest continuous cultures.

The opportunity now is to move from small-scale projects to systemic integration of Indigenous management in national climate and conservation strategies. Doing so would be both an environmental necessity and a matter of justice.

References

1. Indigenous land management and threatened species protection
2. Savanna burning and emission reduction
3. Biodiversity on Indigenous-managed lands
4. Indigenous Ranger Program outcomes
5. Challenges in Indigenous land management
6. Indigenous knowledge as climate action

Q&A: How do young Australians see climate change shaping their future? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points

Young Australians are increasingly pessimistic about their climate future Emotional distress linked to climate inaction is rising Climate anxiety is influencing life decisions from careers to family planning Students are demanding system change and climate justice Youth-led protests and litigation are reshaping the climate debate Many feel betrayed by political leaders and fossil fuel expansion Education, activism, and creative expression are key coping strategies Despite fears, youth remain hopeful and resilient

Young Australians face a future of escalating climate chaos with growing fear, fierce resolve, and mounting protest.

For them climate change is no longer a distant threat.

It’s a daily reality that shapes how they think about the world and their place in it.^[1]

Floods, fires, droughts, and smoke-choked skies have become generational markers.

Instead of dreaming of carefree futures, many now wrestle with existential dread and moral urgency.^[2]

The Psychology of a Warming World

Studies show that climate anxiety is acute among young people across Australia.

A landmark survey in 2021 found that 75% of Australian youth aged 16 to 25 believe "the future is frightening."^[3]

Over half feel that governments are failing them, and many report feeling sad, powerless, or betrayed.

This psychological toll is not imaginary.

It’s deeply tied to perceived inaction by political leaders and the continuing expansion of fossil fuel projects.^[4]

Young Australians aren’t just afraid of extreme weather; they’re afraid of institutional failure.

From Anxiety to Action

Yet fear isn’t the only force shaping this generation: it’s also fuelling resistance.

Student climate strikes, often led by teenagers, have become powerful platforms for protest and solidarity.^[5]

In cities and rural towns alike, youth are organising rallies, lobbying MPs, and pushing schools and universities to divest from fossil fuels.

Some have taken legal action: in 2021, a group of young Australians successfully argued in the Federal Court that the Environment Minister had a duty of care to avoid harming children from climate change (a decision later overturned on appeal).^[6]

Changing Life Plans

Climate concern is also influencing personal decisions.

Many young people are reconsidering traditional life trajectories—whether to have children, where to live, and what careers to pursue.^[7]

Some avoid long-term investments or reject job offers in carbon-intensive sectors.

Others are drawn to environmental science, activism, or policy in hopes of making a difference.

It’s not about despair; it’s about directing energy where it matters most.

Voices of the Next Generation

“I feel like the adults in charge have failed us,” says 18-year-old Emily Tran from Melbourne.

“But that doesn’t mean we give up. It means we fight harder.”

Emily was among thousands who joined the 2023 School Strike 4 Climate, demanding a transition away from fossil fuels and better protections for vulnerable communities.

Her activism is echoed by students across the country from Alice Springs to Brisbane who see climate action as a moral imperative.^[8]

Cultural Responses and Creative Resistance

Australian youth are not just protesting in the streets, they’re using art, film, music, and literature to express their hopes and fears.

From climate-themed poetry slams to environmental TikTok collectives, they are building cultural movements that reach far beyond policy debates.^[9]

This creativity provides emotional relief and fosters a shared identity rooted in action and imagination.

Systemic Betrayal and Fossil Fuel Expansion

Many feel betrayed by Australia’s continued approval of coal and gas projects.

Despite international warnings and growing evidence of harm, the federal government has supported major fossil fuel expansions including the Beetaloo Basin and Scarborough gas fields.^[10]

To young Australians, these decisions are not just environmental missteps; they’re personal affronts that undermine their trust in democracy and leadership.

The message they receive is clear: profit still outweighs their future.

Coping, Healing, and Holding On

Yet amid the uncertainty, many young Australians are finding ways to cope.

Peer support networks, climate cafés, and youth-led organisations like AYCC (Australian Youth Climate Coalition) are helping them process their grief and channel it into purpose.^[11]

Some practice “radical hope”, a belief that despite overwhelming odds, change is still possible.

Others are building local resilience through permaculture, mutual aid, and regenerative living.

Looking Ahead

The youth of Australia are inheriting a climate legacy they did not create.

But they are not passive recipients of disaster.

They are architects of resistance, storytellers of survival, and catalysts of transformation.

They are demanding a better future.

And daring to create one.

