Bloomberg : Scrapping RET = Higher Power Prices

According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the only ones to benefit from a scrapping or reduction of Australia’s Renewable Energy Target would be the fossil fuel based power generators.

It’s getting harder for the Abbott Government to sell its spin attacks on the RET and Bloomberg’s new analysis will be difficult for the RET review panel to ignore.

BNEF’s analysis found abolishing or slashing the RET would see the loss of  12-21 billion dollars of investment, cut 7,000-11,000 future jobs in wind and solar industries every year and lead to higher power prices for consumers.

However, it would also deliver power companies 6-12 billion dollars in extra revenue from 2015 to 2020.

With the latter in mind, it becomes crystal clear why Big Energy wants to see renewable energy heading towards the door.

BNEF’s study found if the RET is left as is, it will save the average household $44 a year on electricity bills, increasing to $142 in 2020.

“This is because renewables like wind and solar – which have no fuel costs – push down the price of producing power from coal and gas on the wholesale markets. In only four years, this more than offsets the cost of building the new wind and solar power stations under the Renewable Energy Target,” said Kobad Bhavnagri, Bloomberg New Energy Finance’s head of Australia.

“Governments and power companies that stand to profit handsomely from abolition of the scheme have so far only talked about the costs. But that’s like only talking about the costs of buying a new house and forgetting that you don’t have to pay rent anymore.”

With regard to small scale solar, the analysis states abolishing the subsidy for the acquisition of small solar power systems would see installation rates plummet by at least 24% in the medium term.

Bloomberg’s analysis, Modelling Options For Australia’s RET Review, can be downloaded here.


Renewable Energy Target – Costs Vs. Benefits.