Will state governments save clean energy

http://www.businessspectator.com.au...ergy/will-state-governments-save-clean-energy
Needs subscription but there are always ways around life's problems!

With negotiations over the Renewable Energy Target endlessly dragging on at a federal level, and the Abbott Government (with the exception of Environment Minister Greg Hunt) barely veiling its disdain for policies that would improve energy efficiency while decarbonising energy supply, hope is turning to the state governments to fill the breach.

The change of government in Victoria and Queensland has brought in Labor administrations that have no trouble acknowledging human activity is leading to a warming of the planet. They are at least saying the right things. At the same time in NSW both the Labor and the Liberal parties have said they believe the RET is a good policy and want to encourage renewable energy investment in their state. They also appear supportive of efforts to improve energy efficiency, with the Liberal Government making it clear they wish to retain and expand the Energy Efficiency Target scheme.

Yet the problem is getting them to all to back words with deeds that might actually make a genuine difference.

In the current NSW election campaign the Baird Government has baulked from making a clear commitment on the future level of its energy efficiency target. Meanwhile Labor didn’t even mention the scheme in its environment election platform – instead choosing to talk about a useful but rather second-order initiative of upgrading the energy efficiency of lighting in NSW hospitals.

On renewable energy just today, the Liberal NSW Environment Minister Rob Stokes said on Sydney’s local ABC radio morning program that his government was unequivocal in supporting the RET and encouraging the Federal Government to keep it in place. Meanwhile, NSW Labor has said they’d legislate a renewable energy target for NSW.

Yet both these positions are problematic, as are those of the other state governments which all say they want to see a substantial increase in the level of renewable energy in the electricity system.

While the NSW Liberal’s Rob Stokes has an excellent grasp of the issues surrounding renewable energy, he hasn’t made any concrete pledges that would cover for failure at a federal level.

With negotiations over the Renewable Energy Target endlessly dragging on at a federal level, and the Abbott Government (with the exception of Environment Minister Greg Hunt) barely veiling its disdain for policies that would improve energy efficiency while decarbonising energy supply, hope is turning to the state governments to fill the breach.

The change of government in Victoria and Queensland has brought in Labor administrations that have no trouble acknowledging human activity is leading to a warming of the planet. They are at least saying the right things. At the same time in NSW both the Labor and the Liberal parties have said they believe the RET is a good policy and want to encourage renewable energy investment in their state. They also appear supportive of efforts to improve energy efficiency, with the Liberal Government making it clear they wish to retain and expand the Energy Efficiency Target scheme.

Yet the problem is getting them to all to back words with deeds that might actually make a genuine difference.

In the current NSW election campaign the Baird Government has baulked from making a clear commitment on the future level of its energy efficiency target. Meanwhile Labor didn’t even mention the scheme in its environment election platform – instead choosing to talk about a useful but rather second-order initiative of upgrading the energy efficiency of lighting in NSW hospitals.

On renewable energy just today, the Liberal NSW Environment Minister Rob Stokes said on Sydney’s local ABC radio morning program that his government was unequivocal in supporting the RET and encouraging the Federal Government to keep it in place. Meanwhile, NSW Labor has said they’d legislate a renewable energy target for NSW.

Yet both these positions are problematic, as are those of the other state governments which all say they want to see a substantial increase in the level of renewable energy in the electricity system.

While the NSW Liberal’s Rob Stokes has an excellent grasp of the issues surrounding renewable energy, he hasn’t made any concrete pledges that would cover for failure at a federal level.

NSW Labor’s policy is to legislate a 20% renewable energy target – yet this is actually a lower level than the Abbott Government is now offering at a national level, which they say would deliver 23% renewable energy (even though it would significantly cut the existing legislated target). In addition, if the NSW legislation were to establish a scheme with the same design as the national RET it could be legally disallowed. This is something Anne Kallies, a law lecturer at RMIT, explained in November in the column, Beyond the RET: options for state action. Alternatively the target might be merely aspirational legislation, like what the SA Labor Government likes to do, which is next to useless. I should note that at least NSW Labor is aiming for something that isn’t just going to happen without some effort, unlike the shameless ploy by SA to take credit for 50% renewables (when this was going to happen within a few years without any help from them).

Another policy of questionable value is a pledge to get economic authorities to mandate “fair” tariffs for retailers to pay for exported solar generation. NSW Labor’s promise in particular is a complete joke given they’d task it to IPART, who have already determined a price which isn’t any better than what the marketplace already offers.

It seems the policies that are being offered by state governments seem tailor-designed around pet topics of particular advocacy groups without any kind of guiding overarching objective linked to the overall goal of avoiding dangerous climate change. Some are clearly developed as shiny trinkets built to dazzle and confuse but with almost zero substance behind them.

Into this confusing milieu of platitudes and policies of questionable value, the Climate Institute has released a discussion paper outlining five areas it believes state governments should include in their decarbonisation strategies:

1) Setting binding emission limits on major emitting facilities (e.g. industrial processes, power generators);

2) Incorporating carbon costs and the benefits of emission reduction into policy and planning processes;

3) Using procurement and management policies to help build markets for lower emission goods and services;

4) Continuing to develop and link energy efficiency policy frameworks;

5) Providing assistance in various forms – funding, technical, regulatory, training

Some of these initiatives, in particular point (2), aren’t too good at impressing the local community groups keen on getting up their own solar power station. But they will probably make a more meaningful difference to carbon emissions in the long run.

Yet the one that is probably most desperately important with the current uncertainty surrounding the renewable energy sector is point (3) – using procurement to build markets for low emission goods.

There is actually a sound policy framework already in place to support renewable energy at a national level in the RET. The problem is that investors have exited the market because of uncertainty about its future shape. Of particular concern is that the scheme is being set-up for failure. If the government lets the uncertainty surrounding the scheme drag on for another six months we could run out of time to build sufficient projects to meet the target – even one noticeably lower than that currently legislated.

The states could provide a valuable role in buttressing the national scheme by establishing a joint initiative to procure renewable energy from newly constructed projects (ideally via contracts for difference rather than owning the power outright). This could be used to address the various government agencies' own power needs as well as local councils – but really needs to go further to make any kind of meaningful difference. However, the aim shouldn’t be to replace the private market for renewable energy, rather to jump-start it and provide a competitor to the large power retailers. Even just contracting for 800 megawatts within the next six months across Victoria, Queensland, NSW and SA would provide a handy kick-start on ensuring any future agreed renewable energy targets can be achieved on a timely basis.

Time is fast running out, but the ACT government provides a framework that could be quickly deployed by the other states.

Will they translate words into action?