Energy Use and Supply         (Part c)

Report of the Senate Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee
The Heat Is On: Australia's Greenhouse Future
Table of Contents

Chapter 5

Energy Use and Supply         (Part c)

(Chapter 5 - Part a)

(Chapter 5 - Part b)


Promoting Renewable Energy

The potential for renewable energy

5.157 A large number of submissions argued that the development and further uptake of renewable energy was essential, both for Australia to meet its Kyoto commitments and to changing the structure of its energy economy. For example, Pacific Power argued that:

5.158 The Australia Institute argued that renewable energies were important if Australia was to take advantage of the opportunities opened up by the Kyoto Protocol:

5.159 However, they feared that complacency would see Australia left behind:

5.160 Many witnesses emphasised not only the opportunities for abatement opened up by the development of renewable energy, but the commercial opportunities as well. SEIA told the Committee that:

5.161 SEIA also emphasised its export potential:

5.162 The Managing Director of Energy Technology Investments and a former adviser to the Clinton Administration, Cathy Zoi, emphasised the industry's enormous global potential:

5.163 In June 1999, the Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council (PMSEIC) published a report, From Defence to Attack: Australia's Response to the Greenhouse Effect, which made many similar arguments. [7] They, for example, argued that Australia needed to act before the Kyoto Protocol was ratified:

5.164 The PMSEIC estimated that the Australian market in greenhouse abatement was US$7 billion, growing at 4.1 per cent annually, and that globally abatement could be worth US$500 billion with a growth of 3.2 per cent. Many of these opportunities will be in renewable energy. They advocated a national goal to `capture and maintain at least 5 per cent of the world greenhouse market using the Australian market as a prototype'. This, they argued, was `unlikely to be achieved without a greater level of commitment to commercialising Australian technology and nurturing the emerging firms which will be the medium through which success is achieved'. [9]

Current renewable energy programs

5.165 The Commonwealth has a small number of programs with the aim of developing renewable energy. They include:

5.166 The PVRP was introduced on 1 January 2000. Cash rebates are available to householders and owners of community use buildings, such as schools, who install grid-connected photovoltaic systems. The program has already overspent its budget allocation and has had to be redesigned. Concern was raised in previous Senate Estimates hearings regarding the basis for funding allocation and whether it would be sufficient. However, the Government has declined to provide additional or reallocate resources to this program.

5.167 In December 1997, the Government also announced an Action Agenda for the Australian renewable energy industry. [15] The Agenda was approved for implementation on 23 May 2000. Its objective is to develop a policy framework to encourage growth in a commercially viable and internationally competitive Australian renewable energy industry. [16] Under the supervision of the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, an `Industry Leadership Group' has been formed, supported by a Strategic Planning Working Group, with participants drawn from industry, academia and government. [17] The scope of the Agenda includes sustainable transport fuels, solar, wind, biomass, tidal, wave, hydropower and geo-thermal energy and renewable hydrogen, value-added products, conversion technologies and associated services.

5.168 The Agenda's declared vision is `to achieve a sustainable and internationally competitive renewable energy industry which has annual sales of A$4 billion'. Five strategies set out to deliver this target are: market development; building community commitment; building industry capability; setting the policy framework; and encouraging a culture of innovation. [18] The Agenda has a complementary overlap with several other programs designed to increase commitment, education and innovation in respect of greenhouse issues.

5.169 The Committee notes that up to now the Agenda has failed to introduce any new initiatives of any note that go beyond measures already underway.

5.170 Among the states, NSW is a leader with the establishment of the Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA) and Green Power programs. Both Victoria and NSW have Energy Smart Business programs and Tasmania, through its power company Hydro Tasmania, is actively developing new renewable energy sources such as wind.

