CEFC sees limited role for gas in high renewable grid | RenewEconomy

CEFC sees limited role for gas in high renewable grid

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

CEFC sees limited role for gas generation in high renewables grid in Australia, due to competition from solar, high costs, and carbon risks.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Clean Energy Finance Corp sees a limited role for gas-fired generation in Australia in a high renewables grid, and instead wants more focus on reforming market signals, transmission and grid infrastructure, and energy storage.

In its submission to the Finkel Review, the CEFC also repeats its assertion that coal-fired generation will not likely get any private financing support at acceptable rates, and argues that numerous reports point to the fact that high levels of renewable energy can be incorporated into the grid.


The Finkel Review is shaping up to be a major blueprint for the reform of Australia’s energy markets, and whether the country will accelerate its push into new, smart technologies, or throw the brakes on in an effort to protect established fossil fuel interests.

The federal government has indicated it would like the CEFC to invest in new coal-fired generation, and this week the main oil and gas lobby, APPEA, argued in its submission to Finkel that the CEFC should also support gas-fired generation. Other fossil fuel generation companies echoed those calls.

But CEFC chief executive Oliver Yates says any new fossil-fuel generation in Australia would be unlikely to find private sector finance at an acceptable cost.

“While there are several proposals in the market for new gas-fired generators in Australia, our observations indicate that it is challenging to find long-term domestic gas supply agreements to support new investment,” the submission says.

It notes that gas prices – which have already jumped sharply thanks to new LNG export facilities – are expected to rise significantly further in real terms over the next 15 years as international demand increasingly determines Australian domestic gas prices.

In addition, peaking gas-fired generation is likely to be sidelined by new large-scale and rooftop solar installations, which will change daily electricity generation profiles. On top of this, gas-fired generation is likely to have a shorter economic life under future carbon constraints.

Instead, the CEFC wants more emphasis on encouraging energy storage, demand management, and upgraded transmission.

It appears to support renewable energy auctions, of the type used by the ACT, in limited quantities by Queensland and Victoria, and in many other countries, to support renewable energy projects, and to value system services such as energy storage and dispatchability.

“Auctions use market competition and discipline to keep downward pressure on project costs, and long-term contracts with government counterparts …  provide certainty over revenues which in turn reduces financing costs,” it says.

“Staging periodic auctions on a multi-year timetable ensures that contracts capture reductions in technology costs, attract new project developers to the market to increase competition and allow the procurement process to respond to changes in market needs over time.”

The CEFC also notes that wind and solar plants can be built relatively quickly, meaning that the electricity system is “capable of rapid transformation” and is likely to bear a larger share of the national emissions reduction burden in the early years of Australia’s shift to a low-carbon economy.

Technology costs for wind, solar and battery storage continue to fall, and a number of major studies in recent years have confirmed no technical barriers, a point highlighted by Finkel in his preliminary report.

“The studies have found that while an increasing share of renewables will mean changes to the way the grid is managed, there are no technical barriers to achieving energy security with a very high share of renewables,” the CEFC submission said.

But it also said that if “ageing coal-fired generation capacity” is withdrawn before new renewable energy capacity is available to meet the shortfall, prices are likely to be higher and more volatile.

Because of this, it was important to facilitate a smooth transition to a high-renewables system and avoid price spikes, using policies that support early investment in renewables to prepare in advance for coal capacity withdrawals, and investment in energy storage and transmission.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

  1. Rob G 3 years ago

    The amusing thing here is, IF the coalition DO bring in a ETS of sorts their terrible poll numbers may very well improve. But alas, their own ideology will keep them in the wrong camp. I see the ALP returning to power and cancelling all the silly plans – like the 1 Billion dollar rail line to the Gallie Basin coal mine. The Andrews government did such a cancellation in Victoria. (Policy uncertainty also affects coal planning making it even more un-bankable)

    • solarguy 3 years ago

      And the angles will sing! And so will I.

  2. MaxG 3 years ago

    I am waiting for the CEFC to get defunded… would fit the LNP profile…

    • Malcolm M 3 years ago

      As part of the LNP’s policy at the last election, the CEFC would provide ~$250 m/year for new technology start-ups, and ~$200 m over 10 years for investments that would help the Barrier Reef. These have been conveyed to the CEFC by a Ministerial directive. However the current legislation only has one remaining tranche of $2b for the CEFC, which is due 1 July 2017. To fulfill the Coalition’s Barrier Reef commitment, they will need to introduce new legislation to extend the life of the CEFC. The current legislation also has limits to the scope of Ministerial directive, such as not covering carbon capture and storage, nor investments with a carbon emission profile above the average of the current generation fleet. There is also a target of an above market return on investment. So for any legislation to extend the life of the CEFC to pass the Senate, the limits of Ministerial control would likely need to remain.

    • Ren Stimpy 3 years ago

      Or they’ll replace the current CEO with Dick Warburton later this year.

    • stalga 3 years ago

      I think it would be fair to say that, after failing to eliminate it, they are now trying to white-ant it.

  3. Chris Fraser 3 years ago

    Bring on the higher share of renewables. It looks like gas generation would be utilised less. But it also appears gas has a role for now during rare evening peaks if all the wind is becalmed (unlikely given location of turbines everywhere), its very hot, and all the household batteries run low.This would also be effective from an operational point of view … 1) The gas generators will have all day to maintain themselves, improving reliability and put out various fires, and 2) They can start up quickly – this will give AEMO plenty of time to decide if they want them.

  4. solarguy 3 years ago

    A plan is the first step and that should have been by now. YEAH I know why it hasn’t happened. but now is a great time to plan FF phase out. Let’s get on with it Mal.

  5. Ian 3 years ago

    Rapid wind, solar and battery storage technological improvements and cost reductions, rapid and scalable deployment. Increasing fossil fuel prices and future carbon constraints. That is the reality. Any government or government official that deviates from this and insists on new FF investment will be called to account. Can we afford to spend billions of Dollars on stranded assets?

  6. John 3 years ago

    Clean Energy Finance Corp rejects Federal Government’s view on renewables causing blackouts

Comments are closed.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.