(AU) Anthony Albanese Says Coal Mining Could Continue In Australia In A Net Zero Emissions World

ABC News - Anna Henderson

Coal mining could continue beyond 2050 even if Australia adopts a net zero emissions target, Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese says.

Key points Anthony Albanese says all energy sources will need to be part of the process to reach the net zero-emissions target Mr Albanese said Labor did not believe a carbon price would be necessary to achieve this Mr Albanese is opposed to the Government's investment in new brown coal but agreed there was still likely to be coal mining in Australia post-2050

Labor's shadow cabinet has agreed to move with 73 other nations, and every state and territory, to embrace a carbon-neutral target by the middle of the century.
It is the same overarching target Labor took to the last election.
Mr Albanese is opposed to government investment in new thermal coal mining — the type of coal that is used in coal-fired power stations.
But under questioning by Insiders host David Speers, he agreed there was still likely to be coal mining in Australia post-2050.
"I suspect we will," Mr Albanese said.
"[The target is] net, that's the point."
He argued there was no replacement for metallurgical coal, which is used to make steel and is a major export out of Queensland.
The Labor leader also agreed thermal coal mining for export could continue under the commitment.
"Yes, we could," he said.
"It will be determined by global action."

---

Climate and economy linked

The Morrison Government risks being stranded at the intersection of climate change-related disasters and their economic fallout, writes Ian Verrender.

---

The Australian coal sector employs more than 50,000 people.
Mr Albanese said exported coal was not counted in Australia's greenhouse gas budget.

"You don't measure the emissions where the original product comes from. I mean Japan isn't responsible for the emissions of every vehicle that's built in Japan," he said.

Albanese: Net zero will be 'economy wide'

The Opposition Leader confirmed Labor's 2050 net-zero emissions policy would apply to all industries.
He told Insiders transport and agriculture would not have any special considerations.
That's different to the position taken by his predecessor, Bill Shorten, before the last election.
"Emissions are about energy, they're about transport," Mr Albanese said.He said the net-zero target was not just about driving down emissions, but also compensating for them.

---

What do we really think
about taking climate action?

A majority of Australians believe climate change is driving more droughts and floods, and that higher power prices are the result of "excessive profit margins".

---

"It's also about practices that can make a difference in going negative emissions, if you like," he said.
"You can do that through agriculture, through forestry, through a range of measures."
Mr Albanese was pressed repeatedly to confirm whether Labor would be open to a price on carbon as a way to incentivise industries to reduce emissions.
"We don't believe that is necessary," Mr Albanese replied.
"We didn't go to the last election with that commitment."
Labor is yet to confirm whether it will ditch the shorter-term, 2030 climate-change target the party took to last year's election.
Privately, many opposition MPs expect it to be changed and pushed back.
Mr Albanese said Labor was committed to "interim" measures ahead of 2050, but he said the timeframe and details of those measures were yet to be settled.

Links

• Anthony Albanese backs Labor's 2050 emissions target (ABC News- video)
• Labor to keep net zero emissions target for 2050
• The tiresome climate wars are back again, but it's not business as usual
• Bushfires won’t change climate policy overnight. But Morrison can shift the Coalition without losing face
• Morrison’s roadmap to emissions reduction could turn out to be pap – but it’s not a terrible idea
• Australia's bushfire royal commission to focus on preparing for future emergencies, but not climate change policy
• Fires and climate fears rattle Australia's giant coal lobby
• Australia locked in climate policy 'paralysis' despite summer of fire
• Australia Says Climate Change Targets Can’t Risk Economy, Jobs
• Government to take ‘technology over taxation’ approach to climate change

(AU) New CSIRO, AEMO Study Confirms Wind, Solar And Storage Beat Coal, Gas And Nuclear

RenewEconomy - Giles Parkinson

Actually, I'd rather a big banana

An updated study on current and future generation costs by the CSIRO and the Australian Energy Market Operator confirms that wind, solar and storage technologies are by far the cheapest form of low carbon options for Australia, and are likely to dominate the global energy mix in coming decades.
The first report, GenCost 2018, identified that wind and solar were by far the cheapest forms of new generation technologies, clearly cheaper than coal, and even when  combined with storage, remained easily the cheapest form low carbon electricity options.
A draft of the updated study, GenCost 2019-20, has been quietly posted on the AEMO website and confirms that wind and solar and storage remain the cheapest technologies, now and into the future, and much cheaper than the technologies promoted by the Australian government – gas, carbon capture, and nuclear.
The study is jointly funded by the CSIRO and AEMO, although CSIRO took carriage of the report, along with advisors Aurecon, who succeeded GHD which did the first version.
Its capital cost estimates – which assume continue cost reductions for solar, wind and dramatic falls for batteries, remain little changed from the 2018 version, although wind cost reductions are lower than expected last year.


And despite ferocious criticism by the nuclear lobby, its estimates for nuclear remain unchanged, largely because it says there have been no technology advances since the last report. It does recognise the potential for small nuclear reactors in certain scenarios, but these are heavily qualified: they are at least a decade away, and would still deliver a levellised cost of energy at least twice that of wind and solar and storage.
“The global generation mix is expected to be dominated by wind and solar photovoltaic (PV) by 2050 in all three scenarios explored in this report: Central, High CRE and Diverse technology,” the report says.
“The implementation of scenarios that include a broader set of global technology drivers has resulted in a wider range of potential capital cost reduction paths for wind and solar PV. The new scenarios also indicate that in some scenarios carbon capture and storage and nuclear small modular reactors could play a larger role than previously projected.”
The other changes in capital costs have been upward revisions for gas generators, mainly because investors are looking at smaller plants and so the costs per unit are higher, and for solar thermal technology – which is no surprise given the hiccups in that technology’s development and the cancellation of a proposed large project in South Australia.