Green Power - Early attempts at market transformation

5.171 An initiative of SEDA, Green Power was an early attempt to build a domestic renewable energy industry. SEDA characterises Green Power as an attempt to stimulate `market transformation' through the accreditation of renewable energy power suppliers which can sell `green' electricity to consumers at a premium. This has been able to stimulate demand for renewables, but its impact remains limited. By October 1999, 11 retailers were offering Green Power to approximately 60,000 customers. [19]

5.172 While the bulk of these customers were in NSW, under the NGS, SEDA has also been licensed to accredit green energy sources for retailers around the country. SEDA's guidelines are strict and include consideration of the collateral environmental impact of renewable sources. They are consequently seen as benchmark for the definition of renewable power sources. Biomass from forests is accredited on a case by case basis and non-plantation native forests are not accredited. [20]

5.173 It is estimated that customers pay a premium of 35 per cent more for Green Power than non-renewable electricity. Currently, only about 1.7 per cent of electricity consumers buy Green Power. SEDA's Mr Chris Dunstan told the Committee that:

5.174 Mr Dunstan claimed that Green Power, in combination with other SEDA programs, has helped to stimulate about $100 million of investment in renewables, and was crucial to projects such as Pacific Power's wind farms at Crookwell and Blayney. The former Chief Executive of SEDA, Cathy Zoi, also told the Committee that Green Power had been able to leverage $70 million of investment for about $2 million in government spending. [22]

5.175 Great Southern Energy was very positive about the role of Green Power in creating a positive context for the development of renewables:

5.176 Great Southern Energy hoped that `under current trends, 2-3 per cent of the total customers base may join a Green Power scheme in the medium term. Take-up rates of this level across Australia would result in about 300-400 MW of new capacity and 1,000-1,500 GWh of new renewable generation. This would be a small proportion of the 2 per cent renewable energy targets and achieve about 1.0-1.5 million tonnes of greenhouse gas reduction'. [24]

5.177 The Committee commends NSW and SEDA for their initiative in establishing the Green Power program and its success in raising awareness and demonstrating consumer demand for renewables. However, even with projected increases in consumer uptake of the program, it is likely to remain of limited importance in achieving large scale emissions reductions, partly because it involves consumers choosing to pay a premium (which many may not be in a financial position to do) and partly because the otherwise hostile conditions in the NEM are putting such pressure on renewables.

5.178 For example, the future viability of schemes such as Green Power has been questioned by Integral Energy, an accredited retailer of Green Power. According to the Integral Energy 1997 Annual Report, competition is driving energy prices down, and the viability of potential alternative energy projects with it:

5.179 Commenting on the NSW Green Power program, Great Southern Energy also highlighted the importance of reducing risks and uncertainties associated with alternative energy schemes:

5.180 It is currently uncertain exactly what effect the introduction of the 2 per cent renewables legislation will have on Green Power. It will stimulate more investment and higher levels of renewable generation. However, the Committee considers Green Power of great value and urges the states and territories, and electricity retailers, to continue and expand their offerings of Green Power products over and above the mandated 2 per cent increase required by the new legislation. In its August 2000 inquiry into the 2 per cent legislation, the Committee recommended that the Commonwealth ensure that retailers cannot count Green Power sales towards their 2 per cent liability. [28]

Research and development

5.181 SEIA told the Committee that current research and development in renewable energy was less than $8 million in 1996-97. They argued `the ballpark for real R&D in a real, innovative large industry' would need to be at least $200-300 million. Current efforts to stimulate research and development in, and the commercialisation of, renewable energy technology `is going to have to be ramped up':

5.182 Citing cutting edge research at the ANU on solar cells and solar thermochemical energy applications, SEIA argued that government as well as the private sector could play a role in the commercialisation of promising technologies:

5.183 Dr Muriel Watt of the Australian CRC for Renewable Energy, also felt that R&D needed more effective stimulus:

5.184 Dr Watt argued that longer term market certainty was needed:

5.185 The Committee notes that the 2 per cent renewable electricity target could have a beneficial effect in this regard. Given that it will increase the purchase and renewable electricity to 9500 GWh in 2010, and maintain that figure to 2020, it is hoped the long term market certainty provided by the measure will be a significant stimulus to new investment. [33]

