Solar

Solar tax debate futile unless we tackle the “original sin” of price regulation

Published by

When it comes to energy market regulation, few proposals elicit the type of reaction seen in response to the suggestion that networks should be allowed to charge customers for the solar power they export into the grid.

On one side of the debate, proponents argue there are equity issues at stake because non-solar customers are increasingly cross-subsidising solar customers.

The other side argues any such subsidies are dwarfed by the decarbonisation benefits and lower wholesale electricity prices resulting from solar exports. Sadly, the debate has become increasingly hostile and personal.

The Australian Energy Market Commission’s draft decision a few months ago failed to calm the debate, indeed, it inflamed it. My submission to the AEMC does not advocate for or against network export charges – rather, it identifies why the AEMC has failed to resolve the debate.

First, it is self-evident that network export services should be recognised in the rules. That’s the easy part. The hard part is identifying how those services should be priced and who should pay.

Unfortunately, the AEMC has completely sidestepped its responsibility to tackle these two difficult questions. Instead, it seeks refuge in an outdated regulatory framework, and kicks the can down the road to the Australian Energy Regulator.

And in reality, the effect of the AEMC’s approach will be to leave it up to monopolistic networks to decide these matters.

Really? Is that the best the AEMC can do on such a contested and vexed problem?

As my submission highlights, despite appearances, this is not a problem about solar exports. The real problem lies in how network sunk costs are recovered from consumers. The regulatory framework fails to address this problem. It has always failed to address this problem. My submission calls this “the original sin of price regulation”.

Solar exports have not created this failure. They have merely highlighted it.

Unless regulators and policy makers tackle the original sin of price regulation, any attempt to accommodate solar exports will be mired in indeterminable (and interminable) arguments. And who loses in these arguments? It’s always the same answer. Consumers.

My submission can be found here.

Ron Ben-David is a Professorial Fellow at Monash University and chaired the Victorian Essential Services Commission for more than 10 years.

Share
Published by

Recent Posts

Robbins Island wind farm beats Supreme Court challenge, but still awaits EPBC ruling

Hotly contested plans to build 900MW wind farm on Robbins Island off north-west Tasmania have…

27 February 2025

SwitchedOn Podcast: The struggle to switch on a community battery

In the first of a new series of interviews with local groups installing community batteries,…

27 February 2025

New renewables developer proposes solar farm and big battery for Tamworth hinterland

The solar and battery project south of Tamworth is the first from a newly formed…

27 February 2025

“Too far, too fast:” bp details renewables backtrack, puts Australian green hydrogen mega-projects on ice

bp says fossil fuel reset follows "misplaced optimism" for a fast energy transition, with renewable…

27 February 2025

Snowy Hydro calls for heads to roll after “flying shrapnel” halts tunneling works, again

Snowy Hydro sheets blame to the contractor of its beleaguered pumped hydro project after a…

27 February 2025

“Last ditch:” Australia’s richest woman takes on local environment laws in Canada coal power play

A push by Gina Rinehart's Hancock group to open The Rockies to coal mining faces…

27 February 2025