Turnbull government grossly misuses report by Australian Energy Market Operator
The Turnbull-Frydenberg investment bank: Bullying, cronyism and 
Captain’s picks http://reneweconomy.com.au/turnbull-frydenberg-investment-bank-bullying-cronyism-captains-picks-46765/ By David Leitch on 11 September 2017 Bullying, cronyism and Captain’s picks instead of policyThere is almost universal agreement that carbon policy is or should be a Federal issue.
That is clearly something that the Federal Government should be involved in as it involves Australia’s international status and obligations. But that is the one area that the Federal Government is not touching.
Despite Finkel, despite our COP 21 obligations, the Federal Government does nothing. No electricity policy, no vehicle emission standards, no policy in other areas of the economy responsible for half of Australia’s emissions.
Gross misuse of AEMO report for political purposes
Perhaps the very worst thing, of the many to choose from, about the Liddell negotiation is the gross misuse of the AEMO report. This is only possible because the media is too busy, to put it kindly, to do its homework.
The definition of a “problem” is when forecast “Unserved Energy (blackouts)” exceeds the desired reliability standard. That is not the whole story, but if you want one metric, it’s that.
Unfortunately, AEMO didn’t draw its graph relating to NSW all that clearly. We have attempted to do better, [graph on original] using the .xls data that AEMO provides. AEMO does not forecast a problem and if more renewables are built, the standard will be easily met.
Liddell move emboldens the pro coal, pro socialization, anti private enterprise groups – i.e. the National party and right of the Liberals
Turnbull’s naked interference, partly symbolic, has emboldened the anti-climate change cheer lobby. Examples include:
Over the weekend we saw The National Party has passed a motion that is essentially anti a Clean Energy Target.
In NSW energy minister Don Harwin’s public statements about the need for more renewables, see this article and the NSW Government’s “aspirational” zero carbon policy by 2050 have been shown up in their true light by Premier Gladys Berijiklian’s statement that NSW is “not ruling out a new coal fired power station”
“Asked if the state government will pay to keep Liddell open beyond 2022, Mr Berejiklian said: “We’ve not come to any conclusions regarding that. Obviously we are interested in the federal government’s announcements.”
Ms Berejiklian lashed South Australia for going rogue and piling into renewables, despite their inability to cope with peak demands.
A third option, which many believe is the only viable alternative, is for NSW to build its own new coal-fired power station.
“I’m not going to rule it out,” the Premier said yesterday.” Source: Daily Telegraph, Sep 10
Interference in the market using Federal money instead of policy development
Despite the virtually universal endorsement of the “Finkel Report”, despite the electricity industry, including the large coal generators, and also the growing band of renewable investors and consumers, in coalition with many but not all energy consumers the Federal Govt has been unable to progress industry policy in a way that provides an investment confidence.
It has been unable to form policy consistent with our international obligations.
So what is the alternative? It’s to be populist and interfere in the market – similar to say Venezuala’s recent policy developments – or as if Turnbull had Russian Presidential powers.
It’s not as if Turnbull has a great record on micro managing public investment, you can find plenty of critics of the NBN for instance. Let’s look at some of the “Captain’s picks” that are just announced on the floor of parliament as “done deals”
Snowy 2.0: $8-$10 billion
The Federal Govt’s only historic investment in electricity was its 13% investment in Snowy Hydro. Now in order to subsidize a minimum $2 bn, and likely more, investment in pumped hydro, the Federal Govt is proposing to spend $5bn-$6bn buying the NSW Govt and Vic Govt out of Snowy.
The Federal Govt has no experience in electricity generation. Snowy is also the 4th largest retailer by customer numbers and the Federal Govt has no experience in electricity retailing.
The pumped hydro project has not gone through any competitive process for funding in the way that say CSP or nearly anything has to.
Our studies of pumped hydro show that it needs about $90 MWh differential between peak and offpeak to be profitable. How can anyone really know whether that will be on offer when this plant is built?
No private sector operator would do it now. This purchase and the subsequent investment should be open to far more public scrutiny. At least $2 bn of transmission will be needed to support the investment.
However, as large as that investment is, and as risky as it is, a case can be made that in a world of high renewables where there was lots of zero marginal cost PV in the middle of the day a pumped hydro investment could be of use.
We are not in that world today and there is no plan to get to that world in the future. Pumped hydro, like batteries, consume about 25% more electricity than they produce. If that electricity is being produced by coal there is little more that can be said.