5.186 The measure was widely thought to have promising potential to spur the further development of renewable energy in Australia. Although the impact of the measure on Australian greenhouse emissions from energy will be low (4-5.5 MT CO2 less in 2010), it is hoped it will stimulate some $1.8 billion in investment in the years to 2010. [34]

5.187 The Committee was supportive of the 2 per cent renewables legislation introduced into the Parliament in June 2000 but, in response to concerns that the measure may not stimulate investment in higher-cost renewables such as wind and solar, also recommended a number of small amendments to the legislation, including a steeper phasing path for the takeup of renewables and a tighter system of penalties. [35]

5.188 In its paper on emissions trading and business taxation, the Australia Institute advocated the retention of accelerated depreciation (slated for abolishment under the Ralph proposals) using revenue from the auction of emissions permits. In response to a question from the Committee about this proposal, SEIA said:

5.189 Mr Rob Clarke, the Manager of the wind turbine manufacturer Pheonix Windpower, also argued that accelerated depreciation was important to new investment in renewables:

5.190 Ms Cathy Zoi, whose company Energy Technology Investments (ETI) Limited was seeking to raise venture capital for sustainable energy, told the Committee that there was strong potential in this area but that progress was currently slow:

5.191 SEIA also commented that new government initiatives, such as the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Program (GGAP) and the rebates for household solar electricity systems, were promising. Of the solar rebate scheme they commented:

5.192 They also thought that the GGAP may have a small impact on changing energy markets for the better:

5.193 The wind turbine manufacturer Pheonix Windpower advocates the establishment of a small electricity levy that could generate revenues which could be applied to stimulate research, development and investment in a domestic renewable energy manufacturing sector:

5.194 Pheonix suggests that revenues from the levy be applied to R&D funding, testing and accreditation facilities, soft loans, installation grants or tax write-offs such as accelerated depreciation. They also argued that attention needed to be paid to reducing barriers to distributed generation and to establishing net metering programs so that domestic producers of renewable electricity could sell their energy into the grid. In particular, Pheonix emphasise that R&D, particularly in wind, is needed if Australia is not to become a net importer of renewable energy technology:

5.195 While the Government does have existing programs in place relating to commercialisation and capital markets, such as the Renewable Energy Equity Fund (REEF) and the Renewable Energy Commercialisation Program (RECP), the AGO told the Committee that the venture capital equity fund established under REEF (known as CVC Reef) still had not commenced operation as of June 2000, due to delays in capitalising the fund. The Government has committed $20 million as its share of REEF, with the private sector expected to commit funds on a 2:1 basis. Better progress is being made with the RECP, with $22 million having been committed to date and a total pool of $56 million being available following the Measures for a Better Environment Package. The $10 million allocated to the Renewable Energy Showcase Program has been fully committed. [43]

5.196 These figures compare to the approximately $300 million which SEIA argues needs to be devoted to R&D alone over the next few years. Another renewable energy firm, Sustainable Technologies Australia Ltd, argued that AGO programs were not substantial enough and were being spread too thinly:

5.197 The Committee heard a diversity of opinion in regards to the fundamental problems facing the renewable energy industry - some witnesses argued that commercialisation was a problem, others R&D, and others market certainty and longevity. It may be that these are all significant issues affecting different sources and technologies differently. However, a large number of witnesses emphasised the enormous potential for Australia in the development of renewable energy, in terms both of greenhouse abatement and in the ability to capture a slice of huge potential global markets.

5.198 The Committee notes the recommendation of the Prime Minister's Science Engineering and Innovation Council that Australia seek to capture 5 per cent of a potential US$500 billion market in renewable energy. [45] The Committee recommends that the Government commit to such a target and designate renewable energy as a strategic industry.