For generation costs, expressed as the levellised cost of energy (LCOE),  it notes that wind and solar are clearly the cheapest form of bulk energy, at half the cost of fossil fuel alternatives, and one fifth the cost of nuclear. Even with storage – shorter duration batteries or longer duration pumped hydro – wind and solar match fossil fuels, and are one third the cost of nuclear.
In coming years, the costs of wind and particularly solar are expected to continue to fall. And storage too, so their cost advantage of renewables and storage is expected to increase.


So, by 2030, nuclear is still well out of the money, and wind and solar have increased their cost advantage over fossil fuels, particularly those with a carbon price attached.
In virtually every scenario, the CSIRO study envisages a world dominated by wind and solar by 2050. Nuclear may play a slightly increased role in the “diverse technology” scenario, but this is only with artificial limits placed on the deployment of wind and solar.


The nuclear question is interesting, given the increasing calls from sections of the government to pursue the technology. CSIRO says there have been no new developments in the last year to change its estimated capital costs for coal or nuclear. And it is clear that many of these plants would be too big, and not flexible enough, in a modern grid with high renewables and distributed generation.
On small modular reactors, it says there is no hard evidence on costs because none have been built, and the main source of estimates has been from technology vendors, and “past experience has indicated that vendor-based estimates are often initially too low,” it writes.
“Constructing first-of-a-kind plant includes additional unforeseen costs associated with lack of experience in completing such projects on budget. SMR will not only be subject to first-of-a-kind costs in Australia but also the general engineering principle that building plant smaller leads to higher costs.”
But it only sees SMRs entering the equation in more than a decade’s time if governments get serious about the 2°C target, if they impose a limit on the renewable energy share, and if there is a significant carbon price.
Given that even the Coalition government expects the share of renewables to reach 50 per cent by 2030, and AEMO expects that to be higher by 2030 and heading to at least 74 per cent to 90 per cent by 2040, then that does not appear to leave much room for either carbon capture and storage or nuclear in this country.
And, of course, there is no enthusiasm for a carbon price from the main nuclear lobbyists, primarily the Minerals Council of Australia and the LNP politicians who are also pushing coal.


The CSIRO study says that in some scenarios the cost of carbon capture and storage and nuclear could be lower than previous estimations, particularly if small modular reactors achieve a reduction in nuclear capital costs after 2030.
Even then, as this graph shows, the cost of nuclear in 2040 will still be considerably more expensive than the combination of wind and solar and storage, and likely to be more than three times more expensive across different scenarios. A similar cost disparity remains for 2050. And investors, it notes, will go for value for money.

Links

• 2018: CSIRO/AEMO study says wind, solar and storage clearly cheaper than coal
• Rise of renewables may see off oil firms decades earlier than they think
• Renewable Energy Could Save $160 Trillion In Climate Change Costs by 2050
• Solar and Wind Power Will Cost Less Than Coal by 2030, According to One Analyst’s Math
• 'Coal is on the way out': study finds fossil fuel now pricier than solar or wind
• Plunging Prices Mean Building New Renewable Energy Is Cheaper Than Running Existing Coal 

(AU) Australia Says Climate Change Targets Can’t Risk Economy, Jobs

Bloomberg - David Stringer

▶ Nation to prepare long-term plans ahead of key Glasgow meeting
▶ Coal exports likely to continue, opposition Labor Party says

Emissions billow from cooling towers in Australia. Photographer: Carla Gottgens/Bloomberg

Australia’s government will work to set new long-term plans on reducing greenhouse gas emissions ahead of a key global summit this year, though signaled it won’t pursue policies that pose risks to jobs or growth.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who has faced pressure over his climate and energy strategy in the wake of Australia’s deadly wildfires, has criticized opponents for pledging to target net zero emissions by 2050 without detailing how they’ll safeguard economic expansion.
“If we make the wrong decisions, not only would we be harming the Australian economy, harming Australian workers, we would also be harming the global environment,” Finance Minister Mathias Cormann said in an interview on Sky News.
Australia’s plans will need to account for the production of materials including liquefied natural gas, which is exported to markets like China or Japan and typically displaces more polluting energy sources, Cormann said. “We know that that helps reduce global emissions by more,” he said.Following the fires, Morrison, who won a national election in May and won’t face a new poll until late 2022, has appeared to signal he’ll resist any quick shift to more extensive cuts to carbon emissions. His Liberal-National coalition government also remains cautious over the impact on a coal sector that employs about 50,000 workers, according to the Minerals Council of Australia, an industry group.
Morrison’s government will finalize long-term emissions reduction proposals ahead of the United Nations climate summit in Glasgow in November, Cormann said.
Australia may continue to be an exporter of thermal coal in 2050, according to Anthony Albanese, leader of the main opposition Labour Party, that’s targeting net zero emissions by that date.
“That will be determined by the market and by international agreements,” Albanese told ABC Television in an interview. “You don’t measure the emissions where the original product comes from -- Japan isn’t responsible for the emissions of every vehicle that’s built in Japan.”

Links

• Fires, Scandal, Slowdown Pose Triple Threat to Australia PM
• Australia Banks to Face Climate Stress Tests, Regulator Says
• Why Big Central Banks Are Becoming Climate Warriors
• ALP policy of zero net emissions ‘a danger to farmers, freight’
• Rise of renewables may see off oil firms decades earlier than they think
• Renewable Energy Could Save $160 Trillion In Climate Change Costs by 2050
• Solar and Wind Power Will Cost Less Than Coal by 2030, According to One Analyst’s Math
• Anthony Albanese flags a jobs 'revolution' as new direction for Labor