In a furious reaction to owners of coal-fired power generators bringing forward closure dates and the attempted acquisition of AGL by Mike Cannon-Brookes and Brookfield, federal Energy Minister Angus Taylor is using the last moments before the election to push through rule changes that would make it far harder to accelerate closure of coal-fired power plants.
In a humiliation that illustrated how much the Morrison government’s refusal to have an energy policy has sidelined it, Origin Energy announced in February it was bringing forward the closure of its deadly Eraring coal-fired power plant in the Hunter Valley by seven years to 2025. It did so after extensive consultations with NSW Treasurer Matt Kean, then the minister for energy and the environment, but without the climate denialist Taylor having a clue what was happening.
An angry Taylor lashed out at Origin at the time, claiming falsely that the closure would push up electricity prices.
At the same time, AGL announced it was bringing forward the closure of Bayswater in NSW and Loy Yang A in Victoria to 2033 and 2045, respectively, though no one outside those companies believes either plant will make it to those dates.
Now Taylor is seeking revenge on the companies by writing to the compliant Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) to demand changes to the National Electricity Rules. Taylor wants to extend the notice period for the closure of generators from three and a half years to five years.
The notice of closure requirement, a recommendation of the Finkel Review, was imposed in 2018. The previous year AGL had enraged the Turnbull government by confirming the closure of another highly dangerous Hunter Valley coal-fired plant, Liddell, in 2022. Liddell will now close by next April.
Taylor’s demand for the AEMC to nearly double the length of the notice period, if it had been in place in February, would have forced Origin to keep Eraring open at least another year, despite its obsolescence and the uncompetitively expensive coal-fired power it generates.
It would also act as a deterrent to any company bringing forward plans to close the last of Australia’s ageing and uncompetitive coal-fired power generators, with Taylor looking to prohibit any company from closing a plant before late 2027, no matter how uneconomic it is.
That would function as a deterrent to bids such as that launched by Cannon-Brookes and Canadian infrastructure giant Brookfield for AGL, which would have invested heavily in the company’s renewable assets and shuttered its increasingly loss-making fossil fuel assets.
In the coal bunker
Taylor also wants to prevent owners from getting around the closure notice requirements by deeming mothballing of generators to be effective closure. Owners will also be banned from making “speculative notices of closure when the generator has no actual intention to close the plant on the specified date … to prevent generators from engaging in behaviour that could create uncertainty in the market”.
The rule changes also have potentially significant ramifications for AGL’s splitting of its coal-fired assets into a new company, Accel, from its main energy portfolio. Shareholders are due to vote from mid-June after an independent expert’s report on the split. Taylor’s attempt to re-write the rules will complicate the split and make Accel appear less competitive to investors who may be wondering how the new company will function when banks and insurance companies are reluctant to do business with fossil fuels.
Analysts already worry the AGL split might see the proposed value of Accel set so low (in order to attract investors) that it destroys some of the residual value in the assets and leaves them stranded. Taylor’s proposal could very well see the independent expert’s report on the split come down against the deal if the company will be prevented by the government from freely managing its assets.
The independent expert’s report on the split was already being viewed as a major test of what passes for energy policy under the current government — and not just its implications for coal-fired generator owners like AGL and Origin but the Queensland government, which also owns coal-fired power stations. You can be sure the Palaszczuk government will not allow a demand from an energy minister in his dying days to govern what it wants to do with its assets.
Taylor’s latest approach follows his failure to impose a “coal-keeper tax” on households last year that would have seen ordinary families paying up to $400 a year extra in power bills in order to keep fossil fuel generators going. It’s an extraordinary move for a government that, briefly, insisted it was all about “can-do capitalism” rather than “don’t-do government”, but appears keen on the latter approach when it comes to keeping fossil fuels going.
Given the possibility of defeat at the election, it looks very much like Taylor and Morrison seeking to control the energy market and impose fossil fuel power beyond the political grave.
If the Liberal Party under Morrison actually had any principles such as a commitment to “free enterprise”, it could not possibly keep Angus Taylor in his job. Instead, the Morrison government stands for corrupt crony capitalism and a contempt for both human life and the health of the planet. Let a hundred ICACs bloom after this bunch lose office, and may they get very busy.
Yes, Taylor is possibly even worse than Morrison.
It’s astonishing to think anyone could be worse than Morrison.
I know. I did have to think long and hard, before typing that sentence. But it’s actually possible that he’s a worse human being than Morrison. Which I suppose makes him a candidate for future leader of the Liberal party?
Taylor belongs in a field chewing the cud and dropping cow pats and
gas to generate emissions, that would keep him happy until the farmer
decides he’s past his use-by date and sends him to the slaughter house,
which should take less than a week.
Taylor belongs to the Fossil Fuel Miners and Resources exporting party with a sideline in sell non-existant water to the MDB.
Magnus Failure is Scumos attack dog against those who wish a peaceful and healthy Earth for their children. In effect he is a terrorist who’s directive is to advance GLOBAL WARMING henceforth
Got it in one Ratty
Look, I respect you…… but that’s just crazy talk.
