Renewables, battle of the billionaires

Singapore lit up at night

Previously, Edge has discussed the electricity markets’ move away from coal and gas to renewable energy and firming technologies. Last week it was announced that the Australia-Asia PowerLink Project (AAPP) better known as Sun Cable had gone into voluntary administration. AAPP was planned to be the world’s biggest solar and battery storage project.

Sun Cable was backed by some of the largest renewable energy developers in Australia, namely Mike Cannon-Brookes from Grok Ventures and Squadron Energy’s Andrew Forrest.

It appears from the outside the decision to wind up the company was due to a lack of alignment of the companies’ objectives by the shareholders but is there more to the story.

Sun Cable was to provide renewable energy generated in Australia and transport it via a 4,200km underseas cable to Singapore. Powering the project would be a huge solar farm near Elliott in the Northern Territory. The 20GW Elliott solar farm would be firmed with a 42GWh battery.

The first part of the Sun Cable project was planned to start construction next year, resulting in 800MW of renewable energy flowing into Darwin by 2027. Currently Darwin has a maximum demand of around 250MW so either the generation project will need to be resized or the solar farm will need to be constrained until it is able to export. With several solar projects already built in the Northern Territory but not approved for connection, the NT market may become very constrained as a result of the single line transmission between Katherine and Darwin.

Late in 2022, Sun Cable announced it had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Indonesian government to unlock more than $150B in “green industry” growth in the region. The MoU has a broad plan to build key industries to improve Indonesia’s GDP. These industries include mining, energy, transport, food, agriculture and IT infrastructure, all an interest to mining and IT entrepreneurs.

With Indonesia already approving a sub sea survey permit it is likely the sub sea power cable could reach Indonesian shores and provide cheap renewable electricity to the region to assist in its growth.

Following the announcement of Sun Cable going into administration the federal government remains positive on the future prospect of Sun Cable. Are two billionaires too much for a business like this? Will one of them retain control of the company?

Feedback from Minister Bowen suggests following discussions with senior individuals at SunCable, there are no plans to stop moving forward with the project. Minister Bowen said

“It’s a change of approach and corporate structure, but of course in that regard that is entirely a matter for them”

Following a restructuring process, it looks like AAPP will still go ahead but most likely led by only on billionaire.

Chubb report

Chubb report carbon offset

The long-awaited Chubb report was published on Monday 9th January 2023. Its purpose to “ensure Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCUs) and the carbon crediting framework maintain a strong and credible reputation supported by participants, purchasers and the broader community.1”

The government has agreed (in principle) to enact all the proposed recommendations.

But let’s start at the beginning. The Chubb review came about following claims that the scheme was not robust, being managed badly and not fit for standards, especially on the international stage.

Following the King report in 2020 this view was exacerbated by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) taking on an even larger role in this opaque market, holding the keys to the design of ACCU methodologies, registration and regulation of those projects, a data source for the “independent” ERAC (the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee – the independent committee overseeing the ACCU market) and buying ACCUs on behalf of the Australian Government. Some may say it was a keys to the castle type deal.

Therefore, transparency and independence were unsurprisingly the key focus for the Chubb review. Both from the regulatory and data access standpoints, obviously maintaining privacy where required. With upcoming changes in the Safeguard Mechanism expected to come into force in the new financial year and increasing interest in ACCUs from the Hydrogen industry (to ensure certification meets international standards such as CertifHy) the robustness of the scheme must be unimpeachable.

I think the most interesting part of the review is the u-turn from the previous Morrison government’s stance, which mandated in 2021 that their own Climate Active standard would have required members to increase their “carbon neutrality” through a minimum of 20% or 30% ACCUs dependant on size. This reversal, to no such mandate, is showing the business community at least that an international certification is enough for this government. Not the strong climate stance that is being pitched from the floors of Canberra.

As with many of these papers I am finding little accountability and more future safeguarding. Especially around human-induced regen (noting that ends this year), carbon capture and storage and landfill waste gas, with no individual projects reviewed, the current standard of certification cannot be confirmed, yet it is likely to be significantly tightened if the advised transparency is enforced.

Overall, I can’t help feeling this was not more than a necessary boondoggle, yes some interest groups have had some wins, but it was necessary to achieve its end – it is going to undo a significant number of the controversial King review and Morrison Government changes.