Snowy is a gamble with taxpayer funds, Liddell is a gift of taxpayer funds to one private sector operator
Snowy 2.0 is an $8 billion plus gamble with Federal money, but subsidizing Liddell using Federal money to enrich one private sector operator as an effective massive bonus to entice them to buy and take over a coal fired station is basically disgraceful. We list some of the issues below.
All we can say though is it leaves a bad smell. If Turnbull thinks these investments are such a good idea, raise some private capital and do it yourself. Or at least get the States to do it. It is just not a Federal issue to be running State power stations and interfering in the market.
Meddling in business because you can’t do politics
The proposed Federal subsidy to one private sector operator to keep a coal fired generator open in NSW is open to criticism on many grounds. The list includes.
- It’s totally incompatible with Australia’s international COP 21 commitment to reduce emissions by 28% by 2030. How can keeping a coal station power station going from 2022-2027 or 2032 do anything other than harm that goal.
- It potentially hands say West Australian GST proceeds to one private sector operator to build a bigger position in the Australian electricity market. Kerry Packer RIP, once famously said on selling Channel 9, that you only get one Alan Bond. Trevor St Baker must be thinking you only get one Malcolm Turnbull. Turnbull and St Baker do share one thing in common. They both live in houses with lots of PV and batteries. And yet exploit everyone else to sell them coal fired electricity.
- It potentially changes the sale of Loy Yang B. According to press reports one of about 2 bidders left for LYB was Delta’s owner, Sunset Power. Press reports state Sunset was having some difficulty getting bank finance. This could play out as Sunset finding it easier to get bank finance if its backed by the Federal Government Turnbull/Fydenberg investment bank, or it could lead Sunset to say, we won’t bother with LYB and the private sector we’ll just take the Government money and run Liddell.
- Maybe the Federal Govt could buy LYB as well? If you are going to nationalize the electricity industry why stop with just Snowy and Liddell, surely you need a position in Victoria? After all there are endless free taxpayer dollars to be used.
- It will make new generation investment in NSW less likely. If the Government is prepared to do all the work and increase private sector risk why invest. High prices at present, and the expected closure of Liddell are creating a strong investment incentive in NSW.
- Ditto, it makes the job of getting the 1 GW capacity reserve built
- There is no identified need to keep Liddell open. AEMO does not forecast an energy supply issue in NSW.
In any case forecasting the post 2022 electricity market is just a guess. We all know that.- It totally hands all the cards to AGL. AGL has been a good steward of the Macgen and LYA coal assets. Its worked hard on their costs and reliability, it’s come to the party on bailing out Portland smelter and it is doing a bit, albeit not a big bit, to get some new renewables built. Its also potentially helping with gas by getting Cribb Point on the agenda.
- AGL will not want to sell Liddell to a competitor. Never mind the potential increase in competition, it will also complicated the coal position. AGL’s coal supply is set up on the assumption Liddell will close. Its and everyone else’s coal prices will be higher if Liddell stays open. How much higher, hard to say, but we think there are escalators in some of the Macgen contracts which would drive conservation of coal all else being equal.
Australia’s (?stupid) National Party wants: nuclear power, guns, and stop renewable energy
Nationals defend guns, nuclear and no money for renewables http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-government/nationals-defend-guns-nuclear-and-no-money-for-renewables/news-story/fccee1d11fd41d5138976df937ea4a3e, Renee Viellaris, The Courier-Mail, September 9, 2017 TESTY Nationals will today demand governments get their hands off their guns, call for nuclear energy to be adopted and freeze subsidies for renewable energy.
Julie Bishop in pro uranium session with CEO of failed miner Paladin!
Julie Bishop helps promote African uranium with Australian zombie miner, Independent Australia Dave Sweeney Better known for her support for asbestos, why is Julie Bishop fronting an African mining conference beside uranium miner John Borshoff, who ran Paladin Energy into insolvency and called Fukushima a “sideshow”?
NO DOUBT, tall tales and cocktails will both flow at this week’s Africa Down Under mining conference in Perth, an annual event that sees Australian politicians join their African counterparts alongside a melange of miners, merchants and media.
But it is unlikely that too many of these will be the stories of corruption, dirty dealing and corner cutting that are so common in the world of resource extraction, especially in the developing or majority world.
