Handling of the Low EmmissionsTechnology Demonstration Funds...

Handling of the Low EmmissionsTechnology Demonstration Funds appears (in hindsight) to have been grossly misdirected.

Here is an article printed in the Sunraysia Daily. There are links to the article (and a follow up) on the Enviromission website.

Roger is clearly miffed right off at the way things have been handled. On the face of it his comments appear correct and fair but I'm no expert. Interesting reading for holders of EVM anyway.

Starts
Coal-centric: claim:

Enviromission criticises MRCC trip to US
By Allan Murphy

FEDERAL and State Governments are facing criticism over their handling of the Mildura Solar System’s power station proposal following claims that Low Emissions Technology Demonstration Fund milestones may not have been met as early as 2007. Renewable energy technology company EnviroMission yesterday said it questioned the basis of the rationale of the LETDF grant to Solar Systems announced in October 2006.

EnviroMission executive officer Roger Davey said in a process that
“picked winners”, the Howard Government chose Solar Systems ahead
of EnviroMission and other applicants when it announced $75 mil-
lion in Federal funding. The project also secured $50 million from the Victorian Government for the project near Mildura effectively putting paid to EnviroMission’s 50MW Solar Tower proposal in the region. “Large infrastructur e projects require government investment and the ability of EnviroMission’s technology to deliver on government carbon reduction targets made it worthy of government investment, ” Mr Davey said.

“However, EnviroMission was forced to compete for funding along
with other projects that have since been shown to be problematic, ” he
said. “EnviroMission would like to know if funding was ever really
intended for solar renewable development or if the low emission’s
program was only ever really a ruse to continue to direct public funds
to coal centric programs at the expense of the solar renewable indus-
try in Australia. ”

Solar Systems was last week placed in the hands of administrators.
The company received only $500,000 of the government funds
committed under the LETDF . Solar Systems planned to be-
gin construction of a $420 million, 154MW solar power station this year
with a completion date of 2013. Mr Davey said he was “bewil-
dered” that the Solar Systems proposal had faltered in light of the
LETDF grant.

He understood that “non-negotiable” criteria of the terms of the LETDF required recipients of the grant to execute a funding deed within three months of being awarded the $2 for $1 grant.
It was obvious those conditions were never met and that should
have been announced to the “market”. “Any collapse such as that of Solar Systems is a tragedy,” Mr Davey said.

“Australia needs a thriving renewable energy industr y and this is just
a terrible situation that can’t recommend development in A ustralia.
“Policy ‘spin’ about funding that has not materialised has been used to fool the general public that public sector investment is being made
in Australia when that is clearly not the case. “How was government scrutiny
and evaluation of successful applicants to the LETDF so completely
out of sync with the private sector view given Solar System’s difficulty
in securing the necessar y private sector funding? “The obviously flawed LETDF critique of applicant companies left the market with a skewed view of the merit of the unsuccessful applicants and this outcome was the catalyst
for EnviroMission to shift its development focus to the U nited States.”
Mr Davey said EnviroMission, which originally planned to con- struct a 200MW solar to wer at Tapio Station had revised those plans to 50MW in line with the LETDF criteria at the time.
“We had the commitment of Macquarie Bank to facilitate all pri-
vate sector funding upon a successful LETDF outcome and we had a
site, a construction company, and a project that had already driven a
substantial investment, ” he said. “That included preliminar y studies and consultations in the region only to be overlooked for a company that now appears to have not ticked quite as many boxes. “We were completely surprised by the Federal Government ’s decision to overlook a project-ready application in favour of a new player to Sunraysia. He said any renewable energy development in Sunraysia would need to address the “border town” politics it had while in consultation with State Governments. “While the superior site for EnviroMission’s solar tower was identified north of the Murray, the economic benefit was clearly biased towards the Victorian side ,” he said. “Any future project like a solar tower power station cannot afford to be compromised by state politics.

Mr Davey questioned the benefit of the Mildura Development
Corporation and Mildura Rural City Council two-week delegation to the
US next month to investigate solar development.
“We are now especially frustrated to learn that a local taxpayer funded
delegation from Sunraysia is planning to visit California giving the
appearance that a bird in the bush is preferred to the EnviroMission
bird that was in the hand. ” “It is ironic that ratepayers’ money is being spent overseas to explore ‘solar opportunities ’ at the expense of nurturing companies that have already stepped up to the plate and gone unsupported in the face of public policy,” he said. “That money would be better off
sending a delegation to C anberra to lobby the government. ”
By Allan Murphy

Ends.

News in Arizona / The US has dried up after a flood of announcements (relatively speaking). Hopefully there will be some news of progress in the near future.