Australia ranks 3rd globally for new coal projects
North West Shelf gas extended to 2070
Expansion equals 200+ new coal plants
Projects threaten net-zero 2050 targets
Critics say emissions cuts are being undone
Legal and international pressure intensifies
Australia is powering ahead with fossil fuel expansion despite climate warnings, public protest, and emissions targets.
In the past year, Australia has approved seven major new coal projects and extended key gas facilities, fuelling a fresh wave of domestic and international concern.
The approved coal expansions include extensions to mines in the Hunter Valley and Bowen Basin, while nearly 30 more coal proposals remain under review.
Meanwhile, the North West Shelf LNG project has been green-lit to operate until 2070—locking in long-term emissions that conflict directly with Australia’s net-zero by 2050 commitment.
Coal and Gas: Expanding, Not Contracting
Australia now ranks third globally for new coal mine development, behind China and India.[1]
The Australia Institute warns that the combined output of proposed fossil fuel projects would emit more than 4.8 billion tonnes of CO₂e by 2030.[2]
Gas expansion is no less aggressive. Woodside has announced further developments in the Gippsland Basin and major processing plants in Queensland.
Climate Math Doesn't Add Up
The scale of planned expansion is staggering—equal to building more than 200 new coal-fired power stations.[3]
Experts say these emissions will dwarf reductions achieved through renewable energy and emissions trading schemes.
Australia’s official emissions are down 27% since 2005, but that figure excludes exported emissions and may undercount fugitive emissions from coal mines.[4]
Policy Schism and UN Warning
Critics argue that expanding fossil fuels while claiming emissions progress amounts to a policy contradiction.
UN climate chief Simon Stiell recently called on Australia to halt fossil fuel expansion and strengthen its 2035 emissions targets.[5]
At home, environmental groups and First Nations communities are challenging new coal approvals on legal and moral grounds.
The Australian Conservation Foundation says the emissions from new projects outpace climate cuts by 7 to 1.[6]
Summary Table
Category
Status (as of Aug 2025)
Climate/Emissions Impact
Coal expansions
7 approved
major projects;
~30 pending
Adds
billions of tonnes CO₂e;
undermines Paris ambitions
Gas expansions
North West
Shelf extended
to 2070; new LNG plans
Long-term
emissions lock-in;
export scope boosts global impact
Overall footprint
Equivalent
to 200+ new
coal plants globally
Projects
will dwarf domestic
climate mitigation efforts
Emissions reporting
Underestimates
due to
outdated fugitive models
Real
emissions may be
higher than reported
Policy tension
Mixed
signals:
mitigation vs expansion
Internal
and international criticism,
legal challenges ongoing
What's at Stake?
While global pressure mounts and the UN eyes more aggressive action, Australia’s fossil fuel future is on a collision course with its climate pledges.
The choice now is stark: decarbonise or double down. Each new approval sets the country’s climate ambition further back.
~80–84% of Australians believe climate change is happening
~66–72% attribute it to human activity
Trust in science remains high at ~90%
Only ~25–30% are “very concerned”
Firsthand climate events increase awareness
Disengagement and uncertainty persist among some groups
Australians overwhelmingly believe in climate change.
However, not all are fully informed or engaged with the science behind it.
Awareness and Belief
Surveys show that around 80–84 % of Australians acknowledge that climate change is happening, and 70–75 % express concern about its impacts1.
About 66–72 % believe climate change is mainly caused by human activities. However, roughly 20 % see it as a natural phenomenon, about 5 % deny it entirely, and about 11 % remain uncertain2.
One global poll even found only ~60 % of Australians believe in human-caused climate disruption, below the global average of 73 %3.
Knowledge vs. Perceived Urgency
While many accept the climate threat, only a minority consider it an “extremely serious” issue right now. Around 71–83 % say they are fairly or very concerned, but fewer translate that into felt urgency4.
Ipsos 2025 found 56 % believe urgent action is necessary to avoid failing future generations, a figure slightly below the global average and down from previous years5.
Gaps and Variation in Understanding
Knowledge of climate science terms and mechanisms does correlate with acceptance, but is unevenly distributed across demographic and political groups6.
