Extract from The Guardian
We had the terrible storm that triggered a statewide blackout
in South Australia last week – and, ever since, we’ve had the
unfulfilling storm of spin about what caused the lights to go off.
The release on Wednesday of a preliminary report by the Australian Energy Market Operator into the sequence of events that caused the power outages has given us new and important, albeit incomplete, information about a serious episode in Australia’s energy market.
Predictably, it has also generated a new burst of florid interpretation, never mind the nuances.
It was the wind, stupid. See? Told you so! Wicked windfarms, always snickering away on exposed hillsides, plotting the downfall of civilisation.
So … was it the wind?
Well, in part, yes, it was, but if you were going to plot a graph of significant events in a deeply unfortunate cascading sequence it would look like this.
But, if you are interested in understanding the complete picture, it’s the one I’ve just given you, subject to the caveat that the AEMO itself gives – that it’s too early to “know” several things. We’ll get another update from the regulator on 19 October, then the final detailed assessment in about six months’ time.
What the events in South Australia should do is this: trigger a serious conversation about whether federal and state governments are working together collaboratively to ensure we are combining measures to ensure future energy security with the urgent imperative of lowering greenhouse gas emissions to meet our international obligations.
Australia needs to do both these things.
One way in which the various jurisdictions could demonstrate seriousness would be to consider whether the electricity sector could benefit from a form of carbon trading that would split the difference between the federal government’s Direct Action scheme and Labor’s election policy.
Walking in that direction – apart from being a rational line of inquiry for its own sake – could also call truce on Australia’s toxic cycle of climate politics that has dogged this debate for the best part of a decade.
Trying to find a workable middle ground, and being guided by expert views, could end a deeply unfulfilling cycle where people feel free to select their own facts – a habit which generally produces suboptimal policy outcomes.
If the federal government is concerned about states going off on frolics with overly ambitious renewable energy targets, it could do a couple of things that would engineer better outcomes – it could extend the life of the national renewable energy target beyond 2020 to provide more investment certainty and it could provide clear leadership about the importance of orderly transition to low emissions power sources, which has been the standout absent element in recent history.
Energy ministers meet in Canberra on Friday.
The early signs have not been promising. But this is an opportunity that shouldn’t be squandered.
The release on Wednesday of a preliminary report by the Australian Energy Market Operator into the sequence of events that caused the power outages has given us new and important, albeit incomplete, information about a serious episode in Australia’s energy market.
Predictably, it has also generated a new burst of florid interpretation, never mind the nuances.
It was the wind, stupid. See? Told you so! Wicked windfarms, always snickering away on exposed hillsides, plotting the downfall of civilisation.
So … was it the wind?
Well, in part, yes, it was, but if you were going to plot a graph of significant events in a deeply unfortunate cascading sequence it would look like this.
- A very serious weather event involving high winds, thunderstorms, lightning strikes, hail and heavy rainfall results in multiple transmission system faults through the state grid, including, in the space of 12 seconds – the loss of three major 275KV transmission lines north of Adelaide.
- Pause here momentarily. Make sure you take in point one properly before we move to the next point in the sequence, because, on current information, point one is pretty important. It’s the critical factor.
- After the freak storm hit, causing the loss of three major transmission lines, we then get to the windfarms. The AEMO describes the sequence thusly: “Following multiple faults in a short period, 315MW of wind generation disconnected, affecting the region north of Adelaide. The uncontrolled reduction in generation increased the flow on the main Victorian interconnector (Heywood) to make up the deficit and resulted in the interconnector overloading.”
- Then, to avoid damage to the interconnector, the “automatic-protection mechanism activated” – which tripped the interconnector and caused the blackout.
But, if you are interested in understanding the complete picture, it’s the one I’ve just given you, subject to the caveat that the AEMO itself gives – that it’s too early to “know” several things. We’ll get another update from the regulator on 19 October, then the final detailed assessment in about six months’ time.
What the events in South Australia should do is this: trigger a serious conversation about whether federal and state governments are working together collaboratively to ensure we are combining measures to ensure future energy security with the urgent imperative of lowering greenhouse gas emissions to meet our international obligations.
Australia needs to do both these things.
One way in which the various jurisdictions could demonstrate seriousness would be to consider whether the electricity sector could benefit from a form of carbon trading that would split the difference between the federal government’s Direct Action scheme and Labor’s election policy.
Walking in that direction – apart from being a rational line of inquiry for its own sake – could also call truce on Australia’s toxic cycle of climate politics that has dogged this debate for the best part of a decade.
Trying to find a workable middle ground, and being guided by expert views, could end a deeply unfulfilling cycle where people feel free to select their own facts – a habit which generally produces suboptimal policy outcomes.
If the federal government is concerned about states going off on frolics with overly ambitious renewable energy targets, it could do a couple of things that would engineer better outcomes – it could extend the life of the national renewable energy target beyond 2020 to provide more investment certainty and it could provide clear leadership about the importance of orderly transition to low emissions power sources, which has been the standout absent element in recent history.
Energy ministers meet in Canberra on Friday.
The early signs have not been promising. But this is an opportunity that shouldn’t be squandered.
No comments:
Post a Comment