Renewables hub, or coal museum? Australia’s energy debate plays out in Latrobe Valley

If you were looking for a neat summation of the current state of the energy debate in Australia, the tug-of-war over the future of a retired brown coal power plant in Victoria’s Latrobe Valley would be a good place to start.

A renewables hub or a coal museum?

The old Morwell Power Station and briquette factory on the outskirts of the town of the same name was last week listed for protection by the Heritage Council of Victoria.

The former Energy Brix Power Station, which once supplied brown coal-fired electricity to the grid, was closed in 2014 – two years after receiving a $50 million federal government bailout package.

At the same time, the plant’s final operator went into liquidation.

Read Sophie Vorrath’s One Step Off the Grid story - “Renewables hub, or coal museum? Australia’s energy debate plays out in Latrobe Valley.”

The current energy debate is farcical. What does this government stand for?

How bizarre can the energy debate get? Every time I think that we have heard it all, reached the “bottom”, or whatever, even stranger things happen – now almost daily.

Malcolm Turnbull.

Our political leaders have now spent years scoring points on each other, and attempting to shift the blame, indeed, doing everything they can to avoid addressing the issue of rapidly rising electricity and gas prices. Yet, ironically, they are collectively to blame.

In all this “colour and movement” neither the government, nor the opposition, has yet produced a believable and deliverable energy policy. That is, a policy to specify the path forward to a low-carbon society, demonstrating a genuine capacity to lower power prices and to guarantee supply.

Read John Hewson’s opinion piece on The Guardian - “The current energy debate is farcical. What does this government stand for?”

Is ‘clean coal’ power the answer to Australia’s emissions targets?

‘The only way shifting to ultra-supercritical coal power could meet Australia’s 26-28% climate target is if carbon capture and storage (CCS) were applied’

As Australia’s energy debate heats up, some politicians are calling for cleaner and more efficient coal power stations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg told ABC radio on Tuesday that “ultra-supercritical coal-fired power plants actually drive down the carbon footprint by up to 40%”.

And last week Resources Minister Matt Canavan referenced a report, as yet not released by the Department of Industry, Innovation and Science, which claims that Australia can meet its carbon emission targets by replacing existing coal generators with ultra-supercritical coal generation.

So, is this a reasonable strategy to reduce Australia’s emissions?

Read the thoughts by a researcher with the Energy Economics and Management Group at the Global Change Institute from The University ofQueensland, Lynette Molyneaux, on The Conversation - “Is ‘clean coal’ power the answer to Australia’s emissions targets?

(Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) rolls of the lips of Matt Canavan, and others of his ilk, with ease and the implied assumption that it is a understood, tried and tested technology, when it is not and has only been trialled in a few small instances and no one yet knows how the process could be scaled to anything near the size needed to make CCS useful in any sense on a world scale – Robert McLean.)

Renewables 'not to blame' for South Australia blackout, but energy debate rages

Amy Reimiskis reports on
the two storms happening
in South Australia.

The storm – both real and political – continues to rage over South Australia, with federal Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg conceding initial inquiries found renewable energy was not to blame for last week's statewide blackout, while refusing to back down from attacks on "aggressive" state Labor renewable energy targets.

With South Australia preparing for more flooding as it deals with the fallout from Wednesday's unprecedented storm, debate is still raging over what caused the power blackout, which left thousands of people still without power four days later.

Mr Frydenberg told Sky News on Sunday that while preliminary investigations showed the state's increasing reliance on renewable energy was not at fault for the blackout, it was time to discuss "aggressive" renewable targets set by Labor states. Such targets could not take precedence over energy security, he said.

It is a topic set to dominate conversations at this Friday's emergency Council of Australian Governments meeting between Mr Frydenberg and state and territory energy ministers.

Read the story in today’s Melbourne Age by Amy Reimiskis - “Renewables 'not to blame' for South Australia blackout, but energy debate rages.”