Ghosts of climate policy past
The more it changes, the more it stays the same. It’s an old refrain, but the closer we get to the Clean Energy Future legislation ducking and weaving its way through parliament, the more we are reminded of the ghosts of the current proposal’s stepmother, the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.
The CEF package is due to be presented to parliament next Tuesday in 13 (lucky for some?) different pieces of legislation. And the grenades are being repaired. There’s a lot at stake – not just for action against climate change, a commitment to a transition to a low-carbon economy and the course of renewable energy development, but also the short-, medium- and long-term careers of many MPs.
Many are anxious. Labor only has to look at the polls, and its own record of party discipline and dispatching of leaders. The Greens, who believe in this most of all, are nervous because they voted down the last one and need this to stop them looking foolish. The Coalition is worried about what should happen if the legislation is voted through and implemented, and the world does not end.
So it’s time to lob grenades. Last time, it was a Labor government lobbing them into a hopelessly divided Opposition, only to have it blow up in their own face with the emergence of Tony Abbott. This time, the Coalition has returned fire at what most presume to be a hopelessly divided Cabinet. The Coalition's climate change spokesman Greg Hunt got the ball rolling at the Ecogen conference in Brisbane, taking the cue from an even more disastrous showing by Labor and Prime Minister Julia Gillard in the polls:
“There is now, from what we are being told by very senior executives, a push to topple the carbon tax within the Cabinet,” he said. “Now, that may not happen, but it makes it absolutely clear that this government, at its core, doesn’t believe in it and …it would be an act of arrogance and folly to take this tax forward until they’ve resolved their leadership issues.”
Of course, it suits the Coalition to say this and there is mischief in his prediction. It was insurrection in their own ranks, after all, over this very issue, that killed the CPRS. Now they are hoping that similar forces are at work within Labor, although it would seem that government members would have more at stake than a party in Opposition.
While the ability of Labor’s rank and file to panic and make poor decisions should not be underestimated, the Liberals know that their chances of a sweeping election victory in 2013 will diminish the longer a carbon price is in place and is shown to be benign. The tactics are the same, only the roles have been changed – although one still wonders why the ALP bothered to go there in 2009. Wise heads would tell them not to take the bait, but the polls are stark.
Labor says publicly it is better prepared this time. It and the Greens indicate they are prepared to guillotine the legislation through parliament, to ensure they are passed by late November. Asked today at the Ecogen conference if there was division in Cabinet, parliamentary secretary for climate change and energy efficiency Mark Dreyfus said no. "We're here to govern," he told Climate Spectator. "It will become law. Our prosperity and way of life will be improved," he told the conference earlier. "People will look back in years to come, and say that the government did the right thing."
However, Dreyfus said he did understand the anxiety of the renewables and associated industries, who have experienced the disappointment of the past. The Greens are also concerned. Not so much about the passage of the initial legislation, because there is little they can do to alter the course of events, apart from playing their role. What was troubling Greens Senator Christine Milne on Tuesday was the fate of the so-called complementary measures, in particular the crowning achievement of the multi-party committee negotiations, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
The $10 billion CEFC, which is what interests the renewables industry most, is the most vulnerable part of the package. Its legislation will not go through parliament until next year, and will barely begin to operate before the next election in 2013. A victorious Coalition government could find this the easiest to dispatch, or at least severely nobble.
Milne took this message to the audience at the Ecogen conference in Brisbane, saying that they risked losing many of the complementary measures designed to boost renewables unless they became more vocal. Not just the CEFC, but the renewable energy target was also under threat, from the energy sector as well as the political arena. “It’s no longer possible to be an advocate of renewable energy and be apolitical,” she said. “This is a rearguard action we are now fighting. You must understand the forces that are ranged against you.”
She predicted a “massive assault” from industry and from within the energy sector against the MRET, the mechanism that will largely underwrite an anticipated $30 billion in wind farm, solar and possibly geothermal and biomass plants over the next decade. The MRET retains bi-partisan political support – a position that Hunt reinforced on Tuesday - but given the lack of enthusiasm from some newly elected Coalition state governments, and the disintegration of bipartisan in the US, there is a fear this could spread to the federal arena.
