It’s time for politicians to put the national interest ahead of energy ideology

Australians are paying a heavy price for a decade of uncertainty on national energy policy.

Australians are paying a heavy price for a decade
 of uncertainty on national energy policy

As some of our older coal-fired power plants have closed, the investment needed to replace their generation capacity has been stifled. As a result we now pay some of the highest power prices in the world despite having an abundance of energy resources at our disposal.

This investment won’t happen without agreement on our national energy policy direction. In the absence of anything else, agreement on the National Energy Guarantee (NEG) is needed.

Right across NSW, small businesses and larger industries like mining and manufacturing are calling on the Parliament to support the NEG as a way to move forward with a degree of clarity.

Read the comment from The Age by Stephen Galilee - “It’s time for politicians to put the national interest ahead of energy ideology.”

(This comment by Stephen Galilee sounds honourable, but despite his rhetoric, the argument is as ideological as that of any other. At base, it’s about letting the market decide what is best and that ideological belief has taken us for far down a rabbit burrow that it will be difficult, if not impossible to extricate ourselves - Robert McLean)

National Energy Plan: Does WA need its own renewables target?

The Federal Government's flagship new energy plan was signed off by the Coalition partyroom this week with great fanfare — but there's growing uncertainty about what it means for WA.

Managing director of BayWA Renewable Energy, 
Durmus Yildiz, -  he fears the solar industry may be
 negatively affected by the National Energy Market.

The McGowan Government has not yet received a briefing on the national energy guarantee (NEG) policy, which is designed to operate through the National Energy Market.

WA is not a part of this market.

The new policy will see the Clean Energy Target and subsidies for renewables cut in 2020, and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says there will be an opportunity to import the principles of the new system into the WA market.

While the general consensus — including from Energy Minister Ben Wyatt — is that there will be no immediate impact on WA, some in the state's energy sector are concerned.

Read the ABC News story by Nicolas Perpitch - “National Energy Plan: Does WA need its own renewables target?”

Escaping energy policy limbo

After a week of uncertainty with energy policy, it was welcome news that a Strathmerton business is taking a step forward and embracing renewable energy.

Like many businesses, Booth Transport must have felt the financial sting from energy prices that continue to rise year on year.

In the pages of The News these stories are common, with many large-scale businesses facing tough decisions as the cost of power goes up and up.

Booth Transport decided to try something innovative to lower the power bills for its Strathmerton depot, and lower its carbon footprint at the same time.

Through an environmental user agreement with Moira Shire Council and the Sustainable Melbourne Fund, a state-of-the-art Tesla Powerpack was installed to help store energy from onsite solar panels.

On paper it seems to be an agreement where everyone wins.

Moira Shire Council does not have to pay for the installation, but helps loan repayments via its rates system.

Booth Transport does have to pay back for the expensive installation, but with power prices on the rise it could benefit in the long run.

And with the company expected to eventually employ up to 77 people at the Strathmerton site, less financial pressures from increasing power bills has to be good workers.

And let’s not forget the point of the expensive battery and solar installation, which is not just to lower power prices, but to lower carbon emissions in the atmosphere.

Although there are beneficial steps from individuals and businesses, any environmental gain is a drop in the ocean compared to action by governments.

Australia has had a tumultuous couple of years politically, as endless debate about climate policy has caused the premature political deaths of many leaders. 

After much debate, the former Gillard Government introduced a carbon tax which came into effect in 2012.

Seen as a broken promise in the electorate, the tax was abolished by the Abbott Government, but despite promises, power prices did not go down.

The country is currently in a state of limbo on energy policy, and uncertainty on future policy settings has led to a lack of investment in new power generation.

This, in turn, has been blamed for a rapid increase in power prices.

After much debate, both in parliament, and most probably within the coalition party room, Malcolm Turnbull unveiled his new energy policy earlier this week.

The National Energy Guarantee, or NEG, promises to increase supply and reduce emissions, but not in a way that will increase power prices.

The Prime Minister still needs to convince the Australian public it is the way to go.

But until there is more certainty on energy policy federally, companies like Booth Transport will take matters in their own hands to lower emissions (and the power bill).

Editorial from today’s Shepparton News - “Escaping energy policy limbo."

Failure to fully implement Finkel Review causing energy uncertainty: AEMC

The lack of a credible, long-term mechanism to achieve Australia's emissions reduction commitments has created uncertainty and deterred investment in the sector, a key energy market regulator says.

Ongoing security and reliability of energy supply is
 likely to be affected as the shift is made from
synchronous supplies – traditional power sources
such as coal or hydro – to non-synchronous – such
as wind or solar. 