Reversal however will come at a price, there will likely be a significant amount of funding put in place to reduce the both “real and perceived,” burden on both the CER and especially the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee (ERAC). The latter of whom will be dis-banded and renamed the Carbon Abatement Integrity Committee (CAIC), moved out from the CER with full data access restored and with a remit which, if enacted within 6 months, could see them as an Independent Statutory Authority, a level the ERAC currently hold but are handcuffed from enacting upon.

Personally, I think any changes which bring transparency to this market, its accreditations and oversight can only be positive. There is still the government tender for an ACCU exchange to be developed which would further assist this transparency, but I also fear it has stopped short of really making the Carbon Market in Australia un-penetrable.

With Climate Active still supporting accreditations from Certified Emissions Reductions (CERs), Verified Carbon Units (VCUs) amongst others and an increasing number of lesser regulated Carbon Neutral certificated (iRECs etc) being used for Carbon Neutral Claims, I think this review could have used its opportunity to ensure the Australian Carbon Neutrality Certification would be seen as a world leader. Instead, I fear it is trying not to shake an already leaking boat, with pressure for ACCUs likely to increase with Safeguard changes and the HIR methodology ending in 2023, as well as the new “REGO” scheme being touted as “voluntary surrender only” with no regard for the impact to the LGCs market. Another knee jerk could have put too much price pressure on a market which is not only opaque but likely to come under significant demand, and that is before the increased scrutiny once data is widely available.

No, the Chubb review has done its job, it has unwound a lot of the misgivings people had. It should increase transparency, a feat which has been loudly called for in this market since its inception 11 years ago and not ruffled too many feathers in the process. I guess I just hoped for more.

References: 1: https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction/independent-review-accus

Kate Turner is Edge2020’s senior manager markets, analytics and sustainability. Through a passion that renewable energy solutions are key to any climate change solution, Kate supports our clients to manage their portfolios and any associated risk within traditional markets as well as complex renewable energy portfolios. Kate is hands on in procurement development and implementation for our clients and leads our market regulatory and advisory sustainability services. If your business is interested in wholesale or retail renewable PPAs we’d love to help you. Contact us on: 1800 334 336 or email: info@edge2020.com.au

Does another new environmental scheme create more uncertainty?

Australia's renewable energy schemes

In December the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water released two papers. One on Renewable Electricity certification and one on the Guarantee of Origin Scheme.

These are mainly aimed at the hydrogen industry but the first could have a significant impact on the electricity sector if the proposals are implemented as per the position paper.

The Renewable Electricity Certification paper asks for feedback on the need for a new mechanism for electricity to be certified, currently to be used only for voluntary surrender purposes. It proposes it will act alongside LGC creation (Large-scale generation certificates) with the developer able to decide if they produce an LGC or a REGO (Renewable Energy Guarantee of Origin certificate) on any given period, in any given day.

The REGO can be used for all uses, bar RET liability i.e., voluntary surrender.

The main difference of the REGO to the LGC elements being proposed in the paper are:

  • It proposes to allow the use of below-baseline generation to create a REGO.
  • It will also allow STCs systems to create a REGO once the maximum deeming periods from date of installation has been met. If the minimum threshold isn’t met they can aggregate multiple small scale systems to create a certificate.
  • Further it suggests almost a double counting whereby a battery could purchase REGOs to “store” green electricity then re-sell as green electricity with a new REGO.
  • For exporting renewable energy i.e. Sun Cable whereby the REGO can be created even though the electricity is exported overseas, this is not allowed under the RET scheme for LGCs. How we can claim that against a domestic usage is yet to be seen!
  • There is a proposal any vintage can be surrendered at any time for this year’s claim
  • It is also worth noting a REGO would require a time stamp under the proposals – meaning hourly matching could be undertaken. However, a note for is you are in an aggregated system for the REGO the last hour to make the 1MWh REGO would be the one counted.

It is proposed this will allow claims post the sunsetting of the RET in 2030 but does not go as far as to state it will replace the RET – however this must be implied that it is the intention of the scheme.

