Can the Albanese government make Australia a global climate action leader while encouraging new fossil fuel projects?

"Do you have an Australian offshore location you want #Ausgov to consider for oil and gas exploration as part of the 2023 Petroleum Acreage Release," the department of industry and resources posted on Twitter just after 5pm on August 18.

Just a few hours earlier, the government had released a discussion paper on changes designed to lower emissions at the nation's largest polluting facilities.

Shortly after that, Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen would commit to pursuing a national electric vehicle strategy aimed, in large part, at reducing the carbon footprint of the transport sector.

And yet here was the same government, publicly inviting companies to mine resources responsible for producing emissions.

The apparent contradiction didn't pass unnoticed, including to ACT independent senator and conservationist David Pocock.

"Time to get serious about climate action - more ambition, more action," he responded.

The case of the department's tweet, sandwiched between ambitious climate action announcements, was just one example of the delicate balancing act the Albanese government is attempting to pull off as it navigates the long road to net zero emissions by 2050.

Cast as anti-coal during the failed 2019 election campaign, Labor succeeded this time with a climate and energy agenda which was ambitious in part, safe in others.

It's so-called Powering Australia plan, for example, targets an unquestionably bold 82 per cent share of renewables in the grid at the end of this decade.

But the same plan doesn't hasten the exit of coal-fired power stations or gas plants, prevent new ones opening up or impose taxes on their operations.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has declared he wants to end the "climate wars" which have plagued federal politics and stymied meaningful action to tackle global warming.

But is this the path to peace?

In Sydney this week to unveil details of the royal commission into the Robodebt scandal, Mr Albanese found himself defending Labor's climate and energy agenda.

Resources Minister Madeleine King had just announced more than 47,600 square-kilometres of Commonwealth waters would be opened up for oil and gas exploration (the department's tweet related to next year's release).

Ms King said the ongoing search for new oil and gas was vital to prevent future supply shortages, like the one which struck the east coast at the start of winter.

The resources sector and right-wing Institute of Public Affairs think-tank warmly welcomed the decision. But the Greens, environmentalists and teal independents were furious, accusing Labor of undermining its own climate emissions reduction targets before the ink was even dry on a bill to make them law.

Warringah MP Zali Steggall was among those pointing to report last year from the International Energy Agency, which found that reaching net zero by 2050 meant no new oil and gas projects.

But back in Sydney, Mr Albanese was unrepentant.

"We need to be sensible about this," he told reporters.

"We need to change the way that our economy functions, our energy mix across the board.

"We have a plan to change that energy mix, to lower our emissions. And that plan includes 82 per cent of renewables being part of the energy mix by 2030.

"But what that doesn't mean is that immediately you can stop using fossil fuel sources today."

Alison Reeve, the deputy director at the Grattan Institute's climate and energy program, has noticed a trend with Labor's major climate and energy announcements.

Whether it be the $20 billion plan to modernise the electricity grid, reforms to gradually lower pollution at major emitters or strategies to boost the uptake of electric cars, Ms Reeve said the government has been keen to talk up what it wants to start doing.

But she said it hasn't yet spoken about what it's going to stop doing.

"To use an analogy, if you're trying to lose weight, it's not enough just to eat more vegetables. You also have to eat fewer biscuits," Ms Reeve said.

"If you just keep eating the same amount of biscuits your weight loss is going to be a lot slower.

"Similarly if you keep opening new fossil fuel extraction facilities, or if you have other policies that inadvertently push up consumption, your progress will be much slower."

The federal government's weight loss target, its emissions reduction target, is to cut greenhouse gas emissions 43 per cent of 2005 levels by 2030, en route to net zero by 2050.

Climate experts agree that 43 per cent falls short of the level of ambition required around the world to limit global warming to the Paris goals of well below 2 degrees and preferably to 1.5.

But that doesn't mean the government's 2030 target will be easy to achieve, Ms Reeve said. Far from it.

Emissions were down 21.5 per cent on 2005 levels at last count, meaning half the job is done with eight years to go.

But Labor has inherited an economy in which emissions rose at the end of last year. The government also won't be able to rely on the land-use sector, which has done most of the heavy lifting thus far.

"At the moment, the only sector that is on track to achieve something like that [43 per cent] target is the electricity sector - the rest of them are not," she said.

The first major test and tough conversation for the new government is expected to come as detailed design work starts on an overhaul of the safeguard mechanism - the scheme intended to limit pollution at the nation's 215 largest emitting sites.

READ MORE:

The government wants to gradually lower emissions limits at the facilities to align with its net zero target. But it's signaled some concessions could be made to ensure heavy emitters in trade-exposed sectors aren't disadvantaged against overseas competitors.

Ms Reeve said the government must resist pressure to let some sectors off the hook.

"If [the government] cave in on that what you are implicitly saying is that the rest of the economy - which is you, me and farmer Joe who grows our vegetables - they are the ones who are going to have to pick up the slack of achieving that 43 per cent," she said.

In a speech this week announcing the 10 new sites for oil and gas exploration, Ms King emphasised that the resources sector - including gas - was a major part of the government's plan to reach net zero.

"Gas enables greater use of renewables domestically by providing energy security," she told the Northern Territory Resources Week conference.

"Australian LNG is also a force for regional energy security and helps our trading partners meet their own decarbonisation goals."

Ms King and Labor's unwavering support for the gas industry remains a sore point for pro-climate politicians, experts and advocates who are otherwise pleased with much of the Albanese government's approach.

Senator Pocock is all but certain to support Labor's climate bill when it reaches the Upper House, believing that while the 43 per cent 2030 target is inadequate, it's a start.

But the former Wallabies captain has been left questioning the government's commitment to genuine climate action in the wake of Ms King's announcement.

He's not arguing that Australia must stop using fossil fuels immediately, only that new projects mustn't be allowed to proceed.

"We can't be saying we're serious about climate action at the same time we're talking about new coal and gas projects, or still calling for expressions of interest for offshore oil and gas," he told The Canberra Times.

Senator Pocock argued Australia was the developed country with the most to lose from global warming. But it also had the most to gain, he said, if it went full-throttle in embracing the clean energy transition.

"If we are actually committed to transforming our economy, we can't just continue to hedge our bets and sort of say, well, you know, we'll get there one day," he said.

"The time is now."