This is both in the forms of gas, critical for food manufacturing, and electricity.
The Federal Government claims that transition to a electricity grid dominated by 82 per cent of wind and solar will bring prices down, but analysis by many organisations including the Centre for Independent Studies shows that this over reliance on intermittent power generation inevitably leads to higher prices and lower reliability.
This outcome has also been the experience of countries that have attempted this type of electricity grid mix.
Germany and the UK have suffered from industrial capacity moving offshore due to higher prices, and Spain and Portugal experienced a disastrous system failure earlier this year.
There are different views on what was the cause of the “Iberian blackout”, but there are challenges when conventional power stations have to maintain the inertia of a grid dominated by intermittent generators, or even more difficult, start it up again when something goes wrong.
We produce a lot of gas in Australia, and most of it is exported.
We could produce a lot more, and it forms an essential part of our manufacturing capacity.
We are at a dangerous inflection point in Australia’s history where ideology is trumping reality in understanding how our energy system works and what approaches would risk the competitive advantage we have developed.
Wind and solar is good technology, but it can only work well as part of a diverse mix.
The majority of the generation capacity must be dispatchable 24/7, or what is referred to as ‘base load’.
Australia has had a successful economy because gas availability and of cheap dispatchable electricity provided by coal fired power stations.
The only current technology in the world that could replace that baseload generation is nuclear, which I am an advocate for, because I want Australia to be part of global emissions reduction.
Carbon capture and storage technology demonstrates potential to reduce the emissions from coal fired power generation.
Some countries can use a large percentage of hydroelectricity in their grids, but they have natural advantages.
Gas peaking plants and batteries can assist, but these have limited capacity to stabilise the grid.
The roll-out of solar and wind projects also involves thousands of kilometres of extra transmission lines because of the dispersed nature of the generation facilities.
The disrespect and the total disregard of social licence toward regional communities that governments and some energy companies have shown in the roll-out of all this infrastructure has been appalling.
Regional communities are concerned about climate change and want Australia to be part of a global effort to address this.
But they don’t want the economy to be damaged by a poorly thought-out transition that will increase power prices and reduce reliability.
They also don’t want to see prime agricultural land and remnant vegetation destroyed in a flawed project to remake Australia's energy grid.
There is a cheaper, better and fairer way to do this, involving a more cautious transition, in line with international competitor economies and using all technologies available.
The burden can’t fall on regional communities in the form of industrialised landscapes and farm land, or poorer Australians, unable to access the government solar and battery subsidies.
The bottom line is that the government won’t say when electricity prices will come down under their renewables-dominated approach.
That is because price reduction is unlikely on the trajectory we are on, and regional Australia, especially, will pay a huge price.
– Federal Member for Nicholls Sam Birrell
13°C