Recommendation 41

The Committee recommends that the Government set a target for the Australian renewable energy industry to capture 5 per cent of the global renewable energy market by 2015, and designate renewable energy as a strategic industry.

Recommendation 42

The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth Government in consultation with the industry develop an aggressive industry development program for the Australian renewable energy industry.

Recommendation 43

The Committee recommends consideration of a range of options for the renewable energy industry including tax incentives, R&D grants, market and regulatory reforms, and continuing assistance with commercialisation.

Australian Democrats Recommendation 4

The Australian Democrats recommend that carbon levy revenues also be considered as a source of funds for renewable energy programs.

Recommendation 44

The Committee recommends that the Commonwealth set up specific programs under Austrade and Ausaid to promote the export and transfer of Australian and sustainable energy technology to developing countries.

Australian Democrats Recommendation 5

The Australian Democrats recommend that the Commonwealth Government conduct studies to identify the full costs of energy supply on a regional and time basis and that, where prices are below those costs, make compensating subsidies available to sustainable energy alternatives in those areas or satisfying loads at those times.

Turning the Ship

Can current energy market structures achieve emissions savings?

Potential reductions

5.199 Current policies which are expected to reduce emissions from energy use and supply, and particularly from electricity generation, are limited. Most do not go substantially beyond a `no-regrets', low cost approach. It is hoped that energy market reforms will have a beneficial medium-to long-term impact, through the removal of structural barriers to cogeneration and renewables and the reduction of gas prices (making it more competitive as a fuel for base load power generation). However, new projections estimate these savings as very modest (only 3 Mt by 2010). Other current measures which are expected to produce emissions savings are the 2 per cent renewable energy initiative (the costs of which exceed `no-regrets' but will be capped), and the Generator Efficiency Standards.

5.200 The Generator Efficiency Standards will apply to fossil fuel generators over 30 MW capacity, with 50 GWh annual output and a capacity factor of 5 per cent over the last 3 years, whether or not they are grid-connected. Their aim is encourage efficiency improvements to the level of best practice performance. [46]

5.201 The AGO estimates savings from the 2 per cent measure of between 4-5.5 Mt CO2 by 2010, and savings of 4 Mt from the efficiency standards. [47] This would add a saving of up to 10 Mt by 2010.

5.202 The Committee accepts that the 2 per cent measure is primarily aimed at developing the renewable energy industry and that expectations of large short term savings are unrealistic. However, the generator efficiency standards, while encouraging electricity generators to reduce their greenhouse intensity of generation, do not achieve the full potential for efficiency savings in generation. The AGO explained that:

5.203 While policies such as the Generator Efficiency Standards are obviously worthwhile in themselves, in a context in which policy is reluctant to move beyond no-regrets measures they will also have a limited impact.

Electricity emissions trends - modelling and projections

5.204 Research on the emissions impacts of energy market reform was commissioned by the Department of Industry, Science and Resources as part of a March 1999 Report by Allen Consulting. The model developed by McLennan Maganasik simulated the path of greenhouse emissions assuming the steady implementation of current energy reforms and no further policy change, in comparison with a base model that assumed the continuation of the pre-reform industry structure. In their conclusions, Allens stated that delays in reform would cause the greenhouse outlook to deteriorate, as would any failure to establish new gas supplies by pipeline from Papua New Guinea or the Timor Sea.