If this is to go ahead there are a few concerns:

  • Will it crash the price of the LGCs?
    • Could the market be flooded with “equal value” REGO certificates and bar RET liability the LGC market move?
  • Alternatively – What happens to the LGC market if everyone signs up to REGOs – would it mean LGCs could potentially go up in price as people are only creating REGOs and the LGC RET liability can’t be met
  • Will it increase volatility with an arbitrage being available between the two schemes?
  • Does this really level the playing field for Hydrogen in the way they think it will? I am not sure we meet all criteria in the market leading hydrogen certification markets with this proposal
Consultations close 3rd Feb but this is one to watch. It may be being pushed through a side door but it could blow open the LGC market as we near the end of the RET scheme. Have your say here: https://consult.dcceew.gov.au/aus-guarantee-of-origin-scheme-consultation   

 

Coal and gas moves to renewables and storage

Renewable generators with battery storage

With Enel X announcing the installation of battery storage systems in shopping centres in Melbourne and on the NSW central coast, this year may see a shift in the energy market as we transition from coal and gas to renewables and storage.

Recently AEMO’s CEO Daniel Westerman said, ‘even after factoring the cost of new transmission lines, wind and solar remain by far the cheapest forms of new power generation’.

Key federal policies have underpinned the need to progress an increase in renewable energy. Growth in renewable energy is dependent on the growth of storage to be fully utilised and the need for greater transmission infrastructure is required to link the projects to the end users.

The announcement of the Net-zero emissions target of 43% of 2005 levels by 2030 have pushed other mechanisms to also ramp up across the country. The key federal mechanism is the Safeguard Mechanism, which targets the emissions reduction for Australia’s largest emitting facilities. In line with the Safeguard mechanism the 82% renewables energy target in the National Electricity Market (NEM) by 2030 is also incentivising renewable generation. As both these drivers will require more renewable energy to be rolled out to offset the thermal generation, more storage will be required to compensate for the intermittency of renewable generation and an increase in transmission lines will be required to connect the renewable energy projects with storage and end users.

AEMO has for many years been looking at a fundamental shift in generation, transmission and energy usage. AEMO is now focusing on firming, Electric vehicles and the regulatory framework to enable these changes to occur.

In recent years we have regularly seen that the NEM has the potential to operate with very high levels of renewables, but the limiting factor still remains that thermal generation provides reliability and system security when the wind is not blowing or the sun is not shining. At the end of December, South Australia produced 104% of its demand with renewable energy and exported the extra electricity to neighbouring regions.

With most states striving for high renewable energy targets, Victoria is hoping to reach 95% renewables by 2035 and Queensland has increased its target to 80% renewables by 2035.

With the recent volatility in the overseas energy markets, in which Australia is a pivotal player in due to the large quantities of coal and gas we export, there is now a greater incentive to shift away from thermal generation due to the volatility and high prices.

AEMO reports show there is currently 21GW of new projects undergoing connection assessment and they expect 5GW of new capacity to be added during FY2023, in addition to the 4GW currently operating.

To assist this influx in renewable generation ARENA granted $176m in December 2022 to fast track 8 new battery projects to bring in 2.0GW/4.2GWh of storage. The plan is to triple the battery storage across the NEM by 2025.

Over the next year we will also see more transmission lines connecting the nation as more renewable energy zones are connected to the load centres under the Rewiring the Nation policy.

The first transmission projects to receive Rewiring the Nation funding were announced following the October 2022 Federal budget. Recently funded projects include the VNI NSW-Victoria interconnect, Marinus Link and various NSW transmission projects connecting the renewable energy zones. This funding will assist in building the transmission lines over the next 10 years.

If your business is interested in wholesale or retail renewable PPAs we’d love to help you. Contact us on: 1800 334 336 or email: info@edge2020.com.au

Slow growth in renewable energy

The Clean Energy Council (CEC) recently released to its members their quarterly renewable projects report, which showed only one renewable project, Stubbo solar farm, reached financial close in Q3-2022. The 400MW Stubbo solar farm situated in NSW demonstrates the slowing of the renewable industry. Renewable project growth has slowed by almost 30% compared to Q2 -2022 and over 60% slower than Q3 -2021.

While politicians are talking up the prospects of a renewable energy driven industry to reduce the impact of climate change, the reality reaching the 44GW target outlined by the federal government may be hard to achieve at the current rate of growth. To meet the 44GW target by 2030, a significant number of new wind, solar and storage projects need to come online. If these projects do not happen, the retiring coal generators cannot be replaced and may be forced to remain online.