Survey segmentations reveal a spectrum:
Alarmed (about 25 %): highly concerned and scientifically literate
Dismissive (about 7 %): actively sceptical
The remainder (66 %) fall into Concerned, Cautious, Doubtful, or Disengaged, showing varying belief levels and openness to persuasion 7.
Trust and Information Sources
Australians have high trust in scientists, CSIRO, and the Bureau of Meteorology, and around 90 % trust in science overall8.
People relying on commercial TV/radio were more likely to think climate change is natural, compared to those getting news from ABC or SBS9.
Firsthand Experience & Behaviour
Individuals who have directly experienced extreme weather (e.g. floods, bushfires) report greater understanding, concern, and willingness to act, including adopting pro-environmental behaviours10.
Private actions like switching to green products or solar uptake are increasing: about 45 % already switched, 29 % planning, and just 11 % resistant11.
Overall Assessment
Overall, Australians are broadly informed about the reality of climate change, its causes, and impacts.
However, misunderstanding remains for a significant minority, especially regarding attribution, urgency, and personal responsibility.
Trust in science is solid, but many people remain uncertain or disengaged, especially those without lived experiences or exposure to high-quality information.
Effective communication with trusted messengers, clearer plain-English evidence, and visible action, still holds the key to shifting more Australians toward informed climate engagement.
Australia’s emissions have declined slightly over the past year, but the path to its 2030 climate target remains uncertain.
National emissions in the 12 months to September 2024 reached approximately 434.9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (Mt CO₂-e). [1]
This represents a 0.5% decline from the previous year, continuing a modest downward trend. [1]
Yet key sectors like transport and fossil fuel extraction continue to offset more significant gains made in electricity decarbonisation. [2]
Australia’s Sector Emissions Breakdown
The country’s emissions come from six primary sources tracked by the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory. [2]
As of June 2024, emissions across these sectors totalled 440.6 Mt CO₂-e: [2]
Electricity generation: ~30% of national emissions; falling due to renewables
Transport: rising 1.9% year-on-year due to diesel and aviation demand [6]
Agriculture: stable to slightly falling; methane remains a major component
Stationary energy (non-electricity): e.g., manufacturing and mining fuel use
Fugitive emissions: methane leaks from coal and gas operations
Industrial processes: emissions from materials like cement and steel
Electricity emissions have declined due to solar and wind uptake, particularly in the National Electricity Market. [2]
In contrast, transport emissions remain stubbornly high, with road freight and domestic air travel responsible for most increases. [6]
State and Territory Emissions Profiles
Emissions vary dramatically by jurisdiction, shaped by each state’s energy mix and dominant industries. [3]
According to the State and Territory Greenhouse Gas Inventories for FY2022–23, the largest emitters by volume are: [4]
New South Wales (NSW): dominated by coal-fired electricity and road transport
Queensland (QLD): large coal and gas extraction; high fugitive emissions
Victoria (VIC): brown coal electricity remains a major contributor
Smaller states and territories reveal other trends:
Tasmania: lowest per capita emissions; high hydro reliance; manufacturing is top sector
Western Australia (WA): oil and gas dominate
Northern Territory (NT) and South Australia (SA): heavy emissions from LNG and mining
Progress and Gaps
National emissions are now around 27–29% below 2005 levels, depending on whether land-use changes are included. [1]
This positions Australia close, but not comfortably, on track for its legislated 43% reduction by 2030. [5]
The federal government’s Climate Change Authority warns more ambitious action is needed to decarbonise transport, manufacturing, and gas exports. [5]
Without sharper cuts, especially in fossil fuel projects and diesel use, Australia risks missing its 2030 target. [6]
Conclusion
Australia’s climate progress is real, but fragile.
Gains in electricity are at risk of being undermined by growth in fossil-heavy sectors like transport and extraction.
State-by-state variations reveal where new efforts are most urgently needed, from cleaner freight systems in NSW to reducing gas dependence in WA and NT.
Environmental activist David Suzuki (Image: Kris Krug)
Author
Ketan Joshi is a writer, analyst, and
communications consultant focusing on clean energy and climate
change.
He previously worked in climate and energy for private
companies and government agencies, and now writes journalism
and commentary from the front lines of climate and energy
battles around the world.
He is based in Oslo and consults to organisations addressing
the climate crisis.
Veteran environmentalist David Suzuki believes the time has passed us to stop climate change. He’s wrong.