Earlier this decade the Human Rights Law Resource Centre found that many
‘Australian companies, particularly mining companies, can have a severe impact on human rights throughout the world, including the right to food, water, health and a clean environment. Despite this, successive governments lack a clear framework of human rights obligations for Australian corporations operating overseas. This is particularly problematic in countries with lax or limited regulations.’
The operations and impacts of one embattled Australian miner highlights the point. For years, Paladin Energy was a bullish uranium promoter, now in the wake of the Fukushima nuclear disaster it has joined the zombie companies — the walking corporate dead.
For a few short years, Paladin, headed by the John Borshoff, a man reminiscent of Les Patterson with a drill-rig, operated the Kayelekera Uranium Mine in Malawi.
Borshoff was clear in his rationale stating that the
“Australians and the Canadians have become over-sophisticated in their environmental and social concerns over uranium mining — the future is in Africa.”
The contested mine was a focus of sustained criticism from community and civil society groups before being placed into extended ‘care and maintenance’ following the collapse in global demand and the freefall in the uranium commodity price that followed Fukushima.
Borshoff termed the Australian uranium fuelled Fukushima meltdown a “sideshow”. Not true, although Paladin were always clowns. But never funny ones.
The company is now in administration and a complicated planned bailout involving a Chinese takeover of a shrinking Namibian uranium project has failed. So now, as the creditors circle, who cleans up after the party? What priority will be given to addressing the disrupted and damaged country and communities around Kayelekera?
All good questions to ask John Borshoff, who is presenting Africa Down Under in a session with Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. But don’t hold your breath. This year he will wear a different hard hat. Paladin is the past and the future now is Deep Yellow — a junior miner with ambitions in Namibia. The caravan moves on with scarcely a glance behind.
Paladin’s ambition and appetite always exceeded its capacity and competence and now the gap between its inflated promises and its profound under-performance is absolute.
As the senior Mirarr Traditional Owner Yvonne Margarula reflected about her experience with the uranium sector in Kakadu:
”The promises never last, the problems always do.”………
The absence of a robust regulatory regime in many African countries can see situations where Australian companies are engaged in activities that would not be acceptable practise at home.
Paladin’s boom to bust case study is a further clear example of the lack of independent scrutiny of the uranium sector that also reflects poorly on the activities of Australian miners operating in nations with limited governance and regulatory capacity.
The mining sector always makes a difference, but it is not always a positive one. Especially given that many of the Australian company’s active in the African mining sector are juniors with limited capacity, scant accountability and little or no operational experience or proven compliance history.
In 2015, Tracey Davies, a lawyer with the South African-based Centre for Environmental Rights told Fairfax Media of the widespread and
“… very strong perception that when Australian mining companies come here they take every advantage of regulatory and compliance monitoring weaknesses, and of the huge disparity in power between themselves and affected communities, and aim to get away with things they wouldn’t even think of trying in Australia.”
There are too many examples of Australian mining activities in Africa ending in corruption, environmental damage or community disruption for us to simply accept pro-industry rhetoric. There is a clear need for increased transparency, responsibility and support for affected communities. And a clear need for independent proof, not industry promises.
Africa Down Under cannot be allowed to be an uncritical platform for Plunder Down Under.
Dave Sweeney is the Australian Conservation Foundation‘s nuclear free campaigner. You can follow him on Twitter @nukedavesweeney. https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/julie-bishop-helps-promote-african-uranium-with-australian-zombie-miner,10694#.WbH-ZD_xgOU.twitter
CSIRO a paid-up member of Minerals Council, which fights climate change action
Science agency stands in contrast to Australia’s biggest polluter, AGL, which parted ways with MCA over climate change, Guardian, Michael Slezak, 6 Sept 17, The Australian government’s science agency, the CSIRO, has paid tens of thousands of dollars to peak mining lobby group the Minerals Council of Australia, which fights against government action on climate change.
The CSIRO has been listed as an “associate member” of the Minerals Council of Australia (MCA) since at least 2004 and new documents obtained by the Australian Institute, under freedom of information laws, show that in 2017 the “annual subscription” for membership was just under $10,000.
The mining lobby plays a vocal role in Australian climate change policy debates and the positions it takes are on the extreme end of the spectrum and include pushing for more coal power stations to be built.
