Renewables Target

Welcome to our new page on Renewable Energy.

A lot has been happening in recent weeks with many people putting in a lot of time into individual and group Submissions to the Renewable Energy Target Review that was called by the Abbott Government.
Submissions were due in on Friday 16th May and have come from all parts of the Community to oppose the potentially destructive review.

The Lighter Footprint submission was a joint effort of a number of LFP members championed by Lynne meeting over the past few weeks and the full document can be found here if you wish to have a read of it.

Here is the front page:



Lighter Footprints is a community group in Melbourne's eastern suburbs, based in the Boroondara and Whitehorse areas.

We welcome this opportunity to make a submission to the review of the Renewable Energy Target.

Our submission consists of two parts:

  1. Lighter Footprints submission

  1. More than 80 individual submissions, collected at Burwood Festival on Saturday 3 May. These letters were signed by people attending the festival who felt strongly about preserving and strengthening the target. We will mail these to the review (names and addresses are confidential).

Carolyn Ingvarson
Lighter Footprints

 In addition, a great many individuals were happy to sign this briefer document to register their concern over any plans to reduce the legal framework incentive to grow the Renewable Energy base.

Carolyn and John demonstrating  the model of the Spanish solar thermal power station that generates power day and night. Burwood Festival Saturday 3rd May.

A number of helpful supporting documents were created along the way to collate information including this.


From The Climate Institute:

The Climate Institute’s overarching concerns about the RET review are:
1.    Decarbonisation of the electricity sector is essential to our national interest in avoiding the economic, social and environmental consequences of 2°C global warming.
2.    The RET is necessary but not sufficient for decarbonisation: a stable, predictable decarbonisation signal consistent with the 2°C goal is needed.
3.    Any reduction in the RET further undermines confidence in the electricity market.
4.    Reducing the RET is not the solution to surplus capacity
5.    In the absence of a price and limit on carbon, the Government’s “safeguard mechanism” should regulate an exit pathway for ageing high-carbon plant.  Reduction of the RET will require this regulation to be even stronger.
Responses to specific questions are:
+        The RET should be retained and complemented with a mechanism to facilitate the orderly market exit of lowest-quality, emission-intensive generation. If the trajectory of annual targets is adjusted, any adjustment must support an overall increase in the amount of renewable generation and emission reduction above that driven by the current RET.
+        If the price and limit on carbon are repealed, the RET must be recognised as an even more important partner to the Emission Reduction Fund in achieving Australia’s emission reduction goals. The Government’s yet to be determined “safeguard mechanism” for the electricity sector could include performance standards or other measures to ensure timely market exit of ageing high-carbon plant in line with Australia’s fair contribution to avoiding 2°C warming.
+        Frequency of RET reviews should be reduced to four-yearly intervals and the scope of reviews more narrowly defined to avoid further market uncertainty

The full submissions may be found here.

No comments:

Post a Comment