News & Media

Renewables have a place in a properly planned system, but what Australia proposes needs to be totally re-engineered if we are to include renewables into a reasonably priced reliable power system that does not wreck our economy and agriculture.

Rushing our current flawed plan accelerates the construction of thousands of huge transmission towers on our best farmland. This is nothing short of vandalism.

But on these towers there are also a series of guaranteed high return deals for developers that are being kept secret perhaps because they are too generous.

It is time for federal politicians, whether they be left, right or centre, to intervene on the basis of the national interest. The opposition parties including the Liberals, the Nationals and One Nation plus the media simply have not done the required work to expose the pending disaster.

Last week I set out first how the cost of the renewables program has exploded; then eleven steps that caused this explosion and finally my ideas on how to solve the problem including massive carbon emission reduction plans that are very profitable.

In that series the capital cost was estimated between $280bn and $350bn but trying to overcome the flaws will lift the capital costs closer to $700bn. With financing and secret “return guarantees” the total costs spread over a 35-year period were expected to be around $1 trillion. Now $1.5 trillion seems more appropriate.

As a result, we will not be able to undertake the reindustrialisation and defence expenditure which is now necessary for the nation’s security.

Most of the extra power capex will be paid by consumers, sending bills skyrocketing.

I worked in collaboration with Aidan Morrison of the Centre for Independent Studies; Aidan made a similar contribution to this commentary.

Accordingly, I now set out why the high-cost renewables scheme we chose is flawed and more detail on how we got ourselves into this mess.

Flaw number one: In the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) claims it proposes to set up remote wind and solar power generation capacity that supplies about 70 per cent of Australia’s power needs by 2035. But installation of remote wind and solar has slowed because once remote solar and wind power reaches around 30 per cent of power needs, it becomes uneconomic because on most days too much of the power comes at once and low prices are received.

Flaw number two: Part of the surplus power can be stored in batteries but this is very costly. The Snowy 2.0 project will cost $40bn but provides only a fraction of the required battery storage.

Flaw number three: Under the plan AEMO reveals we need a lot of gas and gas-fired boilers without saying they are needed to help cover the renewables supply slumps. Big gas supplies and generators are way behind schedule because the economics do not make sense. The generators must be set up to run around half the day – when solar and wind power is not plentiful. So it is uneconomic to invest in the required amount of gas and gas-fired turbines when only half their capacity is required. The looming gas shortage means regular blackouts so every supermarket with frozen food in eastern Australia must have diesel back up. And that will extend to many other businesses.

Flaw number four: The energy plan also forecasts a huge increase in rooftop solar. Overdependence on this source of power creates yet another flaw. Remote solar panels can vary angles so can generate about 25 per cent of rated 24 hour capacity. Rooftop solar’s panels are normally at a fixed angle so the generation rate is about half that. That works on a small scale but if the total system includes dependence on rooftop solar it is not economic.

Flaw number five: Linked to rooftop solar are consumer batteries including cars which will need to be linked to the grid and centrally controlled. And it is proposed that car batteries should be charged during the day, which is when people want to drive them. It is complete nonsense.

Flaw number six: Any massive increase in power exiting from households to the grid will require changes in the existing wire networks which are designed to send power to households rather than receive it.

Flaw number seven: The cost of rooftop solar units is not included in the official cost estimates. The cost of these will be met by consumers but there will be subsides.

The question the readers will ask is how on earth did we get ourselves into this sort of mess?

The original AEMO integrated system plan had core objectives covering the price of electricity, plus the reliability and security of the system that delivered the power. But then a third core objective was added to pursue government renewable energy targets – such as Chris Bowen’s original erroneous implausible target of 82 per cent renewable power by 2030.

The original intention was that this third objective be given equal weighting to cost considerations, but very quickly it became the major driving force and reliability and price took a distant second seat.

Inevitably that would create a chaotic situation and of course, it did. What is required is a relook at our total power system where we look at the total costs and benefits of the low cost ways of reducing carbon emissions.

As the varied fanciful assumptions slowly become unrealistic, the cost of the transition goes up. This can be seen in the Australian Energy Market Commission’s latest report on residential price trends, which showed power prices will increase in coming years.

It’s only a small increase but it overturns previous false lower cost findings.

As the seven flaws become apparent price rises will accelerate.