Media

It comes as clean energy investors and the former NSW energy minister Matt Kean blasted the proposal to keep Eraring open beyond 2025. Simon Corbell, the chief executive of the Clean Energy Investor Group, said delaying the closure of Eraring would create “significant downside risk for investors”. “This could result in less investment in new clean energy projects in NSW and will blow out our emissions target and budget. Australia cannot afford to have that at this time,” he said. Read more

Energy groups such as Climate Energy Finance, a think tank that advocates for a speedier transition to renewables, are critical of the proposal. A report by CEF in July estimated that keeping Eraring open at only half of its capacity would require the NSW government to pay Origin between $200 million and $400 million a year in subsidies. Read more

Eraring is Australia’s largest greenhouse gas emitter, releasing more than 12 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent into the atmosphere each year. Tim Buckley, director of think tank Climate Energy Finance, says keeping the plant running would be a “massive retrograde step”. Read more

Environmental activists point out that paying hundreds of millions of dollars a year to keep Eraring open is not needed, and that two reports – including “The Lights Will Stay On” by the Climate Energy Finance and “Earing can be closed on schedule” by Nexa Advisory – outline why and how Eraring should close on time. Read more

Clean energy investors said delaying the closure of the generator could crimp new investment in new clean energy projects and blow out Australia’s emissions target and budget. “Australia cannot afford to have that at this time,” said Simon Corbell, chief executive of the Clean Energy Investor Group, representing investors with about 11 gigawatts of installed renewables capacity. Read more

An extended interview with Tim Buckley on the Utopia Now! podcast covering why finance is important for mitigating the ecological and climate crisis, how the green energy transition is going, whether we are decarbonising fast enough, and government capture by fossil fuel interests amongst other topics. Read more

On the first anniversary of the game-changing US Inflation Reduction that has turbocharged energy transition there and triggered a global race to the top, Tim Buckley and Blair Palese review its top 5 impacts and the top 5 actions Australia should take to respond. Read more

Read more

Tim Buckley speaks at the Australian National Manufacturing Summit noting that while the federal government has plans to value add to get more out of the country’s rich endowment of in-demand minerals, “Australia’s critical minerals strategy has lovely words but $500 million doesn’t cut it,” in the context of massive accelerating public capital commitments to energy transition by our trade partners and competitors. Read more

Tim Buckley said reconfiguring the transmission grid would increase reliability and is key for decarbonisation and a shift away from fossil fuel commodity volatility. Read more

The Productivity Commission report is a misreading of the implications for Australia of a profound global geopolitical shift already underway: unprecedented government intervention by the United States, European Union, Canada, South Korea, Japan and a growing list of other economies to reposition themselves in the accelerating global energy transition, rebuild manufacturing onshore, and secure clean-tech supply chains against China’s decade-long head start. Read more

As Victoria bans methane gas in new homes, Tim Buckley notes the rollout of green hydrogen is facing its own challenges. Whilst Australia’s $2bn Hydrogen Headstart scheme, set to start in fiscal 2027, has been touted to kick start the hydrogen economy, Tim Buckley warned that handing out money is not an economical or long-term solution. “Subsidies are time limited, which means they are limited in their effectiveness and nature. The industry is not going to be viable absent those subsidies. You ultimately need a price on carbon,, where companies would do the right thing or pay tax for doing the wrong thing, in this case carbon emissions.” Read more