Labor could support the government’s proposed low emissions target
(LET), the party’s climate change spokesman, Mark Butler, has said, but
wants conditions to achieve policy certainty and ensure it can be scaled
up to meet more ambitious emissions targets.
In an interview on Radio National on Tuesday, Butler reiterated comments to Guardian Australia that the opposition would consider supporting what he called the “second best” option to Labor’s emissions intensity scheme.
The comments suggest Labor could accept a compromise position designed by the government to limit greenhouse gas emissions and achieve investment certainty for power generation, despite hostility from Coalition conservatives to any mechanism that directly prices carbon.
Australia’s chief scientist, Alan Finkel, is expected to recommend a low-emissions target in his report to the Council of Australian Governments on Friday.
The target would require that a percentage of electricity be generated annually from “low-emissions” sources, effectively working in practice as a technology-neutral renewable energy target.
On Monday the environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, warned that the government’s policy had to change, because doing nothing would drive up power prices.
After telling Guardian Australia that Labor had an open mind on the LET, Butler said on Tuesday it was “not going to pretend that this is not a second-best option”.
He argued there was an “extraordinary consensus” that an emissions intensity scheme was the “first best way forward” but Malcolm Turnbull had been unable to convince the Coalition of its merits.
Butler said the proposal was still unclear because there were two options, one involving a subsidy to particular types of clean energy and the second involving trading of clean energy certificates.
“There will be some conditions that we match this model – again. There has to be enduring reform. If we’re going to junk a policy that we took to the election, then we’ll want to be confident this is something that will stand the test of time.
“[We’ll want this to] be something that does end the investment strike and is able to be scaled up into the future as Australia has to lift its level of ambition.”
Butler said an LET, or clean energy target, could do that but it was important to get its design right and Labor would consult industry to do so.
Asked if the opposition would accept the LET to avoid a scare campaign on power prices against Labor’s policy , Butler said it was responding to the business community saying “enough is enough” and demanding a long-term policy solution.
The uncertainty of Australia’s carbon policy has caused reduced investment in electricity generation, including in renewable energy, pushing up prices.
Butler said the Business Council of Australia and Australian Industry Group’s support for a LET had been “heavily qualified”.
“They want to see what the design is, they want to ensure this is a long-term enduring framework that will not be up for change after the next election – that’s what we want as well.”
Greens climate change spokesman, Adam Bandt, warned on Tuesday that any new LET cannot be weaker than John Howard’s proposal in 2007, which defined a “low-emissions” energy source as one that emitting fewer than 200kg of greenhouse gas per megawatt of electricity generated.
He said if gas and coal-fired power stations qualified as clean energy the government will have “capitulated to the Trumps” on its backbench. “We might as well all pack up and go home, because it’s game over for the climate and the planet.”
Asked if coal with carbon capture and storage could be part of the mix, Butler said it could be a “very low carbon source or zero carbon source” but it had not been built at scale anywhere in the world.
Last week the Turnbull government began a move to overhaul rules governing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) to allow the so-called “green” bank to invest in carbon capture and storage technology.
Butler said that “in theory” carbon capture and storage could be part of the mix. “The problem is, though, the government expects a technology that hasn’t even begun to crawl yet suddenly to be foisted upon a bank [the CEFC] that requires a commercial rate of return – it’s a hollow gesture.”
Frydenberg’s advocacy for a new emissions policy and Labor’s openness to a LET come after an internal breakout within the Coalition to follow the US president, Donald Trump, in withdrawing from the Paris climate treaty.
Compounding the government’s difficulties, the Minerals Council of Australia has signalled it will oppose a new regulation that would “deliberately cast aside coal from the energy mix”.
In an interview on Radio National on Tuesday, Butler reiterated comments to Guardian Australia that the opposition would consider supporting what he called the “second best” option to Labor’s emissions intensity scheme.
The comments suggest Labor could accept a compromise position designed by the government to limit greenhouse gas emissions and achieve investment certainty for power generation, despite hostility from Coalition conservatives to any mechanism that directly prices carbon.
Australia’s chief scientist, Alan Finkel, is expected to recommend a low-emissions target in his report to the Council of Australian Governments on Friday.
The target would require that a percentage of electricity be generated annually from “low-emissions” sources, effectively working in practice as a technology-neutral renewable energy target.
On Monday the environment minister, Josh Frydenberg, warned that the government’s policy had to change, because doing nothing would drive up power prices.
After telling Guardian Australia that Labor had an open mind on the LET, Butler said on Tuesday it was “not going to pretend that this is not a second-best option”.
He argued there was an “extraordinary consensus” that an emissions intensity scheme was the “first best way forward” but Malcolm Turnbull had been unable to convince the Coalition of its merits.
Butler said the proposal was still unclear because there were two options, one involving a subsidy to particular types of clean energy and the second involving trading of clean energy certificates.
“There will be some conditions that we match this model – again. There has to be enduring reform. If we’re going to junk a policy that we took to the election, then we’ll want to be confident this is something that will stand the test of time.
“[We’ll want this to] be something that does end the investment strike and is able to be scaled up into the future as Australia has to lift its level of ambition.”
Butler said an LET, or clean energy target, could do that but it was important to get its design right and Labor would consult industry to do so.
Asked if the opposition would accept the LET to avoid a scare campaign on power prices against Labor’s policy , Butler said it was responding to the business community saying “enough is enough” and demanding a long-term policy solution.
The uncertainty of Australia’s carbon policy has caused reduced investment in electricity generation, including in renewable energy, pushing up prices.
Butler said the Business Council of Australia and Australian Industry Group’s support for a LET had been “heavily qualified”.
“They want to see what the design is, they want to ensure this is a long-term enduring framework that will not be up for change after the next election – that’s what we want as well.”
Greens climate change spokesman, Adam Bandt, warned on Tuesday that any new LET cannot be weaker than John Howard’s proposal in 2007, which defined a “low-emissions” energy source as one that emitting fewer than 200kg of greenhouse gas per megawatt of electricity generated.
He said if gas and coal-fired power stations qualified as clean energy the government will have “capitulated to the Trumps” on its backbench. “We might as well all pack up and go home, because it’s game over for the climate and the planet.”
Asked if coal with carbon capture and storage could be part of the mix, Butler said it could be a “very low carbon source or zero carbon source” but it had not been built at scale anywhere in the world.
Last week the Turnbull government began a move to overhaul rules governing the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) to allow the so-called “green” bank to invest in carbon capture and storage technology.
Butler said that “in theory” carbon capture and storage could be part of the mix. “The problem is, though, the government expects a technology that hasn’t even begun to crawl yet suddenly to be foisted upon a bank [the CEFC] that requires a commercial rate of return – it’s a hollow gesture.”
Frydenberg’s advocacy for a new emissions policy and Labor’s openness to a LET come after an internal breakout within the Coalition to follow the US president, Donald Trump, in withdrawing from the Paris climate treaty.
Compounding the government’s difficulties, the Minerals Council of Australia has signalled it will oppose a new regulation that would “deliberately cast aside coal from the energy mix”.
No comments:
Post a Comment