The CSIRO continues to be a member of the MCA despite even Australia’s biggest climate polluter, AGL, publicly parting ways with the Minerals Council of Australia in 2016, saying it did so because of the positions the MCA took on climate change.
“AGL’s positions on climate change and renewable energy differed from those held by the Minerals Council of Australia … and AGL has elected not to renew its membership,” the company said in its 2016 sustainability report.
CSIRO declined to answer specific questions about how long it had been a member, what the cost had been and what the CSIRO got in return for membership. A CSIRO spokesman instead gave a statement, published in full below. [on original] …….
CSIRO has come under fire in recent years for a perception it has not been giving fearless advice to the public and to government on climate-related issues. At the same time, the organisation has cracked down on employees who themselves seek to speak publicly on policy issues……
ohn Church, a world-leading climate scientist who was made redundant in the organisation’s 2016 job cuts and who was one of the disgruntled employees in the leaked emails, told the Guardian CSIRO’s membership of the MCA was in contradiction to its refusal to engage in policy debates.
“I would definitely say there was a conflict,” Church said. “CSIRO is putting itself in a position where it is implicitly supporting particular policy positions by being a member of the Minerals Council.
“They should not only be independent but be seen to be independent.”
A senior climate scientist still at the CSIRO told the Guardian that currently it is almost impossible for climate scientists there to speak publicly about policy…….
Other public organisations with associate membership of MCA include ANSTO Minerals and the University of Western Australia……ANSTO Minerals, part of the government-owned Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation is also an associate member of the Minerals Council and a spokesman said ANSTO was a member of the Uranium Forum of the MCA and also sits on the radiation protection working group…..https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/06/csiro-member-minerals-council-which-fights-climate-change-action
Turnbull government encouraging mining, funds exploration
Turnbull invests $100m to secure mining investment, drive discoveries, The Age, 2 sept 17, The Turnbull government will commit $100 million to secure private investment in greenfield mineral exploration across the country to drive a new wave of discoveries and restart the flagging mining sector in its west.
WA had been the biggest beneficiary of the once-in-a-century mining boom during the first decade of the 2000s and into the start of this decade, but has become the country’s worst-performing economy as mining investment abated…..
Speaking at the Western Australian Liberal Party conference in Perth on Saturday, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull announced new tax incentives for junior exploration companies in a move he said would encourage investment and “risk taking”.
Turnbull said the new Junior Mineral Exploration Tax Credit (JMETC) would allow the tax losses in greenfield exploration companies to be distributed as a credit to Australian resident shareholders.
Mining lobby out to silence environmental charities
In its submission, MCA outlined the importance of ensuring all organisations engaged in political advocacy were subject to the same rules of transparency.
“While political parties are obliged to disclose the source of donations greater than $13,200, environmental groups can spend millions of dollars every year without having to disclose the identities or locations of their donors,” the submission said.
“This lack of transparency constitutes a potential threat to Austalia’s [sic] sovereignty, by allowing foreign interests to exert political influence by covertly funding domestic environmental groups.”
This comes as the Australia Institute released a discussion paper last Friday, which examined the mining industry’s own tax-deductible advocacy and found it to be controlled by foreign interests.
“The mining industry is 86 per cent foreign owned and has spent over $541 million in the last 10 years on lobbying Australian governments through its peak lobby groups, which are dominated by foreign interests,” the paper said.
“The MCA lobbies to maintain subsidies and tax concessions for mining companies which costs Australian taxpayers billions every year.”
The Australia Institute found that the decision-making bodies of industry lobby groups were dominated by representatives from foreign owned companies, which were having an undue effect on government policy.
“By influencing Australian government decision-making through spending hundreds of millions of dollars on political donations and lobbying, foreign mining companies are attempting to have their corporate interests prioritised over the interests of Australian communities, environments and industries. This level of influence can distort sound economic policy making,” the paper said…….
Paul Sinclair, the campaign director at the Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF), told Pro Bono News the Australia Institute report revealed the damaging effect of the mining lobby’s political advocacy. “Donors don’t give money to political parties for no reason, many of them expect a policy outcome,” Sinclair said.
“The Australia Institute report shows there is a clear correlation between donations being made by mining companies and policy outcomes like destroying the price on pollution that was pushing down Australia’s pollution levels.”
He said the mining lobby’s push to limit the advocacy activities of environmental groups would have a disastrous effect on these organisations.