The CEC says investment in renewable is at an all-time low. Quarterly investment has dropped almost 60% to $418M.

As well as the federal announcements, QLD and VIC have also announced ambitious renewable targets linked to the transition from coal fired generation.

Recently the Federal Minster for Climate Change and Energy estimated Australia must install 22,000 500-watt solar panels every day for eight years, along with 40 seven-megawatt wind turbines every month, backed by at least 10,000 kilometres of additional transmission lines to meet its commitment to reduce emissions by 43 per cent by 2030. This is what is required for us to reach a target of 82% renewables by 2030.

While only one project reached financial close last quarter, three projects started construction during Q3-2022 with an increase of installed capacity of 902MW. As well as another two projects that completed commissioning during Q3-2022.

The Stubbo solar farm project also included a storage device, being the only storage device to reach financial close.

Currently, there are 247 financially committed renewable projects in Australia, with 221 under construction and 169 undergoing commissioning.

The CEC notes that the desire to build new solar, wind, pumped hydro, and transmission lines are meeting opposition from local communities. For example, projects like the Chalumbin wind farm, situated next to World Heritage-listed rainforests in North Queensland are reducing the number of wind turbines they are installing by half due to the concerns from the local community. Another example being part of the Queensland government’s renewable plan which included the construction of the largest pump storage hydro station near Mackay. Mackay locals later found out one of their towns has the potential to be flooded as part of the mega project.

With ambitious renewable targets being spruced by politicians and businesses actively seeking renewable energy to aid in the decarbonisation of their operations, the question of where and when these projects will be delivered needs to be asked. The majority of people support the transition to renewables but obviously not in their backyard.

 

The South Australian island and running on renewables

On November 12th a series of storms passed through South Australia that had the potential to black out the whole state, as had previously happened in 2016. Whilst parts of South Australia did lose power, it was far less dramatic than the last weather event due to a significant amount of work that has been undertaken by AEMO to build a more secure grid since the 2016 blackouts.

In 2017 AEMO released a review of the events that had blacked out the state; the main cause was of course the extreme weather that had knocked over transmission lines as well as some wind farms not meeting protection standards. Similar to 2016, it was destructive storms that passed through South Australia and damaged the network on the 12th November. At 4:59 PM, the market was notified of a significant power system event due to the tripping of multiple transmission lines. Both elements on the Tailem Bend – Southeast 275kV transmission line had tripped. Some transmission towers were damaged and had fallen over, resulting in the South Australian grid being disconnected from the NEM. On Saturday at 6:03 PM, AEMO notified the market that South Australia had been reconnected to the NEM after the 275kV transmission line at Tailem Bend was returned to service.

During events like this AEMO invokes its power to manage system security; however, this time, it went a step further and constrained off-rooftop PV to maintain a secure level of Distributed PV (DPV) generation. AEMO switched off as many rooftop PV installations as possible during the middle of the day, a rare occurrence known as “islanding” of the state grid to maintain stability, designed to keep the DPV below the secure threshold. PV generation is not as easily controlled as other sources. At times South Australia can meet all domestic demand for power via rooftop solar and sends surplus to Victoria but this cannot be managed in an islanded state, therefore requiring the curtailment of the rooftop PV allowing AEMO to manage scheduled and semi-scheduled generation assets to maintain system security.

Smart metering is required to enable the shutting down of rooftop PV systems, however not all South Australian PV systems can be controlled remotely as they have older inverters. This resulted in only 50% of systems being curtailed. Over time as more rooftop PV systems are installed using smart inverters, there will be more control of their output. Currently, AEMO can control 100MW of PV generation, but during the recent event, it also used voltage control to trip off a further 300MW of rooftop PV out of approximately 1,000MW of installed capacity.

The South Australian network has now been re-synchronised to the NEM, and electricity is flowing between South Australia and the other states of the NEM as before. While South Australia was isolated from the NEM for a week, South Australia was powered by wind and solar for up to two-thirds of its electricity demand, with gas providing the difference. System stability is a delicate balance between the supply of electricity, the types of generators providing the electricity and the electricity demand from end users. This time, part of the solution was to encourage end users to consume more electricity, enabling a higher generation level. Before the curtailment, South Australia was supplied by over two-thirds of its demand via renewable generation.

