Oct 18, 2017

How to extricate yourself from an energy policy jam

There are a few tricks to Malcolm Turnbull's new energy policy. Here's how he did it.

Bernard Keane — Politics editor

Bernard Keane

Politics editor

Yesterday the Prime Minister unveiled an energy policy that earned praise -- in, variously, guarded, or more enthusiastic terms -- from industry and the press gallery. After months of chaos, division and policy retreat, how did he do it? Here's a guide:

Vagueness is your friend

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions


Leave a comment

51 thoughts on “How to extricate yourself from an energy policy jam

  1. Wayne Cusick

    Commentators were saying last night that the policy will give investors the certainty they need.

    But I still can’t see anybody investing in a coal fired power station, since the next government is likely to be Labor and they are likely to introduce an EIS.

    Maybe some investment in gas fired power stations would occur, but the price of gas is too high for that to be viable at the moment.

    And the reliance on coal and gas to provide the “security” will surely keep prices high, not reduce them.

    If investment in renewables is reduced or comes to a halt, investment in generation capacity will have also be reduced. And as the coal fired stations close as they get to their use-by date, generation capacity will fall further behind demand. And prices will rise.

    The policy does nothing to rectify the broken system that is the AEM. Nor control the costs of the monopoly distribution networks.

    PS: In one report I saw it suggested that this policy may have enabled Liddel’s life to be extended. I can’t see how – from all reports it is limping towards retirement with many issues.

  2. Wayne Robinson

    There’s no chance that it will help reaching Australia’s commitment to reducing CO2 emissions by 26-28% by 2030 from 2005 levels.

    According to the government’s 2016 review of projections of Australia’s emissions, for the commitment to be reached emissions in 2030 would have to be around 440-430 Mt. The projections for 2030 were 592 Mt, with electricity comprising 186 Mt and transport 111 Mt.

    Somehow, at least a reduction of at least 150 Mt would have to be found somewhere. It’s not going to be found in electricity. Converting all transport to electric vehicles won’t do it either, unless renewables are enormously increased and dedicated to recharging vehicle batteries.

    One thing though – the 224 Mt Josh Frydenberg claims Australia is exceeding on its 5% target for 2020 will rapidly disappear after 2020. I reckon Australia will be over the 2030 target by at least 750 Mt.

  3. Dog's Breakfast

    Back long ago, in a land far far away, there used to be a time when governments were expected to put out serious policy, and sometimes they really did.

    Back in those bygone days, this press release/policy would have been laughed at by the msm, they would barely have been able to ask a question for all the guffawing.

    It’s a good take down Bernard. There are so many holes in this it would barely make a net.

    Just on the dispatchable issue, really gas isn’t dispatchable either. Immediately dispatchable power is either hydro or batteries, unless someone can come up with an answer that isn’t nuclear (same deal). I understand that gas wouldn’t take quite as long to come on board as coal, but still not ‘dispatchable’. Something to do with water not immediately coming to the boil to drive turbines.

    Happy for any learned colleagues to edumacate me on that one, If I’m wrong.

    1. Wayne Cusick

      Open Cycle Gas Turbines are much quicker to respond than steam plant systems, but less efficient than Combined Cycle Gas Turbines.

      OCGT can operate at around 35-45% efficiency, similar to a gas or coal fired steam power plant.
      CCGT can operate at around 50-60% efficiency, which means more MW/MWh for your gas and less CO2/MWh. But I am unsure as to how quickly they can fire up compared to OCGT.

      Solar thermal can be made as dispatchable power too, storing the heat in a container for as much as a few days.

    2. Wayne Cusick

      Oh, and Diesel generators can supply power on demand.

      Natural gas or biogas can be used in reciprocating type generators too.

  4. rhwombat

    Out of the frying pan, into the fire. Wonder what Brian Trumble will use as next week’s distraction.

  5. brian crooks

    Turdy you`re gone, waving your tiny little girly hands around and spitting all over your front bench does`nt engender public trust, 9 polls to go tick tock, its time, round 21 and abbott has won every one, turdy is out on his feet and only standing by clinging desperately to abbott, doubtfull if he can make it round 30, they`ll probably stop the fight and declare tones the winner by a knockout soon.

  6. Arky

    This is the kind of frank policy analysis that this country needs more of and has inspired me to finally subscribe. Having to read in other media sources refer unironically and uncritically to the “independent” Energy Security Board and swallow the government’s “up to” numbers as gospel was just mindboggling. Good work Bernard.

  7. Lizzie

    Once again this government’s policy on energy and environmental issues appears to be a dismal solution. They are treating the public like idiots by promising a saving of $150 per year – remember Abbott’s $500 per year savings. Turnbull and his cronies will lie and deceive in a bid to keep their jobs. They have no integrity whatsoever and I only hope that many more people can see them for what they are charlatans.

    1. Marilyn J Shepherd

      Actually that was maybe $115 a yr by 2030 as if we want to sell out the environment for less than $2 per week. The environment and climate change was not mentioned once and that is supposed to be the goal.

  8. Graeski

    I have only one question: how do we drive this scum from office?

    1. AR

      …easy, vote but that just means the other scum, equally beholden to big coal via its membership donors, will carry on carrying on.
      Same old, same old – whoever you vote for, government wins.

  9. Mil Zall

    The problem is that the economic and social cost to the country of blackouts is not reflected by the electricity market. State governments and the community pick up the cost of the outages but the generators bear little cost.
    In the old days governments operated the generation, transmission and distribution and funded spinning reserve and managed redundancy in generation and the grid.

  10. Bill Hilliger

    Malcolm Trumble, vibble, vobble, wibble, wobble, girly man obfuscates, ducking and weaving, and nobody is believing.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details