Policy & Planning

Our energy market was never fit for purpose, because it was obsessed only with price

Published by

The Energy Security Board and Australian Energy Market Operator are beginning to frame the design of our post-2025 electricity market.

This supposedly reflects the view that our present market design is “no longer” fit for purpose.

Let’s be clear: it was never ‘fit for purpose’ from the day the Victorian market began in the mid-1990s, followed by the National Electricity Market.

In 1992, the State Electricity Commission of Victoria published scenarios showing how iit could achieve a 20% reduction in emissions by 2005, using experience from its Demand Management Action Program and renewables: for example the SECV and Victorian Solar Council had installed our first ‘large’ grid- connected wind generator at Breamlea, near Geelong, in the mid-1980s.

Then the economic fundamentalists and ruthless asset sale experts took over when the Kennett government was elected in late 1992. Energy market design ignored demand-side action. Support for renewable energy was slashed.

The National Grid Management Council, tasked with design of the market, initially framed some reasonable objectives in 1992:

  • to encourage the most efficient, economical and environmentally sound development of the electricity industry consistent with key National and State policies and objectives;
  • to provide a framework for long-term;
    least cost solutions to meet future power supply demands including appropriate use of demand management;
  • to maintain and develop the technical, economic and environmental performance and/or utilisation of the power system.

But these were modified over time to exclude environment and focus on electricity prices not overall cost. They evolved into ‘economic’ objectives—actually short-term narrow financial objectives limited to energy supply.

The 2002 Parer Review identified problems with market design that have still not been fixed.

The Australian Energy Market Operator and Energy Security Board are doing some good work reframing future energy market design. But the barriers to fundamental change are challenging and deeply ingrained in energy culture.

    • Alan Pears is a senior industry fellow at RMIT University, advises a number of industry and community organisations and works as a consultant.Originally published on Renew Magazine. Reproduced with permission of the author.

Recent Posts

Victoria is in a real energy pickle, and now has a new premier. One Nation is not the solution

Voters in Victoria are angry about the rising cost of living. But One Nation will…

28 July 2026

GenCost: The seven caveats behind CSIRO’s “No Progress” scenario – and why it isn’t cheaper

Some stakeholders have used CSIRO's No Progress GenCost scenario to argue net zero should be…

28 July 2026

Outrage machine winning as Australians worry that others don’t support energy transition

Support for renewables is not where it needs to be to get the energy transition…

28 July 2026

“Makes no sense:” Labor mulls third oil refinery as analysts urge faster push into EVs

Energy and climate experts say Labor's plan for a third oil refinery in Australia makes…

28 July 2026

Queensland utility writes long term PPA for one of state’s biggest wind projects – a first under LNP government

Queensland state owned utility signs first major PPA since election of LNP government two years…

28 July 2026

“Scrap the patchwork:” CEC calls for single, national community payment scheme for renewables projects

Clean Energy Council calls for a “single, legislated rate” for payments made to local governments…

28 July 2026