While high levels of renewable generation are good for keeping electricity costs down, the savings can be eroded by high-frequency control costs and the need for a more expensive gas-fired generation to fill the gap when the sun is not shining, and the wind is not blowing.

Edge2020 have an eye on the energy market, enabling us to support customer supply and demand agreements. Our clients rely on our experts to ensure they are informed, equipped, and ideally positioned to make the right decisions at the right time. If you could benefit from an expert eye on your energy portfolio, we’d love to meet you. Contact us on: 1800 334 336 or email: info@edge2020.com.au

Green hydrogen

Green hydrogen

In the brightest day and the blackest night, no opportunity shall escape my sight.

Ok, bar the bad Green Lantern pun, Green Hydrogen is the superpower on everyone’s lips at the moment. From the USA releasing its draft National Clean Hydrogen Strategy and Roadmap a few weeks ago, to the announced changes in the Hydrogen regulation in Europe, even Queensland has jumped on the press release bandwagon, announcing it as a cornerstone within its new Jobs and Energy Plan.

But what is this superpower? How can it help and what does it really do?

Well let’s start at the beginning, what is Green Hydrogen, why is it different to Grey or Blue Hydrogen and why is that important?

Green Hydrogen is produced by electrolysis, by splitting water into its base elements of Hydrogen and Oxygen. The reason it is Green is this process is done using renewable energy. The most preferred approach is to have this PPA (green energy) onsite and therefore Behind the Meter, however it is equally classified, at the moment, from other sources, with both the PPA and electrolyser being grid connected. Noting that there are additional costs if this is not co-located BTM generation as Network costs come into play.

The differential between this and Grey and Blue Hydrogen isn’t the process, but the fuel used to power the electrolysis. Grey Hydrogen comes from Natural Gas and Blue is from Gas but that is coupled with Carbon Capture and Storage (a technology which has been the silver bullet since I was at Uni and despite millions being pumped into the technology remains uneconomic and therefore unused).

Why is this important – well to truly move towards a clean energy future, and for Hydrogen to play a large part in that, the technology used to create the hydrogen must be green, otherwise the end product (the hydrogen) is just an energy transition of the non-renewable source which was used to create it. This is why the Europeans (CertifHy) amongst others, will only allow Green Hydrogen certification from real PPA sources, not greenwashed with carbon credits, and certainly not from any other forms of electricity.

So how can the green hydrogen transform our supply? Well ignoring other uses of the fuel and export at the moment, transportation being a key area which could benefit as their fuel is hard to abate without a viable alternative as well as Ammonia and Methanol production. There is the obvious use if the fuel can be used for power supply.

This is moving closer with the planned Tallawarra B 200MW dual fuel power station (natural gas and green Hydrogen) due online in the summer of 2023/ 24. If this technology can be proven, this will be a huge source of clean energy which can be used for grid stability and baseload generation, it could also remove any bumps from the transition away from coal.

To give a sense of scale though 1KG of hydrogen is equivalent to about 33.3KWh of electricity. Last year the NEM supplied around 204TWh of electricity, so we would require around 6.2million tonnes (or 6.2billion KG) of Hydrogen to power the NEM.

Now the part to blow your noodle, to produce that 1Kg of Hydrogen we need to put into the electrolyser around 50KWh of electricity (taking a 67% efficiency rate for an Alkaline or PEM electrolyser, noting Solid Oxide electrolysers can have higher efficiencies.) Using this 67% efficiency rate we need to put in 310TWh of electricity to be able to produce the 240TWh required for the NEM. This is without factoring that Hydrogen which can be used for transportation and that which will be exported (with Japan underpinning many domestic projects how much will be available in Australia initially? But I said I wouldn’t be diverted to this today!).

This means the Hydrogen power industry alone has the capability to more than double the capacity requirements of the NEM. However, this requirement and thirst for power could be its real secret superpower.

Network constraints are the words every solar and wind operator hates, the renewable energy is being produced but either cannot be transported to the load centres or cannot be used in the local distribution zone and as such is wasted. Although the Hydrogen industry may not be able to use all this excess volume, especially in the near term, it certainly can absorb a large amount of it. Thus, reducing curtailment and increasing the renewable penetration to the grid.

