Renewable Energy Target Victoria, page-5

Agree on that point. What I am, however, arguing in the idea of the "target" and all the hoopla around it.
The benefits of this project, with regards to either 1. a gross neutral position on power generation emissions or 2. a net decrease in power generation emissions are incredibly difficult to measure. By that I am referring to power generation and it's subsequent pollution that then effects peoples health in cities/surrounding areas via inhaled particulate matter. To measure the positive impact on health via a reduction in this particulate matter is near impossible to do. Even looking at something like net-changes in emergency room presentations for respiratory related presentations is a shaky metric at best. The data would have to be collated over a long (e.g. 20-50 years) period of time to be able to get any kind of validation from it. But from my standpoint, the upfront (potential) reduction in emissions should feed through in to better health for a local community arising from less emission of combustion products derived from energy generation. It would just be potentially difficult to measure this over a short period of time (e.g. project delivery -> 5 years).
CWE will be built in my opinion, we all just need patience. Forget the target, a better thing to do would be to pimp this technology and it's benefits in the press, rather than having to listen to some tool (probably an academic with a vested interest or someone on the take too) talk about how abolition of the target would be the end of (their) the world.
As an aside, even worse than the climate target talk are hearing economists say that any bad macro data point is weather related..... /facepalm.

For the record, I am long another renewable company, and wanted to be long SLX, but I am just waiting and watching....

I hope to pick up some more CWE sooner, rather than later.

GL to all holders.