Milne also said she was concerned about the structural problem created by the concentration of power of the big three retailers, who hold the key to the power purchase agreements needed to finance renewable developments, and who have done little of that in the past two years.
“Would the companies prefer RECS prices to spike to penalty rate – to create political pressure to get rid of the scheme altogether? Or will they start signing contracts soon to deliver cheaper energy? Where is the public outcry from people in this business on this issue?” The answer to that is that while many in the industry do share her concerns, none will say so in public, because they may have to go and ask one of the big three retailers one day for a power purchase agreement.
Milne reserved particular criticism for Origin Energy, whose CEO Grant King in recent weeks, including in this interview with Climate Spectator, has suggested the RET be modified, and has questioned the “ideological” campaign against coal-seam gas. She seemed particularly incensed by King's portrayal of the farm gate issues plaguing CSG as being the same as for wind, and by his previous predictions that 6000MW of peaking gas plants would be needed to be built to balance wind, and his forecast a potential trebling in electricity prices because of it.
Follow @gilesparkinson on Twitter
Comments on this article
Milne's dysfunctional rant !
This panic driven catch 22 dilemma has not only incensed the irate farmers - who complain vociferously about CSF, but in the same breath also complain about the high cost of fuels ( even though they are amply subsidised ) is, funny enough all contributing to the BIG LIE - . Gore's climate starry-eyed parody. His imaginative quest for the White House that went oddly askew. Derailed. Period. Kaput !
We are deluged with ex-Pollies in Canberra ( 7000 ) lobbyist who champion the flavour of the year," Climate boogey ", to instil amongst us a sense of foreboding and hallucionary fear, whilst milking the system of $ 30 billion tax dollars and more. Bit rich !
The Global Industrial Giants eg. China, India, Japan & the US etc continue to run their factories 24/7 to feed their starving citizens, and judging by China's five year plans, will triple their input & expand expotentially !
Me thinks, if there wasn't some hidden agenda eg. generating ( back-door ) wealth. Plausibly, no one would even bother. Illusionary or plain deluded ! Why are we expiating ourselves at someone else's expense ? Oz's pathetic dilemma would be neglible, and count for zilch Globally, long-term.
The IPCC stated Global warming since 1870 - as recorded by HMS Challenger's Log, and now, rose .59 c (1.1 F) which is more then by baby's bath water.
They have no axe to grind and was reported in the Guardian (UK) and the Daily Mail, only last week. Meanwhile, the Murdoch press conveniently failed to print the belated news ? And, the ABC and other news media wont subscribe to - why ?
Hello,I love reading through
Hello,I love reading through your blog, I wanted to leave a little comment to support you and wish you a good continuation. Wishing you the best of luck for all your blogging efforts.ccnp dumps// ccie dumps// pmp dumps// security+ dumps// Network+ dumps//// Vmware dumps//// cisco dumps//// microsoft dumps////
CSG
Alistair, gas can be more efficient at power generation but I see a few problems: getting it there (seehttp://theconversation.edu.au/fugitive-emissions-what-is-the-real-footprint-of-coal-seam-gas-29400), building infrastructure that will last 50 years and still pollute, degrading land and water, vulnerability (e.g. to fire), etc. But people are missing the point: there will have to be huge cultural change to a conservor biosensitive society if we are to avoid disastrous global warming.
CSG is not Milne's program -
Coal Seam Gas – 1500 farms cant be all wrong
Its taken Australians a long time to wake up to what coal seam gas mining is doing . Having family in Western Queenslan I‘ve seen CSG wells - some leaking, so called holding ponds for the polluted csg waters – drying out and residues blowing over farms, pond liners broken, torn, one even with a dead bloated animal after rains , cattle run amok after gates left open, farmers harassed, farm land near impossible to manage with csg connecting roads, pipelines, construction impactions, noise levels all operating . Now the leakage of gas has been confirmed, instead of correcting the problem, csg is developing ‘leakage management’.