5.205 In the short-to medium-term, the model predicted that emissions would continue to increase as a result of reform, and be higher by around 6 Mt per annum (almost 50 Mt CO2-e in total, 20 per cent of 1996 levels) between 1998 and 2005 than under a pre-reform scenario. [49]

5.206 Between 2006 and 2010 the model predicted lower emissions by up to 11 Mt CO2-e per year. This prediction assumes the absorption of current oversupply and the expiry of transitional arrangements (such as fixed price contracts). This would have the result that less emissions-intensive generation, mainly gas-fired cogeneration and some expansion in renewable energy, can enter the market. [50]

5.207 In total, the model predicted that the net cumulative impact of current reform measures, incorporating both the initial increases and longer run falls in emissions, will be a net increase in emissions of around 15 Mt CO2-e between 1998 and 2010. The Report suggests that: `current reform measures may not contribute a positive cumulative decrease in GHG emissions until around 2012'. [51]

5.208 These projections are sensitive to the future performance of gas as a replacement fuel for more emissions-intensive fuels such as black and brown coal. The Report argued that if gas prices in a more competitive market remained high, or if the gas pipelines from PNG or the Timor Sea do not eventuate, emissions could be 4-5 Mt CO2-e higher per annum than projected by 2010. [52]

5.209 The AGO admitted that the annual savings after 2006, predicted by the Allens Report, were unlikely to be fully realised. They told the Committee:

5.210 The analysis commissioned by the AGO was again by McLennan Maganasik (MMA), which modified its reform scenario assumptions by including:

5.211 The new MMA study modelled trends in electricity emissions from 1990 to 2020, assuming energy market reforms plus the 2 per cent target and generator efficiency standards (`Reform++').

5.212 It projected emissions levels of 171 Mt in 2000 (the 1998 Inventory figure was 168.6 Mt), 190 Mt in 2010 and 226 Mt in 2020. By 2010, this Reform++ scenario was 12 Mt lower than a no-reform scenario, and 18 Mt lower by 2020. However, until the middle of the decade the no-reform scenario was actually producing lower emissions. [55]

5.213 MMA's 2010 Reform++ projection - that is, in the middle of the first Kyoto commitment period - is still 147 per cent of 1990 levels. They state that even if demand growth were substantially lower than recently recorded, emissions were likely to be at least 130 per cent of 1990 levels. Their projections are also vulnerable to a number of potential adverse developments. These include:

5.214 An alternative, perhaps worst case scenario, is that electricity emissions could continue increasing at the rate they did between 1997 and 1998 (15 Mt a year). In such a case we would be facing a phenomenal statistic of 323 Mt in 2010, even after the effect of the 2 per cent target and generator efficiencies (-10 Mt) was taken into account. This would be 250 per cent of 1990 levels.

Making a greater impact

5.215 It is clear to this Committee that, whichever projections are more accurate, trends in the growth and intensity of energy supply and use in Australia have outstripped the ability of current policies to control them. The fast upward trend in energy emissions will make it very difficult for Australia to meet its 108 per cent target for 2008-12, even when considering that the additional flexibility created within the Kyoto Protocol will work to Australia's advantage. The same trend will certainly make it impossible to meet the more stringent targets Australia will be likely to face in the second and subsequent commitment periods. In such an event, Australia will be faced with the very expensive option of buying emissions credits on the world market. Dr Clive Hamilton pointed out the potential absurdities facing Australians if this occurs:

5.216 Thus, in the event that emissions permits need to be purchased from overseas, this cost will be faced by over-emitting industries (and thus by consumers), or in the case that there are no regulatory obligations placed on emitters, by taxpayers. The message of this is that deferring action will do nothing to reduce or eliminate costs. It is more likely to increase those costs and see them distributed more inequitably and inefficiently. In the Committee's view, it is preferable to plan how those costs will be borne and distributed, while producing optimum greenhouse, adjustment and industry development outcomes, rather than have them occur in an unplanned, inefficient and inevitably inequitable way.

5.217 The Committee supports the view that the best policy perspective on energy is a long term one. This is the optimum way of achieving sustained greenhouse reductions, while also providing long term market certainty, so that investment decisions will be both sound in greenhouse terms and be rewarded by future market conditions.

