How do you sell a plan that is ostensibly about reducing emissions from electricity generation, to a room sprinkled with vocal pro-coal climate sceptics?
Well, that was the task the environment and energy minister, Josh Frydenberg, was faced with when he stood before the Coalition joint party room earlier this week. And Fairfax Media obtained and published a copy of the presentation Frydenberg used.
So, here’s how you convince a room full of coal-lovers that the Finkel review is good for coal – featuring slides from Frydenberg’s presentation.
1. Point out how utterly doomed the coal power industry is in Australia even without any climate policy
No matter what you think of coal, its role in producing electricity in Australia is doomed. Australia’s biggest polluter, AGL, has said it wants to be out of the carbon-emitting game, and plans to close all its coal power stations by mid-century. By then, even without any incentives for cleaner electricity, almost all of Australia’s coal power stations will be closed. As Frydenberg’s chart shows, 10 have closed in the past seven years, and between now and 2040, almost all the rest will shut too.
2. Point out that the now-dead carbon price and green schemes are not the the cause of high electricity prices
This chart looks like something you’d expect a Labor politician to present, rather than a Liberal. It shows that after the carbon price was repealed, prices dipped slightly, and then continued under the Coalition government to rise to previously unseen highs.
3. Remind those in the room that skyrocketing generation costs were caused by them
Yep: the 30% of the cost that is generation, Frydenberg reminded those in the party room, was their fault. “Policy uncertainty holding back new investment,” he put on the screen. As coal power stations inevitably closed, the policy uncertainty meant new cheaper generators (like wind and solar) were not being built, so gas generators (which are expensive) were able to set the price in the market more often.
4. Then point out that the plan to reduce emissions won’t really reduce emissions very much
As we reported earlier, the Finkel review modelling shows the whole scheme does relatively little for emissions from the national electricity market.
Doing nothing at all will see emissions continue to drop by about 5% below current levels. Putting in place Finkel’s recommended clean energy target results in a further drop of less than 10%.
Using the chart from Finkel’s report, which has a full vertical axis, this is even more stark:
5. Remind the room that the fossil fuel industry LOVES the whole idea
All their mates – the fossil fuel industry, the country’s biggest polluters, big business – they all love the Finkel review.
6. Remind the room lefties and greenies HATE the whole idea
Just look at all those disgusting hippies – they hate the Finkel review. So it must be good.
7. Make sure everyone knows we’re going to make renewables more expensive
Those gross renewables? Don’t worry, we’ll make them have their own storage, even though actually, variability and storage balance is better managed at a system-wide level, not an individual generator level.
8. Just look at how lovely it is. The plan will make wind and solar more expensive, ‘levelling the playing field’
9. ‘And really, the whole idea was dreamed up by Grandpa Howard’
10. ‘And remember, if you want to build new coal, this idea won’t penalise you’
11. ‘Look! This “clean energy target” will keep our coal generators running for longer’
12. ‘And your electricity will still mostly be made by yummy, yummy coal’
13. Remind the room Labor might *actually* reduce emissions
In summary, if you want to introduce a clean energy target, and get climate sceptics to like it, just make sure that: a) it doesn’t actually reduce emissions much; b) that it keeps coal power stations open for longer; c) that the whole idea was dreamed up by one of your conservative heroes and d) that the fossil fuel industry loves it but the greenies hate it.