“If the ACF was banned from using more than 10 per cent of our expenditure on advocacy, we would cease to be the organisation that Australians have supported for over 50 years,” Sinclair said……https://probonoaustralia.com.au/news/2017/09/environmental-charities-engaged-bitter-stand-off-mining-lobby-advocacy/
Greens warn Labor not to do clean energy deal that protects coal power
Guardian, Katherine Murphy, 4 Sept 17, Opposition told to be wary of doing a Finkel review deal with the Coalition that would prolong the life of coal plants The Greens are attempting to warn Labor off doing a deal with the Turnbull government on a new clean energy target, saying a Finkel handshake could trigger a “valley of death” for short-term investment in renewables, and lock in coal, rather than stranding it.
With parliament due to resume on Monday, and with the Turnbull government inching closer to finally resolving and outlining its energy policy, the Greens climate change spokesman, Adam Bandt, will bring forward a bill to prolong and expand the existing renewable energy target scheme.
While the Bandt bill won’t win parliamentary support, in political terms, it is a clear shot across Labor’s bow as the opposition begins to assess whether or not to sign on to the clean energy target – in the event the Coalition overcomes its internal brawl, and proposes one…….https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/sep/04/greens-warn-labor-not-to-do-clean-energy-deal-that-protects-coal-power
Minerals Council to lobby Malcolm Turnbull in favour of nuclear power
Turnbull faces new push for nuclear power, news.com.au , SEPTEMBER 1, 2017 Malcolm Turnbull faces calls to remove legal hurdles for nuclear power in a report giving the government advice on ensuring enough baseload power for future electricity needs.
The Minerals Council, which will host the prime minister at its annual dinner in Canberra next Wednesday, has released a paper setting out the case for nuclear power. Nuclear power has relatively strong support among coalition MPs, but it remains a political hot potato and has been repeatedly ruled out by governments because of its cost.
The paper, Removing the Prohibition on Nuclear Power, by the Minerals Council’s Daniel Zavattiero says Australia is trying to build a reliable, affordable and low emissions electricity system with “one hand tied behind its back”.
Having been banned in 1998, the paper suggests the ban could be lifted with a single amendment to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, removing four words – “a nuclear power plant”.
However, any projects would still have to meet stringent environmental and safety requirements.
Mr Zavattiero said a new generation of venture-capital backed nuclear start-ups are coming through, with designs for smaller reactors with significantly reduced up-front costs.
“Any objective science-based discussion devoid of hyperbole and emotion invariably finds that nuclear power is clean, economic and reliable, that it plays a vital role in the world today, will continue to do so in the future, and that it makes no sense for it to be banned in Australia,’ Vimy Resources chief Mike Young said.
A review of the electricity sector by chief scientist Alan Finkel found that while nuclear power had zero emissions “any development will require a significant amount of time to overcome social, legal, economic and technical barriers” and deal with the waste issue……..http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/turnbull-faces-new-push-for-nuclear-power/news-story/13f1fa010017160b8c72ebbf340e03ab
Tony Abbott to join Britain’s Nigel Lawson in climate denial lecturing in Britain
Tony Abbott to lecture leading climate-change sceptic think tank, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/tony-abbott-to-lecture-leading-climatechange-sceptic-think-tank/news-story/ce897ce09992d942256245dd08edf0fd, GRAHAM LLOYD, 1 Sept 17, Former prime minister Tony Abbott will give the annual lecture to one of the world’s leading climate change sceptic think tanks, the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London.
The title of Mr Abbott’s address will be “Daring to doubt”.
The invitation-only lecture will be held at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers in Birdcage Walk, London, on October 9. Mr Abbott will follow John Howard who addressed the foundation’s lecture in 2013 with a speech “One religion is enough”.
The foundation is chaired by former Thatcher government treasurer Lord Nigel Lawson.
The foundation is one of the world’s most active groups promoting debate about the state of climate change science.
It republishes articles and material both supportive and against the mainstream science view and commissions research on climate change-related issues.
The foundation is funded by private donations and does not accept gifts from energy companies or anyone with a significant interest in an energy company.
Mr Abbott’s spokeswoman said the trip would be privately funded by the foundation
Minerals Council wants “clean” “affordable” nuclear power for Australia
Australia should add nuclear to the clean energy mix: Minerals Council, SMH, James Massola. 1 Sept 17, Australia should develop a nuclear power industry to reduce its emissions, the Minerals Council says, and the Turnbull government should take the first step by removing legal road blocks.
