My colleague Ric Brazzale and I have been involved in Australia’s energy and climate policy deliberations for several decades. Over our time we’ve seen — and in a number of cases been directly involved in — an array of weird, wonderful, downright ugly and utterly hopeless policy initiatives in the energy and climate space. Yet the key searing memory for both of us has been constant arguments with people more powerful than ourselves to get them to recognise a legitimate role for energy efficiency and renewable energy in our energy market.
Today we released a report lamenting, while also explaining, how Australia ended up with some the highest wholesale electricity prices in the industrialised world. We’ve achieved this miraculous feat while at the same time producing the developed world’s second most carbon polluting electricity in the world, second only to Estonia. And it has transpired after the Abbott government abolished the carbon price and wound back the Renewable Energy Target by a fifth. All done on the promise Australia would become a low-cost energy superpower.
The people behind this sterling success are also many of the people who set up the regulatory rules that allowed electricity network monopolies to spend $40 billion on network capacity expansions. This doubled household electricity prices while demand flatlined.
[Wonder why the Coalition dislikes renewables so much?]
It has struck me over the years that Australian industry lobby groups, as well as senior bureaucrats at the controls of Australia’s energy policy, seem to all be very good at nodding their heads in favour of a long-term emission reduction policy. It’s just they seem to have an uncanny knack of rejecting or attacking any kind of significant emission reduction policy that has a good chance of actually being implemented.
The Renewable Energy Target and its state-based offshoots are the most significant single carbon abatement policy implemented in Australia. They have also been subject to withering criticism and almost endless attacks and government reviews. These have come not just from the usual subjects like lobby groups representing power generators or coal miners. They have also been repeatedly attacked by powerful officials within the energy policy making apparatus. This has included the Productivity Commission, the Australian Energy Market Commission, New South Wales’ Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal, the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, and the late head of the Australian Energy Market Operator.
Energy efficiency policies have also not escaped such attacks.
Even when the energy policy cabal got a policy almost perfectly matching their demands — which is what the Gillard government’s carbon price represented, with bucketloads of free permits, mild targets and lots of international credits — many cheered on Tony Abbott’s scare campaign to tear it down.
[Rundle: why climate change activism has failed (and how it can be saved)]
Recent remarks by Gary Banks, former head of the Productivity Commission, were incredibly revealing about a belief I suspect is pervasive among those who demand no climate policy until we get a perfect one:
“While Australia’s own actions can have no discernible impact on global carbon emissions, let alone on Australia’s climate, there is broad support for the idea that playing our part is a precondition for a joint international endeavour that could. This requires a leap of faith, but it is a legitimate policy objective, even if a particularly costly one for this country given its resource endowments.”
You can sense the disdain and cynicism with which Banks regards Australian efforts to reduce emissions. Australia should instead be a selfish freeloader. Indeed, perhaps a parasite on global efforts to avoid dangerous climate change as we persist in pushing the use of our great “resource endowment” in coal and gas.
Banks preceded these remarks in his speech by repeating an argument promoted by the Minerals Council of Australia:
“The inconvenient truth is that the increasingly high prices for increasingly unreliable electricity are a direct consequence of the increasingly high utilisation of renewable energy required by government regulation.”
This is wrong. But to appreciate it you need to rely on more than simple refrains like “when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow the power doesn’t flow”. You need to understand that ageing coal-fired power stations like Hazelwood face bills of hundreds of millions of dollars to address safety and reliability problems. You also have to make the effort to familiarise yourself with the technological progress and reductions in costs achieved by wind turbines and solar module manufacturers. And of course you just have to take your nose out of a book to see and hear about the incredible prices Australian businesses are now paying for gas.
The report we released today, Overcoming ideology to support new power plant investment and reduce power prices — Could Judith Sloan and Chris Kenny hold the answer?, helps to explain just how wrong Gary Banks is.
Don’t get me wrong; Australian climate policies have been far from perfect. While at the Grattan Institute, I co-wrote a two-part forensic critique of all that has gone wrong with Australian climate policy from 1997 to 2011 — Learning the Hard Way. But unlike Gary Banks, I actually care about achieving the objective of avoiding dangerous climate change.
* Tristan Edis is director of analysis and advisory with Green Energy Markets, a firm that assists clients make informed investment, trading and policy decisions in carbon abatement markets.