Speaking at an energy regulators' forum on Tuesday, Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) chairman John Pierce said Australia's energy markets were undergoing a massive transformation, but it would not be a neat one.

In a discussion paper launched in conjunction with the event, AEMC said energy policy uncertainty in recent years had led to investment delays and consequent electricity price rises and risks to the security and reliability of the system.

"This uncertainty, around incentives for renewable energy or penalties for emissions, has counter-acted the signals for new investment coming from recent high wholesale prices," the paper said.

Read Cole Latimer’s story in today’s Melbourne Age - “Failure to fully implement Finkel Review causing energy uncertainty: AEMC.”

Counting the cost of Tony Abbott’s war on renewables

Tony Abbott did his best to kill off renewable energy when he was PM—and he’s still trying it seems. But it is interesting to look back at the consequences of his efforts. The war on renewables was meant to reduce electricity prices. But it has done the opposite—and a lot more.

Tony Abbott did his best, and is still
trying to kill off renewables

The big negative for renewables has been that the uncertainty created by the war led to a collapse in investment in large renewable energy projects. And the compromise 2020 large-scale renewable energy target (LRET), reduced from 41,000 GWh to 33,000 GWh, is now driving much less renewable energy development.

However, even the reduced LRET still means a lot of renewable generation capacity has to be built fast, from a near standing start, to generate 55% more renewable electricity than was produced in 2016, by 2020.

A report for the Clean Energy Regulator estimates an additional 6000 MW of generation capacity will be needed to meet the reduced 2020 target—a doubling of the renewable generation capacity installed since 2001. This has driven up the price of large-scale generation certi cates (LGCs) from a long- term price of $30–$40 to $80–$90 (see box).

Read the RenewEconomy story by Alan Pears - “Counting the cost of Tony Abbott’s war on renewables.”

Where to now for Beneath the Wisteria?

by Robert McLean

Where to now for Beneath the Wisteria?

The group was formed with no definitive goal or aim, other than to raise awareness and give people a chance to discuss the matter.

Ten months in and although those who regularly attend are much better informed about the realities facing humanity, we are still without understandable intent.

Comfort comes from the view that Beneath the Wisteria is not an activist group rather, somewhere those unsettled by our changing climate can go to have their commitment and hope refurbished.

Refreshed and renewed they can return to their respective parts of our community to again discuss a tragedy that is unfolding like a slow motion train wreck.

In fact it is the “slow motion train wreck” that is the prime difficulty.

The arrival of climate change is, in geological terms happening breathtakingly quickly, but in human-life terms, at a snail’s pace and so it demands athletic thinking to see, and understand, that what is happening now, will end, this century if unattended to, the near ideal conditions that have allowed humanity to flourish.

It is easy to focus on the burgeoning calamity we face, but it is damnably difficult to concentrate for long on the workable and useful responses to climate change before again falling again into the “woe is me” rut.

Uncertainty stalks my thinking.

Beneath the Wisteria has been wonderfully successful in many ways, among them the fact that it has drawn together a group, who by their willingness to “stand” in a public place and declare their position on what is the most arresting and significant challenge ever faced by humanity, is something worthy of celebration.

Several Beneath the Wisteria supporters are working tirelessly to combat climate change in various and commendable ways and maybe that is the group’s true purpose; to simply be there to provide moral and, if needed, physical support.

Considering our purpose, it is worth noting that time is not really on our side as the world’s climate is deteriorating at a rate well in excess of what just a year ago had been predicted by many of the world’s leading climatologists.

The “business as usual” boosters and the powerful fossil fuel lobbyists can focus only immediate profits and so immediately they see any weakness, or what they perceive as a weakness, in the indisputable evidence of global warming, they pounce.

Time is not on our side and although Beneath the Wisteria supporters are, in the broad scheme of things, of little consequence, it rests with us to unashamedly tell the truth about the implications of the changes we face because of global warming.

When we gather next Beneath the Wisteria (Saturday, October 27, 11:30am), let’s talk about where we go from here.

Please make an effort to join us – several have commented about the difficulty they experience in hearing the conversation and have argued that we move indoors, somewhere.

I understand their concerns, I too have trouble at times hearing the conversation, but this being a public issue it needs to be addressed publicly and so rather than be cloistered away in some obscure meeting room, we need to be “out there” with the public.

Although I believe it is going to require serious and bold State intervention to arrive at any workable solution, there undoubtedly needs to be a huge groundswell from the people.