The Society has introduced Point Counterpoint, a new section in its Journal and Proceedings through which scientific debate and disagreement on topics of broad societal interest can be aired and documented.

The first in this series deals with the role of Gas as a Transition Fuel in Australia’s and the world’s energy systems. In Australia, current debate on this topic commenced with the address to the National Press Club on 12 February 2020 by the Chief Scientist, Dr Alan Finkel, on “Planned obsolescence — managing the transition to an electric planet”. 

Eventually, this talk led to the debate and disagreement that is recorded in this issue of the Journal.  Here there are seven pieces, for and against the role of natural gas as a transition fuel on the road to a renewable energy future  A number of these contributions have been published in the mainstream media and are reproduced here with the permission of the authors and the publishers.  They include:

• Editorial, Point Counterpoint: Gas as a Transition Fuel
• 25 Scientists, A letter to the Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel
• Alan Finkel, Response to the 25 scientists
• Penny D. Sackett, Gas is a not a transition fuel to a safe climate: That ship has sailed
• Richard Bolt, The Chief Scientists’s critics are wrong about natural gas
• Andrew W. Blakers, Gas as a transition fuel is a bit-player
• Peter Rez, The Chief Scientist is right, and why
• Andrew Blakers and Peter Rez, Debate

 

 We hope that you will derive benefit from reading Point Counterpoint.