Thank you for implying that we must replace “coal and gas”, when most voices only decry “coal”. Shamefully, we are likely to be making excuses deep into the future for continuing to use gas. Gas useage as responsive backup will actually increase as renewable capacity increases. While we continue to make excuses, we will continue to be parasites on world efforts towards “net zero emissions”.
I think we have all figured out by now that privatisation of our utilities has been a disaster. Forty years ago Britain, in a moment of clarity, purchased back all of its North Sea oil rights and reaps the benefits to this day. We, in contrast, have happily sold our utilities for (very) short term gain and are now saddled with punitive prices. The only way I now see out of my ridiculous power bills is to wait until the Chinese or Indians get stuck into copying and mass producing the home solar power systems now available for around $20k. The day is coming when I can purchase one for about $5k and tell the power corporates and by extension, the government, to go screw themselves…
It’s a struggle. I guess it was a struggle to replace the horse and cart with the car, but it happened regardless of all the naysayers.
And if we follow scientific advice, we’ll end up shutting down one industry (fossil fuel electrical power) and replacing it with a more advanced one (renewable energy electrical power). Problem ?
Transformed over a decade or so, there’ll still be heaps of jobs for the ordinary person in this new industry, and the greedy profit gougers will just have to retool (or be replaced by new profit gougers).
And a positive spinoff might just be a cleaner environment. Problem ?
The last lump of coal in this 30 second YouTube vid … https://youtu.be/GiDtvjZJGeY
Cheers
Mick
Its interesting isn’t it, the angst around the coal issue. Even if Australia totally pulled out of coal power generation today, our exports would continue for many decades, so no jobs lost there (except through automation). Faced with ever reducing coal use worldwide, just maybe the coal industry would start ramping up their own research. I just don’t believe that some scientist out there can’t develop genuine clean-coal power generation, but I’m damned if I know why I (the tax payer) should fund it.
In the mean time theres one form of 24/7 power generation that no-one is discussing much – wave power. Our own home-grown forerunner in this field would have to be Carnegie Wave Power based in Perth. Sight unseen, underwater, no impediment to shipping, able to be deployed around our coast, totally new industry with potential for substantial employment, several trial plants built – so where are they? Time to piss or get off the pot guys.
Years ago, Carnegie had Fed Gov support to build a big unit off the SW coast of WA. Before anything was put in the water, the Feds pulled the pin on their support.
So Carnegie built a smaller unit off the coast of Garden Island, 40K south of Fremantle. It’s currently supplying a lot of power to our Navy base on GI.
Carnegie wanted Fed support for future units but could never bolt them down (ref. fiddling and Rome burning).
So last year, tired of waiting for the Oz Gov decision making, they took up an offer from the Brits to build mega units off the south coast of England. So that’s where they are, they took their pot to England and now it’s overflowing.
So much for the Oz Gov supporting Oz companies.
So much for Growth and jobs.
So much BS and spin.
We should be so proud.
I think this cartoon sums it up …
https://cartoonmick.wordpress.com/editorial-political/#jp-carousel-926
Cheers
Mick
Hate to see yet another Aussie company go overseas. On the other hand Carnegie needs to do some serious marketing as none of my friends and work colleagues have ever heard of them.
In I think 2007, Rudd should have had the support of the greens to create an emissions trading scheme, but didn’t because it was deemed by them to be less than perfect. Same story, history will I think not look fondly on that decision.
Jane – this carnard about the Greens refusing to support Krudd’s bankers’ sheltered workshop ETS really needs to be nailed into a lead sealed coffin and buried deep, deep down along with Dodger’s 1gm pp pa of highly radioactive waste.
Firstly, using his well known people skills Krudd refused to even ask the Greens for support for his shonky arbitrage employment scheme, relying instead on the spinal strength of that international banker par excellence, Talcum in his first incarnation as head bullshitter for the COALition.
Secondly, it was the right wing in the bowels the Black Lubynaka in SussexSt who told Krudd to drop it or else.
The ‘else’ is our sorry history since Gillard inexplicably threw in her soul to those evil bastards which gave us destabilisation (none dare call it treason for some unknown reason) and the Abbotrocity and now, the worst of all possible worlds, Talcum II.