With 40,000 plus wells, 10%-20% leaking is a huge impact.
And I have heard that something like 1500 farms have joined forces to Lock the Gates and keep the gas companies out - I only wish our family had been able to do that
For those frightened ostriches that see it as an airy-fairy greens pie in the sky – its real, its happening go and have a look – its now exploring urban sites in Sydney, been pushed out of some urban sites West of Brisbane, coastal parts of Victoria, Hunter Valley, Northern Rivers, Liverpool Plains in NSW and the huge dry bush lands of NSW’s Pillager.
we need our country -it's time to stop swapping green myths and actually take a real look at what is happening to some of the most beautiful cropping lands.
Judy whistler Lockyer Valley
Not business as usual
Alistair you are absolutely right, it's not business as usual. In fact, over the last decade we have lowered emissions significantly and still have plenty of time to achieve much more by embracing modern day technologies without the need to slash and burn our standards of living.
Rio Tinto's GM for Australia urged Gillard yesterday, to take the time and go back to the drawing board to reconsider the government's approach and find a better way for Australia to make its contribution. No doubt, we all support such a course of action.
Not business as usual
Agree with you John Merory that the world cannot have business as usual, but suspect due to short sighted politicians and voting public that we are destined to have it, with great grandkids left holding the can.
However CSG can be a contributer to lowering CO2. It is only head in the cloud purists who argue otherwise. Sure gas is a fossil fuel and emits CO2, thus it isn't as good as renewables. Reality is however that despite Greens and others ideological attempts to demonise it, CSG offers large CO2 savings cf. current coal fired electricity. Especially in Australia's case vs. burning brown coal.
However the purists argue unless it is renewable it aint good! This of course misses the point that purity, like enlightenment, is a journey of constant improvement, NOT an instant arrival.
A recent meeting with a Greens politician elicited the public comment that he would rather see coal used for electricity generation in Australia for the next 10 years than allow CSG to entrench itself thus, in his view, further delaying renewables development.
I view this as incredibly short sighted. Gas + renewables (wind and rooftop PV) can reduce Australia's CO2 emissions from power generation by 70% and total emissions by almost 10%.
Unless someone was wearing idealogical blinkers why wouldn't you go down that path. Its probably acheivable within 10 years.
Gas complements the development of renewables in Australia.
comments
I don't get it- the science points to a disastrous change in the Australian continent with climate warming and these commenters quibble as if we can continue business as usual! As for coal seam gas, it is still an important contributor to greenhouse, but if you about to make a fortune flogging it you would be tempted to paint it (falsely) as a greenhouse solution
Recepi for disaster, to test Labor parliamentarians
Our war chest was bulging with reserves and no debt at the time of the recent GFC, but our economics are precariously different in the current global financial climate. Thus, letting Milne loose with $10 billion CEFC for pet renewable schemes to replace fossil fuels which she turned her back on, is a folly.
The government will introduce the carbon tax legislation in parliament next week and the chances are that it will be passed by both houses by Christmas which is not a pleasant thought for the New Year and can adversely affect our lifestyles of generations to come.
Ghosts of Climate Past.
Ther Greens are a funny lot.they talk about full frank discusion but here they are prepared to stop it. One does not have to go back far to listen to their complaints when they were on the recieving end.
The greens seem to be running this issue without any accountabilty,the independents are just as bad. Where is our fearless press dealing with this NOWHERE
Irony....yep..
When those who see only renewables as the future get for what they wish (Chinese curse is it?) Australia will be compelled to increase coal, gas and uranium exports to pay for it. Nobody believes for a second that we will have a multi-billion export business in renewables..do they??
Sweet.....and that meets the definition of situtational irony - incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs
Did Milne say anything worthwhile?
It's hardly surprising that Senator Milne "seemed particularly incensed" by Grant King's statements. But did her criticisms stack up?