Via The Guardian:
A national energy guarantee with a more ambitious emissions reduction target of 45% by 2030 would lead to power prices falling over the life of the scheme in contrast to the Turnbull government’s proposal, according to new modelling.
With the Neg bound for a make-or-break meeting in August, the new number crunching by the respected energy analysts RepuTex, funded by Greenpeace, boosts the case for emissions reduction in the scheme to be made more ambitious.
The modelling, to be released on Friday, compares the impact of the Turnbull government’s proposal – which has an emissions reduction target of 26% and would lead to prices rising – with the 45% target favoured by federal Labor.
It suggests under the more ambitious emissions reduction target, wholesale power prices would fall by a quarter to around $60 per megawatt hour (MWh) by 2030, as more renewables enter the energy mix. In contrast, under the Neg, power prices would be at just over $80.
Prices are higher in the Coalition’s proposal because coal continues to dominate the market, investment in large-scale renewables is largely static, and gas takes a higher share to provide flexible dispatchable power as coal assets leave the system.
But RepuTex says if the emissions reduction target was higher, at 45%, the policy would impose a constraint on emissions from coal-fired generators, and drive more new investment in large-scale renewables, adding more than 22GW of solar and wind capacity.
“Similar to the price decline under the 26% scenario prior to 2020, the competitive pressure from higher solar and wind energy is modelled to push wholesale prices lower, eventually resulting in the closure of excess coal capacity,” the analysis says.
Advertisement“As a result wholesale electricity prices oscillate around $60 per MWh through to 2030, rather than rise above $80 per MWh as seen under the low investment scenario under a 26% Neg,” the analysis says.
That makes a lot more economic sense than the NEG which is overly complex adding costs, consolidates monopolies, protects higher cost coal and gas, and ensures we miss Paris climate targets. Even the NFF can see that much:
The National Farmers Federation has taken a veiled swipe at the Turnbull government’s signature energy plan, suggesting proposed emissions cuts in the electricity sector lack ambition and may have unfair consequences for agriculture.
The comments add weight to criticism that the National Energy Guarantee shifts the burden of climate action to other parts of the economy where emissions reduction is more expensive and difficult.
If you’re not going to bring down the price of gas via reservation then leaping forward to renewables plus storage makes much more sense than protecting coal, for both bills and the climate, or palming cuts onto other sectors.
Bluescope shows the way today:
BlueScope Steel will on Friday sign the largest solar power purchasing deal ever by an industrial energy user in Australia, to lock into cheap renewables generation and rein in its energy costs which have ballooned by more than $50 million in the past two years.
The seven-year contract will underpin a new 500,000-panel solar farm to be built in the NSW Riverina district by ESCO Pacific and will cover a fifth of all the steelmaker’s Australian electricity purchases.
John Nowlan, head of Australian steel products at BlueScope, said the supply will sit alongside the steelmaker’s existing arrangements for round-the-clock power to feed its plants.
It’ll be adding giant batteries in the few years and going off-grid:
Bob Brown is right, at Domainfax:
Former Greens leader Bob Brown has slammed the Turnbull government’s energy plan as a “cop out” that needs a drastic overhaul ahead of a crucial meeting where the Greens could make or break the policy.
Dr Brown told Fairfax Media the National Energy Guarantee would do too little to cut greenhouse gas emissions in the electricity sector, imposed greater costs on Australians and shifted the load on to other parts of the economy.
“It’s a cop-out for the electricity sector and will put a huge burden on agriculture, transport and manufacturing if Australia is to meet its global obligations,” Dr Brown said.
“The emissions reduction target for 2030 should be trebled. Otherwise and inevitably this will cost Australians in their pockets as well as lifestyle.”
The criticism runs counter to strong messages of support from the business community in recent days, as all sides prepare for an August 10 meeting where Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg needs unanimous support from states and territories to implement the plan.
Dr Brown’s views are set to influence fellow Greens member Shane Rattenbury, the Climate Change Minister in the ACT government, who is holding out against the policy in the belief it does not do enough to reduce emissions.
Trash the NEG. It is another Coalition energy policy shocker.