5.218 The ability of industries to manage the increased costs associated with action, must be balanced against the imperative to turn energy emissions around and achieve a long term restructuring of the national energy economy. It must be borne in mind that while bringing costs it will also create great opportunities for new industries in energy efficiency and management, and renewable technology and innovation. If the global climate system can be stabilised through international efforts, it will also contribute to reducing the costs and trauma of damage from (and adaptation to) adverse climate change in Australasia.

5.219 The need to pursue early abatement action in order to pursue an `optimum' path towards reaching our Kyoto targets was a strong theme of the June 1999 report, Early Greenhouse Action, prepared for the AGO by the Centre for International Economics. It suggests that:

5.220 With the long term goal of a sustainable energy economy in mind, the Committee suggests that short-to medium-term policy have the following aims:

5.221 A large number of witnesses argued that only by pricing carbon, and thus encouraging energy markets to internalise the costs of greenhouse emissions, would serious progress be made on reducing the greenhouse intensity of energy generation in Australia. Mrs Leith Wood, Manager of Government and Public Affairs for AGL, argued that the poor greenhouse performance of energy markets was exacerbated by the fact that the pollution from electricity production was not costed. This was at odds with the situation faced by other polluting industries:

Australian Democrats Recommendation 6

The Australian Democrats recommend that Australian governments prepare to set time frames to replace coal-fired power with a mixture of gas and renewables, with the proportion of renewable energy steadily increasing until the Australian economy is predominantly based on renewable sources some time after 2050.

 

Footnotes

[1] Pacific Power, Submission 98, p 801.

[2] Dr Clive Hamilton, Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 10 March 2000, p 61.

[3] Dr Clive Hamilton, Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 10 March 2000, p 58.

[4] Mr David Abba, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 234.

[5] Mr David Abba, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 234.

[6] Proof Committee Hansard, Sydney, 22 March 2000, p 298.

[7] The paper was prepared by an independent working group for PMSEIC. Its members were Professor Don Nicklin (Chair), Dr Tom Connor (Kinhill Pty Ltd), Dr John White (Systems Engineering Consortium), and Dr John Wright (CSIRO Energy Technology).

[8] Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council, From Defence to Attack: Australia's Response to the Greenhouse Effect, 25 June 1999, pp 3, 7.

[9] Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council, From Defence to Attack: Australia's Response to the Greenhouse Effect, 25 June 1999, p 9.

[10] Australian Greenhouse Office, Submission 169, p 1693.

[11] Australian Greenhouse Office, Submission 169, p 1694.

[12] Australian Greenhouse Office, Submission 169, p 1693.

[13] Australian Greenhouse Office, Submission 169, p 1694.

[14] Australian Greenhouse Office, Submission 169, pp 1694-5.

[15] On 23 May 2000, the Government approved implementation of the Renewable Energy Action Agenda (REAA), and established an Industry CEO group to provide high level support, and a Renewable Energy Implementation Group to implement REAA strategies and actions (Industry Science Resources, New Era, New Energy – Renewable Energy Action Agenda, Executive Summary, May 2000).

[16] Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Action Agendas - Renewable Energy, Website: isr.gov.au/agendas/Sectors/energy.html (19/07/00), p 2.

[17] Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Action Agendas – Renewable Energy, Website: isr.gov.au/agendas/Sectors/energy.html (19/07/00), p 3.

[18] Department of Industry, Science and Resources, Action Agendas - Renewable Energy, Website: isr.gov.au/agendas/Sectors/energy.html (19/07/00), pp 3-4.

[19] Mr Chris Dunstan, Official Committee Hansard, Sydney, 22 March 2000, p 269.

[20] Sustainable Energy Development Authority, Green Power Briefing: Green Power and Wood Wastes; Sustainable Energy Development Authority, National Green Power Accreditation Program: Accreditation Document, Version 1, January 2000, Appendix A, p 14.

[21] Official Committee Hansard,, Sydney, 22 March 2000, p 271.

[22] Official Committee Hansard,, Sydney, 22 March 2000, pp 269, 299.

