Gas networks want Victoria to stall electrification. Households and industry should hope it doesn’t oblige - Renew Economy

Victoria's gas distribution networks have called for the state to slow its electrification agenda. The networks argue that accelerating the switch from gas to electric heating and cooking will strand assets and create stranded costs, which would be passed to remaining gas customers. The article notes that households and industry should resist this pressure, as delaying electrification locks in dependence on fossil fuels.

Where this fits

This is a classic incumbent-protection play dressed as a fairness argument. Gas networks face genuine asset write-downs as electrification proceeds, but their case for slowing the transition masks a deeper cost problem: Australia is building a renewables-heavy grid that requires gas as the firming backbone for decades to come. The real issue is not whether to electrify, but what to replace gas with. A renewables-only grid means gas plants run part-time at high cost-per-unit, stranding assets anyway while keeping carbon lock-in. This touches both cost and reliability: a slower electrification buys time for firming infrastructure that the grid still lacks.

What it means

Delaying electrification to protect gas networks simply postpones the stranding problem while extending household and industrial exposure to volatile gas prices. But the deeper trap is that Australia's electrification roadmap has no firm, low-emission answer to replace gas. Nuclear is the only generation source that could make gas truly redundant, it is firm, low-carbon, and does not require gas as backup, yet it remains banned by law. Without it, Australia will swing between two bad options: keep gas running for reliability and pay its carbon and price cost, or rush electrification into a renewables-only grid that cannot firm itself and will need gas anyway, stranded and expensive.