13 July 2016, Renew Economy, Coalition’s myth about renewables and high electricity prices. Fear of rising electricity prices has been one of the mainstays of the Coalition’s re-election campaign: any efforts to increase the share of renewable energy – as proposed by Labor or even more dramatically by The Greens – or impose some sort of carbon price would end up as a Great Big Electricity Tax. Environment minister Greg Hunt is still at it: “And let me say that equally, we are the only ones that can protect against the electricity price rises that the ALP wants,” he told Melbourne radio 3AW in an interview on Tuesday. So, it should probably be seen as something of an irony that in the week after the July 3 poll, wholesale electricity prices shot to their highest levels on record – in most states averaging nearly double the average price when the carbon tax was in place. The reason, most analysts agree, lies mostly with the soaring price of gas, which has also hit record levels due to the impact of the massive LNG export facilities, and supply blockages in Queensland. But the Coalition is not blameless. Apart from being a hugely enthusiastic supporter of the gas export industry, it brought large-scale renewable energy investment to a halt for three years. As we shall see below, if the estimated 4,500MW of large-scale wind and solar that could have been built in that period had been built, then Australia would likely be enjoying much cheaper wholesale electricity prices today. And while the Coalition has railed against the expense of new renewables, the Labor minority government that runs the Australian Capital Territory has quietly been going about its target of sourcing 100 per cent of its electricity needs from renewable energy by 2020. Read More here
Tag Archives: Emissions
11 July 2016, The Guardian, Leaked TTIP energy proposal could ‘sabotage’ EU climate policy. EU proposal on a free trade deal with the US could curb energy saving measures and a planned switch to clean energy, say MEPs. The latest draft version of the TTIP agreement could sabotage European efforts to save energy and switch to clean power, according to MEPs. A 14th round of the troubled negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) free trade deal between the EU and US is due to begin on Monday in Brussels. A leak obtained by the Guardian shows that the EU will propose a rollback of mandatory energy savings measures, and major obstacles to any future pricing schemes designed to encourage the uptake of renewable energies. Environmental protections against fossil fuel extraction, logging and mining in the developing world would also come under pressure from articles in the proposed energy chapter. Join the Guardian Sustainable Business Aus network for news and features on the social and environmental impact of business, as well as other exclusive benefits. Paul de Clerck, a spokesman for Friends of the Earth Europe, said the leaked document: “is in complete contradiction with Europe’s commitments to tackle climate change. It will flood the EU market with inefficient appliances, and consumers and the climate will foot the bill. The proposal will also discourage measures to promote renewable electricity production from wind and solar.” The European commission says that the free trade deal is intended to: “promote renewable energy and energy efficiency – areas that are crucial in terms of sustainability”. The bloc has also promised that any agreement would support its climate targets. In the period to 2020, these are binding for clean power and partly binding for energy efficiency, in the home appliance and building standards sectors. But the draft chapter obliges the two trade blocs to: “foster industry self-regulation of energy efficiency requirements for goods where such self-regulation is likely to deliver the policy objectives faster or in a less costly manner than mandatory requirements”. Read More here
5 July 2016, Renew Economy, Hidden climate report could help Malcolm find the middle. The Climate Change Authority report that some suspected was buried by the Australian government to save it from policy embarrassment during the election campaign, could now make it easier for prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to find the middle ground in a minority government, or one ruling with a razor-thin majority. The CCA report had been expected to be released in late June, but was delayed until after the election, to the obvious relief of the government. So, too, was a report on options for the electricity sector, which had been due for release in April or May, and which leaked reports suggest strongly supported some form of mandatory carbon price. Those reports by the CCA, despite its board being stacked by Turnbull government appointees following the resignation of former chairman Bernie Fraser and other directors, would not have suited the Coalition election platform. They were expected to reaffirm the position that Australia was trailing the world in emission reductions, needed to do more, and would need to adopt a carbon price. And, they would likely note, this would not be anywhere near as expensive as many suggest. That, of course, would not have helped the Coalition election platform, which was to continue with its much criticised Direct Action program, and to lambast any proposals by Labor and the Greens for an economy-wide carbon price and higher renewable energy targets. Read More here
30 June 2016, NASA. Why a half-degree temperature rise is a big deal. The Paris Agreement, which delegates from 196 countries hammered out in December 2015, calls for holding the ongoing rise in global average temperature to “well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels,” while “pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C.” How much difference could that half-degree of wiggle room (or 0.9 degree on the Fahrenheit scale) possibly make in the real world? Quite a bit, it appears. The European Geosciences Union published a study in April 2016 that examined the impact of a 1.5 degree Celsius vs. a 2.0 C temperature increase by the end of the century, given what we know so far about how climate works. It found that the jump from 1.5 to 2 degrees—a third more of an increase—raises the impact by about that same fraction, very roughly, on most of the phenomena the study covered. Heat waves would last around a third longer, rain storms would be about a third more intense, the increase in sea level would be approximately that much higher and the percentage of tropical coral reefs at risk of severe degradation would be roughly that much greater. But in some cases, that extra increase in temperature makes things much more dire. At 1.5 C, the study found that tropical coral reefs stand a chance of adapting and reversing a portion of their die-off in the last half of the century. But at 2 C, the chance of recovery vanishes. Tropical corals are virtually wiped out by the year 2100. Read More here