[23] Great Southern Energy, Submission 150, p 1558.

[24] Great Southern Energy, Submission 150, p 1558.

[25] Integral Energy, Annual Report, 1997, p 16.

[26] Integral Energy, Annual Report, 1997, p 19.

[27] Great Southern Energy, Submission 150, p 1560.

[28] Senate Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee, Report on the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Bill 2000, August 2000, p 41.

[29] Mr Alan Pears, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 234.

[30] Mr David Abba, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 236.

[31] Proof Committee Hansard, Sydney, 23 March 2000, p 411.

[32] Proof Committee Hansard, Sydney, 23 March 2000, p 411.

[33] Senate Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee, Report on the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Bill 2000, August 2000, p 34.

[34] Combined Explanatory Memorandum, Renewable Energy (Electricity) Bill 2000/Renewable Energy (Electricity) (Charge) Bill 2000, pp 20, 45.

[35] Senate Environment, Communications, Information Technology and the Arts References Committee, Report on the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Bill 2000, August 2000.

[36] Mr Alan Pears, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 245.

[37] Pheonix Windpower, Submission 226, p 2957.

[38] Proof Committee Hansard, Sydney, 22 March 2000, p 301.

[39] Mr David Abba, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 236.

[40] Mr Alan Pears, Proof Committee Hansard, Melbourne, 21 March 2000, p 235.

[41] Pheonix Windpower, Submission 226, p 2954.

[42] Pheonix Windpower, Submission 226, pp 2954-60.

[43] Mr Philip Harrington, Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 22 June 2000, p 694.

[44] Sustainable Technologies Australia Ltd, Submission 154, p 1574.

[45] Prime Minister's Science, Engineering and Innovation Council, From Defence to Attack: Australia's Response to the Greenhouse Effect, 25 June 1999, p 9.

[46] Australian Greenhouse Office, Fact Sheet: Generator Efficiency Standards - Powering into the New Millennium, http://www.greenhouse.gov.au/markets/gen_eff/qa.html (14/07/00).

[47] Combined Explanatory Memorandum, Renewable Energy (Electricity) Bill 2000/Renewable Energy (Electricity) (Charge) Bill 2000, p 20; and Mr Philip Harrington, Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 22 June 2000, p 696.

[48] Mr Philip Harrington, Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 22 June 2000, p 697.

[49] Allen Consulting and McLennan Magasanik Associates, Energy Market Reform and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: A Report to the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, March 1999, p xiii.

[50] Allen Consulting and McLennan Magasanik Associates, Energy Market Reform and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: A Report to the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, March 1999, p xiii.

[51] Allen Consulting and McLennan Magasanik Associates, Energy Market Reform and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: A Report to the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, March 1999, p xiii.

[52] Allen Consulting and McLennan Magasanik Associates, Energy Market Reform and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reductions: A Report to the Department of Industry, Science and Resources, March 1999, p xiii.

[53] Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 22 June 2000, p 698.

[54] McLennan Maganasik Associates, Greenhouse Gas Emission Projections: Australian Electricity Generation and Natural Gas Combustion, Report to Australian Greenhouse Office, 5 June 2000, p 34.

[55] McLennan Maganasik Associates, Greenhouse Gas Emission Projections: Australian Electricity Generation and Natural Gas Combustion, Report to Australian Greenhouse Office, 5 June 2000, p vi.

[56] McLennan Maganasik Associates, Greenhouse Gas Emission Projections: Australian Electricity Generation and Natural Gas Combustion, Report to Australian Greenhouse Office, 5 June 2000, pp 36-39.

[57] Proof Committee Hansard, Canberra, 10 March 2000, p 58.

[58] Centre for International Economics, Early Greenhouse Action, Report prepared for the Australian Greenhouse Office, June 1999, p 20.

[59] Proof Committee Hansard, Sydney, 23 March 2000, p 392.