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 Instead, it seeks refuge in an outdated regulatory framework, and kicks the can down the road to the Australian Energy Regulator.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

Australia’s biggest coal state breaks new ground in wind and solar output

New South Wales has reached two remarkable renewable energy milestones that signal the growing contribution…

6 January 2025

New Year begins with more solar records, as PV takes bigger bite out of coal’s holiday lunch

As 2025 begins, Victoria is already making its mark on the energy landscape with a…

3 January 2025

What comes after microgrids? Energy parks based around wind, solar and storage

Co-locating renewable generation, load and storage offers substantial benefits, particularly for manufacturing facilities and data…

31 December 2024

This talk of nuclear is a waste of time: Wind, solar and firming can clearly do the job

Australia’s economic future would be at risk if we stop wind and solar to build…

30 December 2024

Build it and they will come: Transmission is key, but LNP make it harder and costlier

Transmission remains the fundamental building block to decarbonising the grid. But the LNP is making…

23 December 2024

Snowy Hunter gas project hit by more delays and blowouts, with total cost now more than $2 billion

Snowy blames bad weather for yet more delays to controversial Hunter gas project, now expected…

23 December 2024