Footnotes

^[1] The Guardian – Climate crisis has impacted mental health of nearly half of young Australians

^[2] SMH – Youth mental health hit by climate change

^[3] Nature – Young people’s climate anxiety revealed in landmark study

^[4] ABC News – Climate anxiety rising among Australian youth

^[5] The Monthly – Generation Rage: The school climate strikes

^[6] ABC – Court overturns duty of care ruling

^[7] The Conversation – Climate anxiety and life decisions

^[8] School Strike 4 Climate Australia

^[9] ABC – The rise of climate art

^[10] The Guardian – Australia to approve major fossil fuel projects

^[11] AYCC – Australian Youth Climate Coalition

Back to top

Q&A: How does climate change, global warming, and greenhouse gas effect Australian supermarket grocery prices? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points
Climate extremes are disrupting food supply chains Floods droughts and heatwaves have pushed prices higher Australia's food imports are vulnerable to global warming Supermarket costs are rising due to energy and transport shocks Consumers face higher grocery bills and reduced food variety

Climate change is driving up food prices in Australian supermarkets.

Relentless droughts floods and heatwaves are slashing crop yields across Australia ¹.

Fruit vegetables and grains are all affected with seasonal availability shrinking and shelf prices rising ².

Flooded roads and damaged infrastructure delay harvests and delivery schedules leading to shortages ³.

Energy and Transport Costs Climb

Extreme temperatures and fossil fuel dependency increase energy costs for refrigeration and freight ⁴.

Australia’s supermarkets rely heavily on long-haul trucking which suffers from rising fuel prices and road damage ⁵.

Global Food Supply Chains Under Strain

Imported staples such as rice coffee and cooking oil are becoming more expensive as climate impacts hit major exporting nations ⁶.

Shipping delays caused by extreme weather events are pushing up prices and causing stock shortages on local shelves ⁷.

Livestock and Dairy Sectors Suffer

Heat stress reduces milk yields while droughts cut fodder supplies increasing meat and dairy prices ⁸.

Graziers are forced to reduce herd sizes which tightens supply and drives further price hikes ⁹.

Consumers Pay the Price

Australians are now paying more for less as climate volatility shrinks product variety and increases weekly grocery bills ¹⁰.

Low-income households are especially hard-hit by food inflation linked to environmental disruption ¹¹.

What Can Be Done?

Transitioning to low-carbon agriculture and resilient supply chains is essential to buffer against climate-driven shocks ¹².

Experts warn that unless emissions are curbed and adaptive systems funded Australians will see worsening food insecurity ¹³.

Footnotes

1. CSIRO warns climate risks to crops

2. ABC News: Fruit and vegetable supply under pressure

3. Guardian: Flood damage hitting food supply

4. The Conversation: Climate and energy price link

5. SMH: Trucking and weather shocks

6. FAO: Global warming hits global food supply

7. Reuters: Shipping and climate costs

8. ABC Rural: Dairy prices and climate

9. Australian Agriculture: Climate and meat sector

10. CHOICE: Grocery prices and climate

11. ACOSS: Climate and food poverty

12. Climate Council: Future of food in Australia

13. UN: Climate change and food security

Back to top

Q&A: How is Australia tracking against its Paris Agreement targets and 2030 net-zero commitments? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points Summary
Australia’s emissions targets remain off-track Paris pledges cut emissions 43% by 2030 Fossil fuel exports and subsidies undermine progress Climate policies face legal and scientific scrutiny Renewable energy ramp-up shows potential Net-zero credibility depends on faster cuts now

Australia is not on track to meet the Paris Agreement or 2030 net-zero targets.

Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions in 2024 are projected to fall only 7% below 2005 levels.

This leaves a massive gap to the 43% reduction target by 2030 set under the Paris Agreement. [1]

Despite new policies, emissions from key sectors, especially transport, agriculture, and fossil fuel production, continue to rise. [2]

Meanwhile, Australia remains one of the world's largest exporters of coal and liquefied natural gas. [3]

This contradiction between export growth and domestic reduction undermines climate leadership. [4]

The Policy Problem

The federal government has introduced a Climate Change Act, a National Reconstruction Fund, and modest reforms to the Safeguard Mechanism. [5]

But these changes are not yet sufficient to drive the rapid emissions reductions needed this decade. [6]

Critics point out the $11 billion still given in fossil fuel subsidies each year as a key policy failure. [7]

Climate scientists warn that delay now will require steeper cuts later, and blow Australia’s carbon budget. [8]

Legal and International Pressure

The UN has called out Australia’s continued fossil fuel expansion as inconsistent with its climate obligations. [9]

