Today during Question Time, Abigail called out the Minister for Energy, Climate Change and the Environment's claim that NSW "needs" more gas plants.
Abigail said:
My question without notice is directed to the Minister for Climate Change, Minister for Energy, and Minister for the Environment. As we transition to net zero, we must promote efficient energy network investment and operation that is in the long‑term interests of households. This means focusing only on investment in the lowest‑emission, lowest‑cost options to protect the immediate and long‑term financial interests of energy consumers. All reports make clear that gas power is the most expensive form of electricity generation, and that plants that run rarely are even more expensive per megawatt hour delivered, and adding fuel contracts and onsite storage raises the costs further. Why, then, has the New South Wales Labor Government announced plans to tender for 1,500 megawatts of new gas‑fired peaking plants with an operating life likely to extend beyond 2050, and what is the estimated cost to New South Wales electricity consumers of the long‑term energy service agreements that will underwrite them?
The Hon. Penny Sharpe (Minister for Climate Change, Minister for Energy, Minister for the Environment):
That is a very long question. The short answer is that we need them. We are dealing with this because we are transforming our energy system from one that has relied on five or six coal‑fired power stations providing base load power over a long period of time, to one that has many, many different power stations, through renewables—wind, solar and pumped hydro. There are also new storage systems, inclusive of batteries. But at the end of the day, we know, through all of the modelling and the work that we have done, that there are rare occasions when backup gas generation is needed. We believe that it will be a very, very small part of our energy system—less than 4 per cent, off the top of my head. It is currently around 2 per cent. We think it will be around 3 per cent as a result of the peaking tender that we are doing.
It is really important, but it is also very practical. It is about doing what we need to do to get to net zero but understanding that a mix of technology is needed to get there. We can put many renewables into the system because we have really good renewable resources and increased storage. As I said earlier in question time today, there has been an incredible 39‑fold increase in storage. The good news, of course, is that batteries have halved in price. We now have the very large grid‑forming batteries forming part of the system. But there are rare occasions when there is no wind, when we have a period of very low solar, and so we need backup there. That is what those peaker plants are for. They are not a major part of our system, but they are an essential part of it. It is something that this Government has absolutely no qualms about. It is part of the thoughtful work that is going into this once‑in‑a‑generation change that gets us to net zero. [Time expired.]
To which Abigail responded:
Yeah‑no, I do not buy the Government's argument that it is "because we need them". Gas has always been permitted to bid for long‑term energy supply agreements, but their projects never stack up economically against renewable energy, which is far more viable in these circumstances. But, effectively, this decision by the New South Wales Labor Government is massively tilting the table in favour of carbon‑intensive projects, which deliver the very worst price outcomes for consumers. I am increasingly concerned about the Labor Government's redirection towards gas as though it is some big saviour and necessity for the renewable energy transition. It is just not true. At least the Liberal Government was honest about these things. If the Government wants to suck up to the fossil fuel industry, just tell us.
Read the full transcript in Hansard here.
22 October 2026