As I recently wrote, “tactical” fatalism
is used by fossil-friendly governments (or the fossil fuel industry
itself) to culturally enforce a broad sense of helplessness.
Performative fatalism is different. This
is where big-name figures and big social media accounts (often
specialising in a self-described “doomer” mentality) make a habit of loudly announcing the inevitability of climate change and the pointlessness of mitigation.
These messages go ultra-viral, while their
authors claim to be maligned truth-tellers issuing unpopular nuggets of
reality. These people are not in league with the fossil fuel industry,
but the reward mechanisms of corporate social media sites have resulted
in a convergent evolution between their messages and those of coal, oil
and gas companies.
A recent statement from a very significant name in the environmental movement has given them new energy.
According to veteran environmentalist
David Suzuki, it is “too late” to stop climate change. In an interview
with Canadian outlet iPolitics, Suzuki said: “Now, it is too
late. I’ve never said this before to the media, but it’s too late … the
focus on politics, economics, and law are all destined to fail because
they are based around humans.”
The hyperactive “climate.apocalypse” Instagram account, boasting several hundred thousand followers, describes
it this way: “At 89 years old, David Suzuki says it’s too late to stop
climate change. The fight is lost. It’s time to hunker down and prepare
for what’s coming.” More than 100,000 likes.
These moments of popular helplessness flare up during collective instability and stress. Michael Moore released the profoundly shitty documentary Planet of the Humans right in the middle of the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. It packaged the worst tropes of performative fatalism,
packed with eco-fascist population-control ideas and reams of
disinformation, but it was perfectly timed and had millions of viewers.
The message of climate fatalism is just as
wrong as the worst climate deniers. It is absurd to claim that it’s
“too late” to stop climate change. We know for sure that it is possible
to prevent the release of greenhouse gases. The atmosphere heats in
response to the volume of greenhouse gases we pump into it. The less we
add, the less the heating.
If you accept the basic science
explaining how we make things worse, you must accept the basic science
of how we stop making things worse. It is an almost weirdly linear
relationship:
Source: Figure SPM.10 in IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers in Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
We
also know that the collective policy, technology and activism efforts
of our entire species since the 1990s have resulted in a noticeable
reduction in reliance on burning fossil fuels, compared to the parallel
universe in which we did nothing at all.
You can see this when you view
the world’s carbon emissions compared to the spaghetti spread of
scenarios published many years ago. We have avoided both the worst- and
best-case scenarios, and have ended up somewhere in the middle:
Source: Robbie Andrews, Global Carbon Budget 2024
Thisrecent study found implemented policies to date likely reduced global
emissions by “several billion tons of [carbon dioxide equivalent] per
year compared to a world without mitigation policies”, equivalent to
between 4% and 15% of 2020’s total global emissions.
The
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)’s Working Group Three
report dedicates several pages to this, saying, “There is robust
evidence with a high level of agreement that mitigation policies have
had a discernible impact on emissions.”
A
good chunk of this relates specifically to the surprisingly rapid growth
of wind and solar, which you can see nicely reflected in the shifting assumptions
in the IPCC’s own scenarios, leaning more heavily on renewable energy
and electrification and less on fossil fuels, carbon capture and
nuclear.
In the electricity sector in particular,
supply and demand are precisely matched. If new wind power or solar
power is generating something, something else is generating less.
In regions of the world with growing demand, renewables are taking the
edge off fossil fuel growth, and in areas with stagnant or falling
demand, renewables are accelerating the demise of fossil fuels.
Either
way, wind and solar are pushing out fossil fuels, and the core task at
hand is switching from insufficient progress to sufficient progress.
Australia’s power sector is a nice illustration of the simple fact that renewable energy actively reduces the combustion of coal and gas:
Donald
Trump’s election feels reminiscent of the first year of COVID-19. A
deep blanket of anxiety and instability is impacting the US and
countries with close ties. In this haze, fatalists find new purchase.
Whatever Suzuki’s intentions, his comments fuel real and serious
feelings of helplessness and despair.
There is danger in fatalism that goes well
beyond creating dejection and justifying inaction. The broad feelings
of helplessness and hopelessness are a boon to both authoritarian,
fascist governments and the fossil fuel industry, both of which rely on
few realising how brittle their grip on power is.
