Turnbull government statements blaming last year's South Australian blackout on its high renewable energy target ignored confidential public service advice stating that it was not the cause, according to emails obtained under freedom-of-information rules.
With a febrile debate over renewable energy versus coal-fired generation suddenly raging in Canberra, the revelation is set to undermine the Coalition's energy messaging and shatter confidence in its call for investment certainty through sober debate and bipartisan policy solutions.
An email trail shows among other things a senior official from Malcolm Turnbull's department seeking an explanation for the blackout at 8.31 on the evening of the storm.
Another from 7.20 the next morning outlines subsequent discussions including a 5am phone hook-up involving departmental and political staff.
That email, sent to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull's own officials and others, conveyed the first-blush assessment of the blackout including advice gleaned from the Australian Energy Market Operator: "There has been unprecedented damage to the network (ie bigger than any other event in Australia), with 20+ steel transmission towers down in the north of the State due to wind damage (between Adelaide and Port Augusta). The electricity network was unable to cope with such a sudden and large loss of generation at once. AEMOs advice is that the generation mix (ie renewable or fossil fuel) was not to blame for yesterday's events – it was the loss of 1000 MW of power in such a short space of time as transmission lines fell over."
Yet within hours of the calamity the Turnbull government was capitalising on the blackout, suggesting it was a function of the state's unsustainably high quotient of wind generation which had failed to keep working in the conditions.
Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce led a chorus from Canberra about the state Labor government's "unrealistic" energy policies and was quickly joined by other senior ministers including Energy and Environment Minister Josh Frydenberg and Mr Turnbull.
How did SA end up in darkness?
Find out what led to the South Australian blackout as Energy Ministers meet to discuss the fallout and renewable energy targets.
"There is a lot of effort that has gone on in South Australia about their renewable energy target. Maybe if the same competent effort went into actually making sure that an event such as this, a storm such as this – and another storm like this will, at some stage in the future, happen again – is there the capacity to handle it."
Advice to the government dated September 29, 2016, suggested the South Australian blackout had not been because of the state's high reliance on wind generation. Photo: Supplied |
"Now, I regret to say that a number of the state Labor governments have over the years, set priorities and renewable targets that are extremely aggressive, extremely unrealistic, and have paid little or no attention to energy security."
Illustration by Matt Golding |
Labor's spokesman on climate change and energy Mark Butler said a "hysterical" Mr Turnbull had been caught "playing politics with a very deep crisis enveloping our energy system".
"Recent events have shown that price spikes and supply shortages are hitting all states, including those with low levels of renewable energy and very high reliance on coal power," he said.
Australia Institute executive director Ben Oquist, whose progressive think tank filed the FOI application, said it was regrettable that the government had acted politically despite being cautioned to wait.
"AEMO had told federal public servants and political advisers that renewable energy was not to blame for the blackout. But instead of informing the people of South Australia of this fact, both the Energy Minister and Prime Minister chose to push a false narrative about wind power," he said.
"Here we see frank and fearless departmental advice being ignored when it didn't suit a political agenda."
As recently as Sunday, Industry and Innovation Minister Arthur Sinodinos called for less politics in the energy debate, during an appearance on Insiders.
"What industry is saying to us is they want certainty over a lower emissions future ... but if industry wants certainty, there has to be a way of achieving bipartisan policy around this because we are talking about investments which take 20, 30, 40 or 50 years," he said.
Links
- Strange bedfellows urge politicians to ditch 'partisan antics' on energy
- What's with the attacks on renewables Mr Turnbull?
- Warning of future blackouts as politics rules energy debate
- 'Clean coal' would push up power bills more than wind, solar or gas: analysts
- PM's coal sell fails to convince
- Government killed emissions scheme despite advice it could make power cheaper
- US Republican spreading the conservative case for climate action
No comments:
Post a Comment