Here is the LNP’s new energy eight-point plan.
The Coalition’s eight priorities if it wins power
- Repeal the Climate Change Act 2022, removing the legislated net-zero emissions targets
- Remove the safeguard mechanism
- Repeal the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard Act of 2024
- Revoke four offshore wind energy zones across the Hunter, Illawarra, Southern Ocean and Bunbury
- Repeal all legislative prohibition on nuclear energy, clearing the way for Australia to evaluate it on its merits
- Introduce a renewable energy code of conduct as a condition of ARENA and CEFC funding, ensuring developers earn social licence from the community where they operate
- Make commonwealth energy funding to states conditional on prioritising affordability and reliability
- Redirect the Australian Energy Regulator to have primary regard to affordability and reliability, putting households and businesses at the centre of regulatory decision-making.
Let’s go through these one at a time.
- The Climate Change Act is largely irrelevant. It is a simple target-and-accountability framework that motivates the federal government to reach net zero by 2050.
- The Abbott government introduced the Safeguard Mechanism to prevent emissions growth in Australia’s largest 200+ businesses, covering roughly one-third of Australian emissions. The new Albanese government reformed it in 2022, progressively lowering the baseline emissions target by 4.9% per annum to 2030 for these businesses. They can trade credits locally but not internationally. Scrapping the SM removes a major lever for Australian emissions reduction that the LNP itself established.
- NVES steadily increases pressure on car manufacturers to offer more low-emission vehicles. It does not ban anything, but it will make petrol and diesel cars relatively less attractive on price over time.
- AEMO has already written off these four wind zones as having zero production by 2050 in its 2026 ISP, because of the cost of offshore wind.
- Repealing nuclear bans is a sensible idea. It should be included in the mix if it can compete. Currently, AEMO doesn’t even model it because of the ban. That said, it is still unlikely to be cost-effective, even if built on existing power sites near metropolitan areas, so it would almost certainly generate popular resistance requiring large network build-out costs. Given how dumb we are these days, the risk of huge cost and time blowouts is obvious. SMRs remain far less competitive. But we should certainly model nuclear realistically.
- A code of conduct is a useless instrument wherever you deploy it.
- What is the point of picking particular states when they are all part of the integrated NEM? Canberra does not pay much to the states now. Its role is generally to underwrite, guaranteeing cheap financing and/or capacity profitability, etc. If it forced states to include technologies like coal, gas and nuclear, it is unlikely to change the outcome.
- AEMO already considers affordability and reliability. That’s its job.
In short, the LNP’s so-called resistance to the energy transition is largely symbolic and would not change much in practice, since AEMO already models the lowest-cost, highest-reliability system-wide outcome.
Where the problem becomes acute for the transition is in gas supply and price as firming power insurance for the renewables buildout, but nobody ever talks about that. This may force states to renovate coal plants instead, using them as less efficient and dirtier power backup.
The LNP is also stoking community and ideological resistance to the transition. This is pretty dangerous for the LNP itself, given that One Nation will just centrally plan and build stuff on the back of this destabilisation campaign.
At least Peter Dutton had a plan in SMRs and cheaper gas.
The idiots are back.