There
are direct links between “doomer” communities and increasingly explicit
agreement with eco-fascist elements.
One prominent self-described
“doomer” recently described
themselves as an “eco-Nazi”: “The one and only solution to the problem —
the FINAL solution — is to make Planet Earth a human-free zone.” Gaming
social media algorithms to loudly reinforce the physical terror of
climate impacts and then insisting there’s nothing we can do to stop
those impacts feels pretty sinister to me.
The times are bad. Suzuki’s statement
seems inspired more by a gut reaction to Trump than any desire for
social fame. But bad times should trigger new strength in understanding
our agency. Declaring climate mitigation a dead end does nothing but
help those working to make that false statement true.
There is nothing
mandatory about coal, oil or gas. We know that the fossil fuel economy
bleeds, and it can only survive if we collectively succumb to its
constantly repeated message of inevitability.
Yes, there are debates
about the deeper systemic, transformational changes required in human
societies to accelerate the elimination of dangerous fuels. None of that
is relevant to the simple truth that it is not too late to stop fossil
fuels, no matter what the doomer-boomer nexus insists.
Australia now generates about 40% of its electricity from renewable energy sources, up from just 7% in 2008.
This massive shift has been led by wind farms, hydro dams, and especially rooftop solar panels, which now crown more than 4 million Australian homes.
According to the Clean Energy Council, 2024 was a record-breaking year: 7.5 gigawatts (GW) of new capacity were added, including 4.3 GW of large-scale projects and 3.2 GW of rooftop solar.1
But behind this remarkable growth is a high-stakes race against time and infrastructure bottlenecks.
Strong Progress But Is It Enough?
The Australian government has committed to reaching 82% renewable electricity by 2030.2
To hit that target, the country needs to install about 5 GW of clean energy capacity every year, every year until the end of the decade.
At the end of 2024, renewable energy contributed roughly 92,700 gigawatt hours (GWh) to the grid, about 40% of total electricity production.3
Most of that came from wind (13.4%), rooftop solar (11.2%), and hydroelectricity (7.5%).
The National Electricity Market (NEM) is already seeing major shifts. Wind and solar together reached a quarterly record of 46% share by late 2024.4
Investment Surges, Led by Public and Private Sectors
The clean energy sector in 2024 saw a major financial boost: $12.7 billion poured into the industry through rooftop solar, battery storage, and large-scale wind and solar farms.5
The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC), Australia’s government-backed green bank, invested $3.5 billion alone, double its previous year’s total.6
Transmission projects and grid upgrades received $2.8 billion of this to ease the path for new generation projects to plug in.
Warning Signs: Wind Power Stalls in 2025
Despite these gains, early 2025 brought troubling news: no new wind farms began construction in the first half of the year.7
Developers cite high turbine costs, global supply shortages, and transmission grid delays as reasons.
Without acceleration, analysts say Australia is on track to reach just 60–68% renewable electricity by 2030, not the full 82% goal.
To turn things around, the government has now expanded its Capacity Investment Scheme to cover up to 40 GW of new firmed renewable energy, providing financial certainty for investors.8
Solar Keeps Soaring, But Broader Mix Needed
Rooftop solar continues to be the star performer. Over 3.2 GW were added in 2024 alone, about 40% of all new capacity.
However, experts stress the importance of balancing solar with dispatchable sources like batteries and pumped hydro to maintain grid stability.
The next five years will be decisive. Will Australia sustain its current momentum or fall short as system constraints tighten?
For now, the sun still shines brightly on the renewable transition, but the winds of political will and economic coordination must also blow strong.
Federal-state tension limits national climate coordination
Powerful fossil fuel lobby influences legislation
Lack of binding net-zero obligations for corporations
Climate cases in courts face high legal hurdles
Key reforms stalled in Parliament or diluted
Australia has no constitutional right to a safe climate, unlike many nations with stronger legal protections.
This legal vacuum means communities and campaigners lack a firm foundation to challenge decisions that harm the environment.
Unlike Germany or Norway, where courts have ruled in favour of youth plaintiffs demanding climate protections, Australian courts lack that mandate.
Environmental Laws Don't Address Climate Risks
Australia’s primary federal environmental law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (EPBC), barely mentions climate change.