But that isn’t its only superpower to assist with the balance of the grid, cast your mind back to this winter with curtailment being requested from every corner of the NEM. Rather than being the off-taker, the electrolysers can provide demand side management. They will naturally be programmed to react to the price and renewable energy generation signals anyway to be efficient. Therefore, turning up and down at these strained periods without needing market intervention will be a benefit we have not previously been able to tap into.

Hydrogen certainly looks to be the silver bullet this industry has been craving, and no one wants to be left behind when this train leaves the station. However, with so much in theory and nothing as yet proven to scale, we all hope that it doesn’t turn out to be the Aquaman of the superhero world.

Edge2020 provides energy management and advisory services to buyers and sellers of physical and financial energy products. We specialise in electricity, gas, renewable, environmental, and carbon products. Edge2020 can help ensure you achieve your business sustainability goals by supporting you with strategies that focus on minimising consumption and responsible purchasing of renewable energy. Reach out to our passionate team for support to improve your sustainability outcomes – email: info@edge2020.com.au 

 

Coal state leading the way to renewables

Last week in Queensland the weather was perfect. It was perfect for those at the beach during school holidays but also perfect for renewable energy.

As everyone in the NEM knows, Queensland is better known for its dominant coal generation, at times pumping out 80% of Queensland’s power supply. With the clear skies and just enough wind, Queensland became the renewable state.

Last week, Queensland’s demand was supplied by over 66% renewable energy. Solar was the largest contributor of renewable energy with wind coming in second.

Previously we have seen the state powered by 50% renewables but the 66% hurdle is a positive message for end users impacted by the reliability and behaviour of the thermal generators.

The Palaszczuk government announced their 10-year-energy plan which involved introducing two new pumped hydro mega-projects in regional Queensland and a green conversion of its coal-fired power generators. The Palaszczuk government also has recently announced upping the target of 50% renewable energy by 2030 to 70% by 2032.

Despite this increase in target, until recent years coal has remained dominant in Queensland. The government has all but ruled out the early retirement of any of the state-owned coal-fired power stations, following pressure from unions. Some could say the slow uptake in renewables is due to supply chain issues, registration, connection and construction delays while other may say it results from the government owning a significant portion of the existing thermal and non-thermal generation that is reaping high returns due to the spot and forward energy prices.

AEMO’s recent Integrated System Plan (ISP) shows the NEM will contain over 80% capacity coming from renewables by 2030. While the renewable industry in Queensland has been slow to grow recently more federal funding is being used to rewire the nation by connecting renewable energy zones (REZ) to end users. With the rewiring in place developers are less restricted in building and financing renewable projects and producing renewable energy.

Industry is also looking for renewable energy to meet their sustainability targets which leads to a market for new renewable projects. AEMO indicated there are thousands of MWs of renewable projects waiting to be built.

If Queensland followed the latest ISP, the state would require an additional 30GW of energy from renewable sources and the storage required to make it useful for end users when the sun does not shine, or the wind does not blow.

Today’s announcement by the premier outlined the $62B plan for Queensland energy and jobs. The plan includes:

  • 70% of Queensland’s energy supply from renewables by 2032
  • 80% of Queensland’s energy supply from renewables by 2035
  • Two new pumped hydros at Pioneer/Burdekin and Borumba Dam by 2035
  • A new Queensland SuperGrid connecting solar, wind, battery and hydrogen generators across the State
  • Unlocking 22GW of new renewable capacity – giving Queensland 8 times the current level of renewables
  • Publicly owned coal fired-power stations to convert to clean energy hubs to transition to, for example, hydrogen power, with jobs guarantees for workers
  • Queensland’s publicly-owned coal-fired power stations to stop reliance on burning coal by 2035
  • 100,000 new jobs by 2040, most in regional Queensland
  • 11.5GW of rooftop solar and 6GW of embedded batteries
  • 95% of investment in regional Queensland
  • Building Queensland’s first hydrogen ready gas turbine

With this announcement by the Premier, Edge look forward to more renewable generation entering the market resulting in savings for end users and the planet.

If procuring renewable energy is one of your company goals, Edge2020 can help you build a PPA to support your sustainability strategies. Contact us on 1800 334 336 or info@edge2020.com.au

 

The Safeguard Mechanism – not so safe anymore

Once again, the Labor government has shown its teeth when it comes to climate. Last week rebuffing the Energy Security Board’s action for a Capacity Mechanism, which would inevitably only benefit large coal and gas generators, and today bringing out a consultation paper to reform the Safeguard Mechanism.