Legal challenges by First Nations communities and environmental groups are mounting against major gas projects. [10]

Australia’s reputation at global climate summits is being tested by this growing scrutiny. [11]

Glimmers of Progress

Renewables now generate around 40% of electricity nationally, up from 17% in 2017. [12]

Major solar, wind, and battery storage investments are transforming the power grid. [13]

States like South Australia and Tasmania are already close to 100% renewable generation. [14]

But electrification alone will not be enough without deep cuts to fossil fuel use in all sectors. [15]

Conclusion

Australia’s 2030 target is still technically achievable, but only with urgent and systemic policy acceleration. [16]

That means ending fossil fuel subsidies, halting new coal and gas approvals, and investing in decarbonising transport, industry, and agriculture. [17]

Without this shift, Australia risks breaching both its climate commitments and its global credibility. [18]

Footnotes

[1] Climate Change Authority Progress Report 2023

[2] Clean Energy Regulator Emissions Data

[3] IEA: Australia Energy Profile

[4] Climate Council: Credibility Gap Report

[5] Department of Climate Change: Climate Policy Overview

[6] The Conversation: Australia’s Climate Policy Gaps

[7] The Australia Institute: Fossil Fuel Subsidies 2023

[8] IPCC Sixth Synthesis Report

[9] UN Environment Warning on Fossil Expansion

[10] EDO Challenge to Barossa Gas Project

[11] The Guardian: Australia’s COP Scrutiny

[12] OpenNEM: Live Electricity Data

[13] CSIRO Renewable Energy Tracker

[14] ARENA: State-by-State Renewable Stats

[15] Climate Council: Electrify Everything

[16] Nature: Still Time to Act

[17] Grattan: Decarbonising Australian Industry

[18] The Guardian: Is Australia Doing Enough?

Back to top

Q&A: What are the economic and employment effects of phasing out fossil fuels in Australia? - Lethal Heating Editor BDA

Key Points Summary
Fossil fuel phaseout risks job losses in coal-heavy regions Net economic benefits possible with strong renewable investment Clean energy jobs can outnumber fossil jobs with proper planning Government support essential for fair transition Exports and royalties likely to decline without new industries

Phasing out fossil fuels in Australia is economically inevitable. Whether it brings ruin or renewal depends on what replaces them.

Australia’s economic identity has long been tied to coal, gas, and oil.

But the urgent need to reduce greenhouse emissions means these industries will shrink, and with them some jobs, royalties, and export earnings.

The question is whether Australia can manage this transition fairly and intelligently.

Jobs at Risk and Jobs on the Rise

Roughly 50,000 people work directly in fossil fuel extraction in Australia, especially in Queensland, Western Australia, and New South Wales.¹

When related supply chains are included, the number doubles, but it’s still less than 1% of total national employment.

Meanwhile, the clean energy sector is growing rapidly, with wind and solar projects employing over 30,000 people, expected to triple by 2030.²

With appropriate investment, renewable jobs, especially in construction, maintenance, and manufacturing, could far outstrip losses in fossil fuels.

Economic Impacts: Risks and Rebalancing

Fossil fuel exports earned over $150 billion in 2022–23, led by coal and LNG.³

These exports support Australia’s trade balance and fund state budgets via royalties and corporate taxes.

But global demand is shifting. Japan and South Korea, both major customers, are committing to net zero and reducing coal imports.

Without investment in green exports, like renewable hydrogen, critical minerals, and green steel, Australia risks a sharp economic downturn.

The Just Transition: Who Bears the Cost?

The burden of transition won’t fall evenly. Regions like the Hunter Valley and Central Queensland face significant disruption.

Experts call for a “just transition” approach, including retraining, regional investment, income support, and infrastructure spending.⁴

Victoria’s Latrobe Valley Authority and Germany’s coal-exit model show how public planning can ease change.⁵

Without this support, job losses could drive social dislocation, political backlash, and economic harm.

Looking Ahead: Transformation or Decline?

Australia stands at a crossroads.

Managed wisely, the fossil phaseout could bring new industries, cleaner air, and long-term prosperity.

Mismanaged, it could leave workers stranded, regions impoverished, and the climate crisis worsened.

The outcome depends on political will.

And how urgently we act to replace the old economy with the new.

Footnotes

1. Australian Bureau of Statistics – Mining Employment

2. Clean Energy Council – 2024 Clean Energy Report

3. Australian Energy Update 2023 – Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water

4. Climate Council – Just Transition Explainer

5. International Trade Union Confederation – Just Transition Centre

Back to top