Antinuclear

Renewable Energy Development Program (REDP) stumbles, with Martin Ferguson in charge

Does Ferguson have it in for Renewables? Climate Spectator, 23 Aug 2012 Tristan Edis Yesterday the Australian National Audit Office provided us with yet another damning indictment  on a grant tendering program administered by the Australian government bureaucracy – the Renewable Energy Development Program (REDP).

Energy Minister Martin Ferguson is probably the last person in the current government that you’d want to task with fostering the development of the renewable energy industry. His passion clearly lies more with pulling fossil fuels out of the ground, than keeping them there.
But as the saying goes: ‘when you have a choice between a conspiracy
and a cock-up – take a cock-up every time’. And this has never been
more applicable than in the case of Australian government carbon
reduction and clean energy grant tendering programs.
The biggest problem with the REDP, which the ANAO barely mentions, is
that it hasn’t actually got much to show for itself after several
years. Of the six projects awarded a total of $329.4 million in grants
under the program, only two are showing any sign of contributing a
megawatt-hour to the grid…..
This is not just bureaucratic nitpicking. We should rightly ask for
detailed documentation justifying why particular projects were
favoured over others, when several of the winning applicants quite
clearly fell short of the minimum tender requirements specified by the
government.
The Hydro Tasmania hybrid wind, solar and biofuels project located on
the small and remote grid on King Island clearly does not meet the
requirement for projects to be large, utility scale.
Also the two geothermal projects, as well as the wave project, were
awarded grants even though they were still to resolve major
uncertainties around technological viability and performance.
Does this mean these technologies shouldn’t have received support? Not
necessarily.
But “technology neutral” tendering programs providing grants to
large-scale demonstration projects aren’t the way to drive advancement
in renewable energy.  Each technology-type is vastly different in
terms of its key challenges, technological readiness and funding
requirements. Some aren’t ready for commercial-scale demonstration,
but if that’s the only money that’s on offer, then they’ll pretend
that they are. And government, in its anxiousness to have something to
show from its program, will go along with the charade. But once the
press releases are out, government will then insert all manner of
conditions on funding to cover their backsides.
There is a need to take a more strategic, long-term approach to
renewable energy that uses a mixture of programs to support
technologies along the various stages of technological maturity from
idea to widespread market deployment. This needs to be complemented
with a well-informed, long-term strategy for each technology the
government intends to support.
This should be ARENA’s first priority, and must be undertaken in co-operation with the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/does-ferguson-have-it-renewables

August 24, 2012 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy