Australian news, and some related international items

Snowy Hydro plan – Turnbull camouflaging its renewable energy side from his colleagues

sometimes the leader of the nation can join the policy discussion only by disguising his good ideas in a drizabone and bush hat, lest they be recognised for what they are by his own colleagues.

It’s great news – but sadly, Turnbull’s hiding the greens under the mash, Guardian, 18 Mar 17  Lenore Taylor

Huge potential of pumped hydro at Snowy Mountains could pave the way for a 100% renewable energy grid, but don’t tell the prime minister’s colleagues “……This week the prime minister announced some details of a big idea he has been hinting at all year – the massive potential of pumped hydro to help solve Australia’s energy crisis.

But like a parent hiding the nutritious goodness of veggies under the familiar stodge of gravy and mash, he covered the truly exciting potential of his plan under the reassuring nostalgia of a revived “nation-building” Snowy Mountains scheme, complete with hard hat and hi-vis vest.

It was duly reported as a “blast from the past” and a “trip down memory lane” with much reassuring emphasis on the jobs that could be created and file footage of hard-working post-war immigrants.

But – if it works – this revived Snowy Mountains scheme could actually pave the way for a reliable 100% renewable energy grid. It could end all that talk about how we need super-duper extremely “clean” coal for “baseload” power. Once you can store and dispatch power at this scale, the whole idea of “baseload” has been overtaken. And this latest “push” for nuclear energy will be dead before the mining industry has a chance to wind up another million-dollar advertising campaign. If the feasibility studies are positive, it won’t be a “blast from the past” at all, it will be a big leap into the future.

Turnbull’s idea draws on modelling from Andrew Blakers and others at the Australian National University that showed wind, solar and pumped hydro storage was in fact the cheapest way to reliably replace the sputtering old coal-fired power stations, two-thirds of which will come to the end of their days over the next 20 years – cheaper than super-critical coal and also cheaper than gas, which will certainly be needed in the interim.

Turnbull knew this because he has spoken to Blakers a couple of times over the summer. He had the findings well before they were released in February. Blakers and his team are already mapping sites around the country where pumped hydro could work, with funding provided by Arena – the same body that is now studying the feasibility of the Snowy scheme and the same body that Tony Abbott wanted to abolish.

With 64% of voters telling the Essential report they believe renewable energy is “the solution to our energy needs” and 65% saying they approve of a 50% renewable energy target, and an idea to do even more than that in the palm of his hand, and $2bn (from somewhere or other) in the kitty to pay for it, a prime minister following the olden days’ script for building support for a policy would surely have shouted its virtues from the mountain top.

But even as Turnbull was considering it, the Coalition’s public script was still all about demonising renewables as part of an Abbott-style power price attack against Labor.

With Barnaby Joyce still insisting the idea of 50% renewable energy by 2030 is “bat poo crazy”, the prime minister had to muffle the news that it might be easily possible to go even further; he had to hide the greens under the mash. He mentioned renewables only in passing, concentrating instead on the whole nation-building schtick, apparently as part of a plan to quietly steer the policy debate back to somewhere within cooee of reason without his backbench noticing…….

now we are in a preposterous position where the Business Council of Australia, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the National Farmers Federation, the big energy users, Energy Networks Australia, international investors, the NSW Liberal government, the federal Labor party and conservation groups are all backing an emissions-intensity scheme, but the government has already pre-emptively rejected it because of the prejudices of some in its own party. The author of the review, chief scientist Alan Finkel, it seems, may recommend it anyway……

sometimes the leader of the nation can join the policy discussion only by disguising his good ideas in a drizabone and bush hat, lest they be recognised for what they are by his own colleagues.


March 19, 2017 - Posted by | AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, energy, politics

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: