Page 2062 - Week 07 - Thursday, 4 June 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Last year was a rotten year for renewables in Australia and there was much uncertainty. This year, people have been laid off and even now there are probably more projects waiting to be developed than there is finance in the system to build them. It is such a shame. It is such a waste of an opportunity and it is an absolute indictment of the federal government that they have sought so effectively to stymie the development of a powerful industry in this country.
These first amendments are about ensuring that the ACT act is able to operate effectively irrespective of the continuation of the federal renewable energy scheme and legislation by ensuring that there is a mechanism to accredit the electricity that is being generated such that it remains eligible electricity.
The second set of amendments, which also apply to the large-scale feed-in tariff legislation, allow the minister to determine an alternative method by which the FiT support payment is calculated and that this would be a disallowable instrument. This provision is to ensure that in the face of technology changes, for example, any improvements in efficiency could be shared between generators and ACT consumers.
The model here is intended to operate in a way that neither generators nor consumers would be worse off and, should the minister seek to provide an alternative way to determine the payment, that he would seek the consent of the generator of any specific alternative assessment. I did query how this process would occur, as seeking consent from the generator was not articulated in the legislation. But I was assured that if the minister did proceed and use an alternative method that did disadvantage the generator then the minister would be in breach of the section itself. So the process would become irrelevant, presumably, and the issuing of the method would be challenged by the generator.
I turn now to the amendments to the small-scale scheme, or the micro and medium-scale schemes. The first of the amendments to the act which governs them applies the Criminal Code to all offences in the act. This is part of ensuring that the act has stronger compliance. The second amendment ensures that someone who is accessing the feed-in tariff payments does not have their system attached to any storage devices.
This becomes relevant, of course, given the new technologies that are emerging, should someone install a battery, store black energy on it and then attempt to feed that into the grid as premium green energy. It is an unlikely scenario for many but not beyond the possibilities of the technology. It certainly would not be fair to pay a premium for that black electricity.
Clause 12 sets some dates down to clarify the cut-off date of the former scheme, both in terms of applications for micro and medium-scale tariffs and for the installation and connection of both to the grid. It appears that some people have succeeded in having secured capacity under the scheme but have not yet installed. Given that the costs of the infrastructure can vary considerably since the price under the tariff was set, and for a while there the prices of solar panels were well down, it is not really fair for people to wait for cheaper installation costs and then be paid the same tariff.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video