PLEA Network

5 June 2017, Renew Economy, Finkel’s fine line through Australia’s testy power politics. It now seems certain that chief scientist Dr Alan Finkel will deliver a range of options for government policy makers when presenting his review to the COAG ministers and leaders this Friday. There will be mention of the emissions intensity scheme, but because a carbon price of any form is not on the menu of this Coalition government, other more “palatable” alternatives will be on offer, including a low emissions target, an option on pairing new renewables with storage or back-up and, possibly, a pathway for regulation. All have their merits. But as in any policy, the devil will be in the detail and the way these schemes are designed – for the future or the past. And it is going to be interesting to see how Finkel presents his case. Will it be his view of what should be done? Or will it be focused on what can be managed in the current political environment? Certainly, there is a growing chorus among politicians and the mainstream media that something should be done. But there is not a lot of thought into what these policies can actually achieve, even though they should obviously seek to meet climate targets and manage the energy transition efficiently and at lowest cost. The problem was that none of the institutions could bring themselves to actually say it: that wind and solar are by far cheaper than coal and gas and any “other low-carbon technologies”. The Australian Energy Markets Commission and the Climate Change Authority reinforced their support for an emissions intensity scheme (EIS), and only saw a low emissions target (LET) as a second-best measure. Once again, those recommendations simply reinforce preconceived ideas, and lousy modelling. Both institutions came out strongly in support of an EIS last year, but as we pointed out at the time, here and here, these positions were based on hopelessly pessimistic modelling inputs on the cost of solar and wind. Read More here