Rival Interests use fear to sell their case in energy wars - 13th February 2017

Rival interests use fear as the key weapon to sell their case in our energy wars

THEO THEOPHANOUS, Herald Sun

February 13, 2017 

THE next decade will be characterised by what I call The Energy Wars. They will involve fierce battles between powerful interests, political forces, conflicting ideologies and even states. The battlelines will be characterised by populism and fear.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull sought to draw the battlelines through his vision of clean coal power stations without which Australians will experience unreliable supply, higher prices, more carbon emissions, and fewer jobs.

The blackouts in South Australia and potentially NSW have lent weight to his argument.

By contrast, the Greens warn of global warming, seas rising, crops failing and other disasters unless we move to 100 per cent renewable energy. The Labor Party tries to sit somewhere in between, while state governments blame each other or the regulator as it becomes apparent that intermittent renewable energy can’t guarantee supply in some circumstances.

There are many such inconvenient truths. Clean coal technology is very expensive and it’s doubtful it can deliver anything like zero emissions.

Two technologies are proposed. The first is ultra-supercritical technology to ensure coal is burnt more efficiently, reducing emissions by about 20 per cent and even more if coupled with pre-drying technology.

The second involves carbon capture and storage, where carbon is captured before it is released into the atmosphere, and various methods are used to store it.

The US spent about $7 billion to develop a half-sized coal power station with those technologies — about five times the normal cost. The station captures about 60 per cent of carbon emissions. It is hugely expensive and would cost even more if the carbon were stored underground.

There are also inconvenient facts on the Green side. Vast amounts of scarce minerals are used in producing solar, wind and large-scale battery storage capability. Depending on available sunshine, it’s estimated it takes between three and seven years of operation to recover carbon emissions from the manufacture, construction and installation of solar panels. Vast amounts of energy from dirty coal power stations in China are used inmaking solar panels and other renewable energy products while the damage to the environment of large-scale use and disposal of batteries is potentially huge.

We have to get beyond the fear and misinformation of vested interests and politicians. For example, we may be able to retrofit a number of existing coal-fired power stations that we think will be around for the next 20-plus years with USC technology, reducing their emissions by 20 to 30 per cent. That initiative in Victoria could save as much in carbon emissions as 1000 wind turbines.

The use of gas as a transition fuel to a renewable future should also be put back on the table. The Greens’ stance has shifted over the past few years and they argue we can go magically from coal to renewables without gas. Just ask the people of South Australia if they think that is possible.

A rig in Bass Strait's Yolla gas field

Gas has one of the lowest environmental impacts, especially when used directly in households and business as it is in 80 per cent of households in Victoria. Even when used to produce electricity, gas emits about half the carbon of a USC coal power station. As noted, renewables are not exactly zero carbon in their overall impact and gas is certainly a better option than batteries to fill the gap when renewable energy is unavailable.

IN Victoria, gas has provided cheap efficient energy for six decades. But there is only one major source — Bass Strait — which is depleting and increasing in price. We need new and cheaper sources.

New Victorian legislation supported by both major parties will ban unconventional gas (fracking) onshore because of concerns for the water table. But it also imposes a moratorium until 2020 on conventional gas, during which time its availability and safety will be examined by the Chief Scientist.

The Andrews Government resisted demands to ban all gas onshore forever. Hopefully, positive findings by Victoria’s Chief Scientist will allow earlier production of gas using conventional means to secure cheaper energy prices and jobs.

Many combatants are vying to win the energy wars. The battles have meant we have not had a debate on what we desperately need — an emissions trading scheme which would apply a market test to technologies and fuels to deliver the greatest emissions reductions at the lowest cost. Sensible propositions like an ETS remain on the backburner despite being backed by politicians across parties, including Malcolm Turnbull and Bill Shorten.

It seems we are destined to continue the energy wars as politicians and differing interests, technologies and ideologies vie for supremacy, using fear to sell their case.

Theo Theophanous is a political commentator and a former energy minister