Major fossil fuel projects have been approved without legal consideration of their carbon emissions.
In 2023, Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek declined to reform the EPBC to explicitly consider climate, sparking fierce criticism from legal scholars.1
States and the Commonwealth Pull in Opposite Directions
While some states like Victoria and South Australia have renewable targets, others continue approving new gas and coal projects.
This fragmentation hampers a coordinated national approach and weakens Australia’s international credibility on climate leadership.2
Fossil Fuel Lobbying Remains Powerful
Political donations and industry access continue to shape climate and energy policy.
Lobbying from gas and coal sectors has diluted or delayed crucial reforms such as emissions caps, methane regulation, and climate disclosure rules.3
Net-Zero Policies Lack Teeth
Australia’s 2050 net-zero commitment is not enforceable in law, and there is no legal penalty for failing to meet the target.
Large emitters are subject to the Safeguard Mechanism, but loopholes and offsets often undermine its impact.4
Climate Litigation Faces Legal Hurdles
While First Nations groups, youth activists, and environmental NGOs have brought high-profile climate cases, the legal framework limits success.
Courts require plaintiffs to prove specific harm or show decision-makers breached statutory obligations, which are rarely climate-related.5
Reform Is Slow—And Watered Down
The Albanese government promised wide-ranging legal reforms, but key changes to environmental law, transparency, and accountability mechanisms have been delayed or softened under pressure.6
Until climate considerations are embedded in the legal architecture of decision-making, Australia’s pathway to meaningful climate action remains compromised.
Thousands are dropping coverage due to affordability
Critical infrastructure is increasingly exposed
Government interventions remain reactive, not strategic
Queensland, Northern Rivers face compounding risks
Climate change is pricing Australians out of protection.
In cyclone-prone Queensland and flood-hit parts of northern NSW, insurance premiums have soared by more than 300% in the past decade.
Some households now pay over $10,000 a year for basic home insurance, while others have been refused cover altogether.
As the climate crisis fuels more destructive storms, floods, and fires, traditional models of risk assessment are breaking down.
Insurers are pulling out of the worst-affected areas, leaving entire communities without financial safety nets when disaster strikes.
“Uninsurable” Zones Are Growing
A 2022 report by the Actuaries Institute warned that 1 in 25 Australian properties, over 520,000 homes, will be effectively uninsurable by 2030 due to extreme weather risk1.
The hardest-hit areas are low-lying, flood-prone regions in northern NSW (like Lismore) and coastal Queensland (including Cairns, Townsville, and the Whitsundays).
These same places were devastated by floods in 2022, causing $5.65 billion in insured losses, the costliest flood disaster in Australian history2.
With risks rising faster than mitigation, insurers are either charging exorbitant premiums or withdrawing entirely.
Infrastructure at Breaking Point
Beyond households, climate extremes are also exposing the fragility of critical infrastructure.
Bridges, roads, power grids, and water systems were never designed for the new normal of back-to-back cyclones, record-breaking floods, and simultaneous bushfires.
In 2022, floodwaters isolated entire towns in northern NSW for days, cutting off essential services and delaying emergency response3.
The Insurance Council of Australia has warned that infrastructure failure can amplify loss, as happened when Lismore’s levees failed, catching residents off guard.
Government Response Falling Short
In response to the growing crisis, the federal government established the Cyclone Reinsurance Pool in 2022, aimed at reducing premiums for high-risk regions.
But critics say the scheme only addresses part of the problem, mainly cyclones, not floods or fire, and does little to incentivise resilience upgrades4.
Meanwhile, the $200 million Disaster Ready Fund is spread thin across the entire country, leaving local councils scrambling to adapt infrastructure with limited resources.
There is growing pressure for a national adaptation strategy that hardens both homes and public assets against foreseeable climate threats.
Abandonment by Degrees
In the absence of affordable insurance or resilient infrastructure, some communities are being forced to consider managed retreat.
The 2022 Northern Rivers Reconstruction Corporation has flagged the relocation of hundreds of homes from the most vulnerable floodplains, though residents remain divided.
Without urgent action, climate change could make entire regions economically and physically unsustainable.
Australia faces a stark choice: invest in resilience now, or pay ever-higher costs in catastrophe recovery and lost livelihoods.
.png)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.png)