If Taylor thinks he can swoop in with some grubby, self interest policy on the run/ quick before the election/ stuff the planet law changes, and think that somehow that puts him at the head of the queue of one of the most despicable governments I have ever seen, he’s dreaming.
It takes consistent selfishness, an on going disregard for the truth, an ability to turn even the direst of disasters in political point scoring and photo op’s, and the ability to annoy enough people of your own political persuasion that many of them a gagging at the bit to bring you down in hatred to lead this list.
And there is only one man who who had reached these vaunted heights, that ‘guy from down under’ may I, after the election, never hear his voice again.
I’m sort of hoping that Morrison will give up before the election. That is, if it looks truly unwinnable, I wouldn’t put it past him, to come up with the claim, that all the hatred directed his way is taking too much of a toll on Jen and the kids, and that reluctantly, he won’t be standing for re-election.
I would rather see him and his uglies humiliated at the ballot box as they deserve.
Stand by for the rush of resignations if they lose office.
How many have the character to bear being in opposition, to the derision of all, for 3 long years?
not going to happen (imo)
It is a toss up between Morrison’s self interest (well described above) and Taylor’s venal disregard for governance in his dealings to line his own or family’s/mate’s pockets. I haven’t read anywhere that Morrison is greedy for dollars as opposed to power. Maybe he is just waiting for the riches that will come his way on various Boards (no guesses which ones, eh Murdoch) and sinecures that will come his way post his Prime Ministership, that I suspect can only come soon enough for Morrison, as well as anyone not a rusted on supporter of the LNP.
I think its a close call.
“Worse” than The Great Leader is a mighty big call. Even more inept and out of touch, maybe.
More slippery, I think.
Oerhaps he will get spend time with someone of that nickname in the fullness of time.
Any new Federal ICAC will need to be well resourced, such a backlog of work to do. Meanwhile according to Taylor, when he isn’t channeling Lenin, it would appear some capitalists are more equal than others, while the “market” is just an ideological cover to be trotted out when useful.
Enraged and humiliated – how nice is that…but there will be a money trail to Angus’ Cayman accounts related to his fierce defence of fossil fuels, the new ICAC will find it.
I don’t understand Angus Taylor’s opposition to renewable energy. As a blowhard who thinks the sun shines out of his arse he could make a lot of money providing back up power for when “the Sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow”.
StBob64 says Angus Taylor could make a lot of mileage providing back-up power for renewables when “the Sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow” – and the storage goes flat. However what would that power be? On the Right of politics, the economics is converging on gas, and on the Left, many would quietly allow them to commit Australia to a base of fossil gas. Such people would rather have our grandchildren fry in hell than go back on their 50-year old stance against nuclear electricity.
I think you may have missed the humour there, Roger.
Nuance is not his strong card – he has only one, his poor, dead, one trick pony Nukes, RIP.
Literally p#sing into the wind! What a pointless act, and, yes, probably a revenge move as opposed to sensible public policy. It won’t stand, even if it is passed into law, the operators will ensure that whomever is in government come May backtrack on this move for the reasons you point out. Furthermore, supposing sanity does not prevail, once the generator is operating the station at a loss, what’s to stop them restructuring the station off into a shell company and then declaring that entity bankrupt? Nothing, I suggest. So, Angus is just p#sing into the wind.
No point (sic!) being phallocentric – ‘spitting into the wind’.
Or the Donny’s ashes scene at the end of Big Lebowski.
Capitalism works: there is a market for Fogler’s cans as used in The Big Lebowski. One assumes Taylor would ban them …
Pissing into the wind is also possible without a phallus. I don’t see a problem.
There is an old folk tale about a contest between a man & woman to see who could piss the greater distance.
The woman won because of the stipulation, “No hands!”.
Anyone know how?
It’s from Chaucer’s The Canterbury Tales. A man’s penis hangs down and points at the ground (well, that is generally the situation when urinating). Whereas a woman can, um, avoid that situation.
But how did she achieve the distance?
Probably not something most modern, western women would grasp, pun not intended.
Hippies quickly caught on, esp when saris and sarongs are the norm.
Phallocentric? Surely a tad misogynist? Surely some ladies would rise to that challenge?
Try it.
The majority of coal fired plants ALREADY run at 60% average utilization, losing money, due to renewables. Companies are closing them purely for good business reasons.
Directors have a legal obligation to operate a company to the benefit of the shareholders and not that of the former government
He’s virtue signalling to his coal industry mates. A final favour on the way out of power to show his fealty and devotion: Don’t forget your loyal little mate Angus.
At least Angus doesn’t even try to hide his venality, stupidity and massive self-regard, it’s on constant public display.
I have known and worked with people who held Rhodes Scholarships. The ones I knew were intelligent – not only in the intellectual sense but also in their relationships with others – in addition to being really considerate people.
Then there were Abbott and Taylor. Fortunately for me I have never met either. Venal, stupid and massively self-regarding describes their politics well.
Can you imagine what the federal government’s Positive Energy misinformation campaign would sound like, if it actually told the truth?
“We’re making it more difficult to close down expensive, polluting coal-fired power plants! And we’re trying to massively expand Australia’s gas industry: here, here and here! And we’re spending $31 million of public money, to take credit for stuff that we’ve always opposed!”