Last weekend was an exciting one for the Australian renewable energy industry: a sighting as rare as the Tasmanian Tiger, an Australian conservative political leader willing to talk out in support of renewables. They were thought to be extinct.
Tasmania’s Liberal leader Will Hodgman, seeking to get elected in a state poll on March 15, told The Australian on the weekend that he would fight Tony Abbott’s attempts to dilute or remove the renewable energy target.
He planned a “strong” push to ensure RET changes did not stymie the state’s key wind and hydro energy sectors.
Naturally, his position was welcomed by the Clean Energy Council, which pointed out that renewables will be a useful hedge against surging gas prices, and the current review is causing uncertainty for investors that want to back major solar, wind, bioenergy, hydro and other projects.
“Mr Hodgman clearly recognises the benefits renewable energy has brought to Tasmania,” CEC CEO David Green said in a statement. “The Apple Isle sources the majority of its power from renewables such as hydro, wind and solar.”
That Hodgman’s position is at odds with his colleagues on the mainland could be explained by the fact that, unlike other states such as Victoria, NSW, Queensland, and Western Australia, Tasmania is not beholden to a powerful domestic fossil fuel industry. It is no accident that the areas with the most progressive renewables policy, Tasmania, South Australia and the ACT, are those where the fossil fuel industry is non existent or not powerful.
Tasmania already sources around 90 per cent of its electricity from renewables, mostly due to its excellent hydro resources. The Labor state government wants to increase clean energy exports to the mainland by building more wind farms and a new sub-sea cable. The carbon price has been a boost to the state-owned, carbon-free electricity supplies, and any nobbling of the RET would sink its ambitions to expand its renewable projects.
Of course, some federal Coalition members would like to say they support renewables too, but only as a talking point. The position enunciated by the likes of environment minister Greg Hunt and his sidekick Simon Birmingham is that they support “20 per cent” renewables”, with the caveat that the target be subject to yet another review they know full well will see it removed, diluted, or delayed.
As Hunt, in a quite excellent speech to parliament in 2009, knows full well – uncertainty and delays in policy making can and do bring industries to a halt.
“We strongly support the concept of a 20 per cent renewable energy target,” he said at the time. “We believe in the potential of the great mirror fields of California, Nevada and Spain; in the potential of geothermal energy and in the potential of wave, tidal and algal energy to contribute to Australia’s and, indeed, the globe’s clean energy future.
“Clean energy is, with green carbon, one of the two most fundamental steps to dramatically reducing Australia’s net emissions. It is also about broadening the base of our energy security. Clean energy is also about creating jobs in rural Australia.”
Bravo. He also noted the impact of uncertainty and delay of the sort brought about by yet more reviews of the RET. Labor, it is quite true, faffed around for 18 months before it actually brought its legislation to parliament.
“The fourth thing we saw from the government—and this relates directly to this particular legislation—was to delay action on the renewable energy target by a year and a half. We are well over a year and a half into the life of this current government, and this legislation is only now being brought forward after we saw the collapse in the solar sector because of the combination of abolishing the rebate linked to the delay in this legislation. It is, simply, unacceptable.”
Quite. Simply. Unacceptable.
