Coal

Taylor’s favoured coal subsidy could reach $7 billion and hit households

Published by

Households and businesses could be hit hard by major electricity bill increases if a proposed new subsidy to keep ageing coal and gas plants to stay open is approved by state and federal energy ministers.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) and Green Energy Markets say the cost of capacity payments made to thermal generators, under a plan proposed by the Energy Security Board and championed by federal energy and emissions reduction minister Angus Taylor, could be as high as $6.9 billion.

That estimate is double their previous calculations, and would push the average annual household electricity bills up by between $182 and $430 a year, significantly more than the cost increases from the Gillard government’s carbon price that was subsequently repealed by the Abbott government.

Federal and state energy ministers meet on Friday to discuss the ESB’s proposal for a ‘Physical Retailer Reliability Obligation’, a type of “capacity payment” that would see large coal and gas generators receive substantial payments to remain operational.

The proposal has been criticised on the basis that it is both unnecessary and could delay a transition to cleaner energy sources, but it has been embraced by Taylor and the Morrison government as a way to prevent the early retirement of Australia’s ageing fleet of coal fired generators.

The details of the new policy have yet to be released, but the IEEFA and GEM analysis is based on the capacity market in Western Australian. They insist there are no indications that the reliability of electricity supplies were under threat.

“While it is true that several coal power plants are facing financial difficulties, our analysis finds that reliability is not at threat by the level of likely coal power plant exits over the next ten years,” IEEFA analyst Johanna Bowyer said.

“The ESB’s new proposal will require electricity consumers to pay primarily conventional generators such as coal and gas plants for what they could produce if the plant was operating at its full level of capacity, regardless of whether or not, or how often, the generator uses all of its capacity to produce electricity.”

The analysis also suggests that payments used to keep ageing plants open could ultimately lead to worsening reliability, a point underlined by a new Australian Energy Regulator report that noted “1,000 days of baseload outages” just in the last three months.

“An additional payment to existing generators in the NEM risks locking the old legacy system in place for longer, which may in fact harm reliability,” the report says.

“A financial lifeline to these aging power plants leaves us reliant on supply that will become increasingly unreliable, while exacerbating uncertainty about when they may exit. This uncertainty will deter investment in newer, more flexible and more reliable power plants that make better sense into the future.”

Bowyer says the estimated impact of the capacity payments – of between $182 to $430 a year, would dwarf the cost increase faced by New South Wales, Victorian and Queensland consumers from the carbon price of between $112 to $150.

It’s a remarkable prediction, given that the new mechanism is being pushed by a Coalition government that so fiercely opposed the introduction of the Gillard government’s carbon price.

Households are also unlikely to be compensated for payments made under the proposed ‘Physical Retailer Reliability Obligation’, whereas the costs of the carbon tax were more than offset by reductions in income tax.

Co-author and Green Energy Markets analyst, Tristan Edis, said there is unlikely to be any benefit in introducing the new payment regime, with a substantial amount of new dispatchable energy projects in the development pipeline.

“We should not panic about reliability. From 2017 to 2027, almost 6,500 megawatts of dispatchable power project capacity will be added to the grid,” Edis said.

“To put this into perspective, this is almost double the capacity that will be lost from the next three coal power stations due to close after 2027 – Yallourn, Callide B and Vales Point B.”

“There are also thousands of megawatts of further battery projects in development which could be committed to construction if required. Meanwhile, the extra cost imposed on consumers to keep coal power plants afloat could be very large,” Edis added.

Michael Mazengarb is a climate and energy policy analyst with more than 15 years of professional experience, including as a contributor to Renew Economy. He writes at Tempests and Terawatts.
Michael Mazengarb

Michael Mazengarb is a climate and energy policy analyst with more than 15 years of professional experience, including as a contributor to Renew Economy. He writes at Tempests and Terawatts.

Recent Posts

Wind and solar generate more electricity in Europe than fossil fuels for first time in 2025

Wind and solar generated a record 30 per cent of EU power needs in 2025,…

22 January 2026

Australia should go hard on EVs, exempt them from GST, and save $40 billion a year in fuel imports

Why go through all the pain of having new LNG facilities and new coal mines…

22 January 2026

W.A. backflips on loss-making coal generator, promises more subsidies to keep plant open

State government has already ploughed more than $300 million into embattled coal generator, and has…

21 January 2026

Sigenergy crowned top home battery supplier in Australia, trumping Tesla and Sungrow

Less than three years after launching its home battery product, Sigenergy has dominated the Australian…

21 January 2026

Australian researchers say stacking PV cells may make solar ever cheaper and more efficient

The next-generation of solar technology could be cheaper, more efficient and a step closer to…

21 January 2026

Solar Insiders Podcast: Energy smarts for home batteries and EVs

Kaluza CEO Melissa Gander on the change in technologies, and energy thinking, that will deliver…

21 January 2026