Gas Import Jetty & Pipeline Discussion

Crib point, take one for the team?

Crib point, take one for the team?

Crib point, take one for the team?


A spokeswoman for AGL recently commented in the media that ‘Crib Point was taking one for the team’ This suggests that it is an accepted fact that Crib Point will be negatively impacted, does this mean that AGL already understand the impact but are happy to continue regardless? 


AGL Employee

Hi @Netpassword,


We’d just like to apologise for the delay in addressing your enquiry – this was posted into our 'General' Community discussion page. You can find the dedicated AGL Gas Import Jetty Project community forum here.


We’ll respond to your question shortly.




AGL Community Manager

Just moving this across to the Gas Import Jetty group.

If a post answers your question, please click MARK AS SOLVED!

This helps others in the community find the answers they're looking for.

AGL Employee

Hi Netpassword,


In the ABC interview, we acknowledged that there are few benefits to the local Crib Point community because the town doesn’t get reticulated natural gas and there will only be around 45 full time jobs to run the FSRU.  


The comment “the community are taking one for the team” recognises that most of project’s benefits are for the rest of the eastern states of Australia because it will provide a secure supply of gas and more supply will help to reduce gas prices or at least cap them at international prices.  

We are being up front with the community about the lack of local benefits and that most of the benefits are for the broader community. This is an uncomfortable truth about many infrastructure projects. We face the very same situation when we build wind farms and solar farms near local communities.  


What we have set out to do here is develop a project which has as little impact on the environment as possible. However, we understand that many in the community don’t consider that this is good enough. To even consider this project, we must plan for any possible failures (the worst-case scenarios) assuming they could happen no matter how unlikely. 


While the studies completed to date in the preliminary assessments demonstrate that the impacts to the environment associated with this project will have minimal impact on the environment, an in-depth investigation is being undertaken as part of the Environmental Effects Statement. This was a requirement from the Victorian Government, predominantly because of community concerns around the environmental impact. If the potential impacts cannot be acceptably addressed the project would not go ahead.  


As the EES process is the most rigorous avenue for obtaining government approvals, without the Minister for Planning’s assessment that the project would have an acceptable level of environment effects, AGL would not be able to pursue the project. The project is still in the feasibility stage and AGL has yet to make a final decision to fully fund the proposed project.