In a new paper titled Removing the Prohibition on Nuclear Power, the lobby group argues just four words – “a nuclear power plant” – need to be cut from the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Act to begin clearing the legal path to the development of a nuclear industry…….
Most contentiously, it argues the technology is safe, citing a British study by Friends of the Earth – a claim opponents would dispute by highlighting the Fukushima, Chernobyl and Three Mile Island disasters – and affordable, which opponents would also dispute.
The call to re-think the prohibition on nuclear power comes as the Turnbull government grapples with how, or whether, to implement a post-2020 clean energy target, as recommended by Chief Scientist Alan Finkel’s review of the electricity sector.
It also comes after Fairfax Media revealed in March that at least one in 10 of Mr Turnbull’s MPs backed nuclear power to be part of Australia’s energy mix…….http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/australia-should-add-nuclear-to-the-clean-energy-mix-minerals-council-20170831-gy7ysq.html
Australian government watering down the climate recommendations of the Finkel energy report
Coalition watering down Finkel review climate ambitions, leaked document reveals
Draft implementation plan lacks electricity emissions trajectory, Paris agreement alignment and low-income subsidies, Guardian, Michael Slezak 31 Aug 17, The climate ambitions of the Finkel review appear to be being watered down by the government as it is implemented, according to a draft Coag Energy Council implementation strategy obtained by the Guardian.
The draft implementation plan removes a key recommendation for an agreed emissions trajectory for the electricity system, alignment with the Paris agreement and subsidised solar and batteries for low-income houses.
Sources tell the Guardian the document was prepared by the federal government and distributed to state and territory representatives on the morning of the meeting, leaving little time for state representatives to analyse it…..
At a teleconference on Friday last week, state and territory energy ministers were presented with a draft implementation plan for discussion.
That document, obtained by the Guardian, appears to water down those recommendations in relation to climate change, and removes some altogether.
One key recommendation in the Finkel review that has been severely weakened in the draft implementation document is a change that would force the electricity market to align efforts to meet government emissions reduction commitments made as part of the Paris agreement.
But the draft implementation document removes the reference to international emissions reduction commitments, instead saying merely that the agreement will “reaffirm Australian governments’ commitment to the [national electricity market] and a national, integrated approach to energy and emissions reduction policy”.
Among Finkel’s key recommendation for an “orderly transition”, he called for three things: the clean energy target; a three-year notice of closure for existing large generators; and “an agreed emissions reduction trajectory”. All three moves were part of one recommendation, numbered 3.2.
The Coalition has not agreed to adopt the clean energy target but it has agreed to the three-year notice-of-closure rule, which appears in the implementation plan. However, the plan does not contain any mention of an agreed emissions reduction trajectory…….
Another Finkel recommendation calls for low-income households to be given subsidised access to “energy efficient appliances, rooftop solar photovoltaic and battery storage systems”.
Explicit references to renewable energy has been removed in the draft implementation plan and replaced with “energy efficiency and demand management technologies”.
Sources say representatives of the ACT raised the question of the trajectory being removed, and asked for it to be included. Representatives of Queensland and Victoria also apparently raised concerns about some of the other changes.
Sources said the document, which was prepared by the federal government, was circulated to state energy ministers only hours before the meeting was held, leaving little time for proper scrutiny.
The document is expected to be finalised and sent to heads of government today. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/31/coalition-watering-down-finkel-review-climate-ambitions
Australian government cracking down on environmental activists
Charity crackdown would be a ‘torpedo’ to environmental groups, Bob Brown says, ABC, 7.30 , By Liz Hobday and Gus Goswell , 31 August 17, The Federal Government has denied it is trying to silence environmental activists, as prominent voices in the environment and charities sectors speak out against a series of regulatory changes.
Key points:
- Federal government is proposing changes to regulations dealing with charities
- Some environmental groups could face the loss of their tax-deductible charity status
- Charities concerned about appointment of coal seam gas company boss
- Government will not re-appoint charities commissioner
As Treasury canvasses a proposal to limit tax concessions for green groups, there have been changes at the top of the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC), including the appointment of Peter Hogan, chairman of coal seam gas company, Carbon Energy, to the regulator’s advisory board.
That has raised the ire of environment groups, many of which are registered charities.
