Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

National Energy ‘Guarantee’: can our power ‘trilemma’ become a policy trifecta – or quinella?

By Geoff Carmody - posted Wednesday, 25 October 2017


In the ESB letter, I can't find a 'yes' answer.

The ESB proposes:

  • Finalising the details of the 'reliability guarantee' by end-2018.
  • Implementation of the 'reliability guarantee' in 2019.
  • Reliability standards should be, 'as defined by the Reliability Panel at the AEMC'.
Advertisement

The ESB advice says nothing about what reliability standards will apply.

There is no guarantee the existing NEM reliability standard will be retained, and, if not, no information about what might replace it.

2. Responsibility – the new word for sustainability (governments can prescribe, etc, standards here too, if they want to)

The words in the ESB letter about the 'emissions guarantee' boil down to arrangements, (finalised in 2018 and put in place in 2020), to ensure we meet our Paris Agreement commitments.

There's a 'lower energy intensity' flavour to the ESB words.

Australian carbon credit units (ACCUs) and 'international units', to be traded to meet 'responsibility' commitments, are mentioned in the letter.

Advertisement

The existing RET is 'grandfathered' to new investments (definition?) by 2020 ('tho, thanks to ex-PM Rudd, these attract RET benefits until 2030).

Could the NE'G' announcement itself induce a rush of new projects to beat the RET deadline, costing us all more?

There are some open-ended words: 'Once new investment under the RET finishes in 2020, the emissions guarantee on the retailers will require them to contract with low or zero emissions generators to meet their guarantee, but only where necessary to meet the emission reduction targets set by the Commonwealth. (Italics added.)

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

6 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Geoff Carmody is Director, Geoff Carmody & Associates, a former co-founder of Access Economics, and before that was a senior officer in the Commonwealth Treasury. He favours a national consumption-based climate policy, preferably using a carbon tax to put a price on carbon. He has prepared papers entitled Effective climate change policy: the seven Cs. Paper #1: Some design principles for evaluating greenhouse gas abatement policies. Paper #2: Implementing design principles for effective climate change policy. Paper #3: ETS or carbon tax?

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Geoff Carmody

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 6 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy