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

What must we pay for our renewables protection policy?

By Geoff Carmody - posted Wednesday, 13 June 2018

Yellow highlighted figures are total subsidies ($million per annum) required to make 'reliable' renewables cost-competitive with fossil fuels. They're the minimum total NEM costs of our renewables protection racket.

1. NEM renewables subsidies ($million in 2016-17) for reliability-equivalence: 25% RET*

* Based on actual AER-reported electricity consumption in the NEM in 2016-17, and assuming 25% reliance on renewables.

2. NEM renewables subsidies ($million in 2016-17) for reliability-equivalence: 50% RET*

* Based on actual AER-reported electricity consumption in the NEM in 2016-17, and assuming 50% reliance on renewables.

3. NEM renewables subsidies ($million in 2016-17) for reliability-equivalence: 75% RET*

* Based on actual AER-reported electricity consumption in the NEM in 2016-17, and assuming 75% reliance on renewables.

4. NEM renewables subsidies ($million in 2016-17) for reliability-equivalence: 100% RET*

Continued over the page...

Pages:
‹
1
Page 2
3
›
All

Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

13 posts so far.

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?