“We’ve got the Turnbull Government arranging to put the fox in charge of the chicken coop,” former Australian Greens leader Bob Brown told 7.30……..
former ACNC advisory board member, and now head of the Community Council for Australia, David Crosbie says the sector is under attack.
“It feels, right now, there is a campaign to try and restrict the voice of charities,” he told 7.30.
“And there are a number of elements to that.”
Tax deductibility status at risk
Among the changes is a push to make environmental groups curb their activism or risk losing their charity taxation status. Continue reading
Australian govt -‘no plans’ to build or fund coal power, says PM Malcolm Turnbull
Malcolm Turnbull says Government has ‘no plans’ to build or fund coal power, ABC 28 Aug 17 By political reporter Henry Belot ,
Key points:
- The Coalition has accepted 49 of the 50 recommendations from the Finkel Report
- Barnaby Joyce, Tony Abbott among MPs wanting the CET to allow more coal power plants
- PM Malcolm Turnbull says his Government has funded green energy “to a large degree”
Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull says his Government has no plans to build a new coal-fired power station, and he wants to resolve a fractious debate over a clean energy target (CET) by the end of the year.
Malcolm Turnbull tries to look climate change good, with Snowy Hydro funding
Malcolm Turnbull to announce millions in funding for Snowy Hydro 2.0 pet project, The Age, James Massol, 27 Aug 17 Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is set to announce millions in extra funding for his pet project, Snowy Hydro 2.0, after visiting the power station on Monday morning. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull is set to announce millions in extra funding for his pet project, Snowy Hydro 2.0, after visiting the power station on Monday morning.
The announcement is due to be made in News Corp papers on Monday, but Fairfax Media has learnt the details ahead of time.
Mr Turnbull will attempt to focus on electricity prices and energy policy for the entire week ahead, in an attempt to shift focus away from the citizenship fiasco….
The feasibility study is due to be completed by the end of year; work is already under way on technical and drilling work and it will soon ramp up to be a 24-hour-a-day operation……
The expansion of Snowy Hydro, which will conservatively cost at least $2 billion and which will take at least four years to complete, is designed to provide power for an extra 500,000 homes when finished. The bill for the project could effectively double from $2 billion to $4 billion because of essential upgrades to power transmission lines into Melbourne and Sydney.
When completed, it will effectively function as a giant battery for the east coast electricity market and the new power station will have an estimated generation capacity of 2000 megawatts…..
ARENA began talks with Snowy Hydro about working on the project in February, about a month before the Prime Minister announced the project, and it is hoped the know-how the agency gains from working on Snowy Hydro 2.0 will be used on other pumped hydro storage projects.
The Commonwealth owns 13 per cent of the scheme, NSW 58 per cent and the Victorian government 29 per cent. http://www.theage.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/malcolm-turnbull-to-announce-millions-in-funding-for-snowy-hydro-20-pet-project-20170827-gy5042.html
Energy Minister Frydenberg stalling on decision about $110m Port Augusta solar thermal funds?
Frydenberg calls for advice on $110m Port Augusta solar thermal funds, REneweconomy
In a statement late Thursday, Frydenberg said he had written to SolarReserve asking for details about the proposal to spend $650 million building a 150MW solar tower plant with molten salt storage near the shuttered coal plants outside of Port Augusta.
“Solar thermal plants operate in a similar way to traditional fossil fuel power plants with steam spinning a conventional turbine, which means they can contribute to network stability and reliability when coupled with built-in storage,” Frydenberg noted.
A contract signed between SolarReserve and the South Australian government promises a price cap of $78/MWh for all the state government’s electricity needs, but the price is dependent on SolarReserve accessing the cheap equity on offer from the federal government.
That offer – made by both mainstream parties in the lead up to the last election – was reinforced in the federal budget by the Turnbull government as part of a tax policy deal with Senator Nick Xenophon.
However, the funds had yet to be allocated to any project. ARENA was tasked with seeking expressions of interest on the solar thermal funding for Port Augusta, but did not call for detailed proposals…..
“ARENA and the CEFC have a strong track record in supporting the commercialisation of emerging technologies and will use that expertise to take solar thermal to the next level in Australia,” he said in a statement.
The IPFA advises the Federal government on funding and financing solutions for nationally significant infrastructure across all sectors, including energy. http://reneweconomy.com.au/frydenberg-calls-for-advice-on-110m-port-augusta-solar-thermal-funds-54190/
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 