“An absolute sham”: Greenpeace Japan and Greenpeace Australia Pacific call-out Prime Ministers Takaichi and Albanese for exploiting fossil fuel crisis to entrench gas – Image for illustrative purposes only (Image credits: Pexels)
Sydney – Greenpeace organizations in Japan and Australia Pacific condemned leaders from both nations on Friday for leveraging a global fossil fuel shortage to deepen reliance on gas exports, sidelining opportunities for renewable energy development. The criticism surfaced ahead of Japanese Prime Minister Takaichi’s planned visit to Australia, set for May 3 to 5. Activists argued that such moves undermine regional energy security at a time when clean alternatives offer more stable solutions.
Details of the High-Stakes Visit
Prime Minister Takaichi’s trip emphasizes stronger military ties alongside efforts to secure Australia’s gas supplies. Japanese officials have weighed into Australia’s domestic discussions, stressing gas as essential for energy stability. However, this stance overlooks how Japanese firms profit by reselling much of that gas to other markets.
The visit aligns with broader diplomatic engagements, including a stop in Vietnam. There, Takaichi aims to advance Japan’s POWERR Asia initiative, designed to expand fossil fuel reserves across the region. Critics view this as a direct challenge to the shift toward affordable renewables that many Asian countries pursue.
Tax Disparities Fuel the Debate
A striking imbalance marks the gas trade between the two countries. The Japanese government gathers more revenue in taxes from Australian gas than Australia itself collects. Meanwhile, Japanese corporations reap billions by redirecting exports to third nations.
INPEX, partly owned by Japan, exemplifies the issue. The company shipped billions in Australian gas to Japan without paying Australia’s Petroleum Resource Rent Tax. It contributed only $500 million in corporate tax on $36 billion in revenue, raising questions about who truly gains from these arrangements.
| Stakeholder | Tax/Revenue from Australian Gas | Key Practice |
|---|---|---|
| Australian Government | Less than Japan | Exports raw gas |
| Japanese Government | Higher tax take | Resells to third countries |
| INPEX (Japan-owned) | $500M on $36B revenue | No PRRT paid |
Greenpeace Highlights Corporate and Regional Risks
Ikumi Toyota, Climate Change and Energy Campaigner at Greenpeace Japan, described the visit as a strategic play to capitalize on the fossil fuel disruptions triggered by the war on Iran. She pointed to Japan’s role in funding projects like Barossa and Scarborough, which expand gas infrastructure across Asia. Toyota warned that this approach blocks neighbors from accessing secure, low-cost renewables.
Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, labeled the gas trade a deception exposed by recent public demands for fairer taxation on major gas firms. He noted how Japan urges continued exports just as scrutiny peaks over corporate tax avoidance. Rafalowicz advocated for partnerships centered on renewable energy rather than fossil fuels.
Implications for Energy Security and Costs
Proponents of gas cite it as a bridge to stability, yet opponents argue it perpetuates volatility. Households in both countries face rising power bills tied to gas dependence, even as extreme weather events intensify. The current crisis underscores renewables’ potential for genuine security through local generation.
Stakeholders across Asia stand to lose if gas expansion prevails. Countries buying resold supplies pay premiums, delaying their own transitions. A pivot to cooperation on clean energy could lower costs and bolster resilience against future shocks.
As Prime Minister Takaichi’s visit approaches, the debate sharpens around whether Japan and Australia will double down on gas or embrace a renewable path that serves the region more equitably. The choices made in coming days could shape energy policies for years, affecting everyone from taxpayers to vulnerable communities.