For a state run by resources, a 43 per cent reduction in carbon emissions in seven years is a big ask for Western Australia.
Of all the states in Australia, WA has been left with the most work to do to meet the federal government's target of reducing emissions by 43 per cent in the next seven years.
When the federal parliament returns next month it's almost certain that will become law — sending a clear message to anyone who wants to hear it, but particularly investors.
So how will WA deal with that news, and everything the state will have to do to make it reality?
Just how much work does WA have ahead of it?
In short: a lot.
That 43 per cent figure is linked to carbon emissions from 2005.
Over the past 17 years, good progress has been made across most of the country – with emissions nationally reducing by 20 per cent.
That's down to the efforts of places like Tasmania, which has reduced its emissions by 128 per cent, and South Australia, by 31 per cent.
But WA has gone the other way – increasing its total greenhouse gas emissions by 4 per cent compared to 2005 levels.
"So if WA were to do its fair share, it would have to get down its emissions about 48 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030, which is radical," WA Greens MP Brad Pettitt said.
"The only other option is that WA asks other states to do more.
"Given we're the richest state, the most GST, the biggest surpluses, I can't see other states being very enthusiastic about that."
So what changes once this bill passes?
In effect, not a whole lot – but it does send a signal to state and territory governments, as well as industry, about how serious the federal government is.
To help achieve that target, the government this week released a proposal that would require some of the nation's biggest polluters to cut their emissions by between 3.5 and 6 per cent a year.
That would be done by tightening what's called the "safeguard mechanism", which penalises those polluters for going over a set carbon emissions ceiling.
Critics describe the current scheme as being akin to allowing companies to set their own speed limits, and then exceed them.
That's particularly been the case in WA, where 62 facilities were covered by the scheme when it started in 2016–17, and collectively emitted 41.8 million tonnes of CO2e.
By 2020–21, that figure had increased to 70 facilities producing 45.9 million tonnes – about half of WA's total annual carbon footprint.
Carbon analyst at the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility, Alex Hillman, said tightening those rules will be critical.
"If Labor wants to deliver its federal target and WA wants to reduce its emissions, then there's going to need to be firm regulation, especially through the safeguard mechanism, to limit industrial emissions," he said.
What does the state government plan to do?
While this is a space largely controlled by the federal government, WA does have some levers it can pull.
One of them is the Environmental Protection Authority's (EPA) assessment process, which ends with recommendations being made to the Environment Minister about whether a project should go ahead, and whether certain conditions should be imposed.
The EPA is currently consulting on changes to how greenhouse gas emissions play into its considerations, which will seek "deep and substantial" reductions by 2030, with a "linear trajectory" from there to net zero in 2050.
Currently, projects only have to aim to be net zero by 2050.
EPA chair, Matthew Tonts, said those "deep and substantial cuts" meant "our expectation is that proponents will use all reasonable and practicable measures to ensure that those cuts are substantial and real".
The current guidelines came about following a tense period in which the watchdog dumped a controversial recommendation for all new large resources projects to fully offset their emissions.
It led to a crisis meeting between top resources executives and Premier Mark McGowan, after which the EPA shelved that set of guidelines.
Professor Tonts said in consultations on the latest revision, there had been few surprises.
"I'm confident that the EPA will be playing its role in helping Australia meet its obligations," he said.
The government has also promised to cut its own emissions by 80 per cent from 2020 levels, including by closing the state's two remaining coal power plants by 2029.
Environment Minister Reece Whitby said the government was also working with "key industries to decarbonise while protecting the state's economy".
"The state government has also committed $160 million to support the development of WA's renewable hydrogen industry, which has significant potential to deliver clean energy for our domestic and international customers," he said.
The government announced this week $10 million of that had been given to Woodside, to set up a production, storage and refuelling facility in Rockingham.
Dr Pettitt would like to see the government do more, particularly around new resources projects.
"The real danger is that these new projects will come onboard, and without the right conditions will actually further push WA's emissions up," he said.
"This is not [a target] that we can avoid, so we've got to actually act, or ultimately there's going to be consequences in WA being left behind and scrambling to make up those reductions later in the piece."
Are the big emitters on board?
The ABC asked for interviews with four of the state's biggest emitters — but only Woodside and Alcoa replied with statements.
Woodside said it "welcomed" the new legislation "because we support long-term, stable climate policy that helps Australia reach its net zero ambition".
A spokesperson said the company had also set some emissions reduction targets, and would work with the government to design the detail of policy.
In its response, Alcoa welcomed the legislated target and review of the safeguard mechanism, while pointing to their aim to become net zero by 2050, with other interim commitments.
The company's spokesperson said it "already operates the industry's lowest-carbon alumina refinery system, and we are working to increase the share of our operations that are powered by renewable energy".
But Mr Hillman was less convinced of the industry's intentions.
"Industry is going to be lobbying as hard as it can to make sure that it retains as much flexibility and doesn't have to reduce its emissions," he said.
"If the government wants to meet its targets, it's going to have to make sure that the safeguard mechanism has teeth and industry doesn't get to choose its own targets anymore."
What else can be done?
Another part of the solution, being proposed by Dr Pettitt, is to end gas connections to all new residential buildings — something he described as some of the "lowest hanging fruit".
"We're embedding a problem and we're going to have to spend many thousands getting that gas out as we decarbonise our households," he said.
Replacing gas appliances with those powered by renewable energy would not only help the environment, but be cheaper, Dr Pettitt said.
But Mr Whitby said that while "gas still has an important role to play in WA's energy mix, electrification is becoming an increasingly important part of our decarbonisation efforts".