This hasn’t come as a surprise as it was a cornerstone of their election campaign, but to have done it so quickly may surprise some, and to have a start date for these reforms at the start of the next financial year, 1st July 2023, will surprise many.

To re-cap, the Safeguard Mechanism is the legislation which came in in 2016, it was designed to reduce the emissions of the industrial sectors within Australia with targets or baselines capping the amount of emissions each facility can emit. The flaw was that the large industries could continue to re-set these baselines so as to ensure that as production increased, so did the baseline and as such the emissions would also be increased without penalty. In the Financial year 2020 – 2021, these large emitters made up 28% of Australia’s Carbon Footprint

What is currently being proposed is a type of basic cap and trade model with stricter reduction targets, to help the government achieve their net 43% reductions by 2030 and net zero by 2050. This equates to reductions for these large emitters of an initial 3-6% and increasing post 2030.

The consultations also ask for feedback on whether the concept of using industry average benchmarks should be used to set all baselines. This will be strongly argued against by industry, especially since the published default values are significantly lower than most emitting facilities. However, it may enforce the desired reductions, this I am sure will be a major discussion topic in the weeks ahead.

Other parts of the paper discuss increasing the transparency of the Australian Carbon Credit Units (ACCU) market and the Carbon Offsets used to abate the excess Scope 1 emissions. This would support the tender sent out late last year to establish a trading platform for the Carbon Credits, which would de-mystify the pricing and availability of this currently opaque market. This is a measure, I am sure, will be welcomed across the industry, especially by those projects with excess certificates.

However, what will not be welcomed from the green flank in government, and their supporters, is the possible future inclusion of international Carbon Offsetting certificates. With many of these trading at significant discounts to the Australian government accredited ACCUs, the value of these domestic projects could be significantly eroded if international credits can be applied to excess emissions.

The drafts of the responses will be being formed by C&I regulation teams over the coming weeks, with the aim to try and protect their position and emissions as much as possible. I am sure they will be arguing for facility specific, production adjusted targets with the cheapest offsets possible for over emissions. However, how successful their lobbying will be is yet to be seen. This new government is not afraid to turn the status quo on its head and with ambitious climate targets, and with international eyes watching, I am not sure that industry will receive the desired outcome from this reform. With the consultation closing at the end of September this will certainly be one to watch before the end of the year.

Today is the day we are officially in debt to our ecosystem

Earth overshoot day

Today is earth overshoot day.

Being green isn’t just about renewable energy, cycling to work or using re-usable bags when you do your shopping. It is about being in a state of equilibrium with the planet that we inhabit and not emitting more carbon  dioxide than we can absorb.

When we are not in equilibrium, we “overshoot” our allowance and as with all debt we are borrowing from the future rather than living within our means.

Unfortunately, yesterday we officially spent our allowance and as of today (Friday 29th July 2022) we are in debt to our ecological budget for the rest of the year.

This has been gradually getting earlier and earlier and as you can see the National Footprint and Biocapacity accounts have shown we have been over budget for half a century.

Interestingly not every country overshoots at the same rate. If the planet lived like Australians overshoot day would fall on the 23rd March, but if we lived like Jamaica we would basically be in balance and not overshoot until December 20th. So surely if many countries can live in balance so can we?

The understanding of Climate Change and acknowledgement of action is now widely recognised, but I feel the sheer scale of the effect of inaction is yet to be fully understood.

Energy is one major way we can help ourselves reach the goal of balance in our biosphere.

Reducing the carbon output of our energy by 50% will move the overshoot day by over 3 months and by utilising existing energy efficient technologies in energy, buildings and industrial processes we can push this another 21 days.

The decarbonisation of our energy economy is not only becoming more crucial from a resilience to international cost pressure perspective, but is crucial to assisting us push the overshoot  date out,  to balance the budget of our biocapacity by not  ‘overspending’.

Edge2020 provides energy management and advisory services to buyers and sellers of physical and financial energy products. We specialise in electricity, gas, renewable, environmental, and carbon products. Edge2020 can help ensure you achieve your business sustainability goals by supporting you with strategies that focus on minimising consumption and responsible purchasing of renewable energy. Reach out to our passionate team for support to improve your sustainability outcomes. email: info@edge2020.com.au