Libs go cold on solar plan - Feed-in tariff scheme `inefficient'

Canberra Times
Friday 22/1/2010 Page: 6

The ACT Opposition has withdrawn support for the ACT Government's solar feed-in tariff scheme, criticising its efficiency after calculating it cost about $500 for every tonne of emissions it saved. But the ACT Government and the Greens have rejected the Liberals' comments, arguing the scheme was never pitched as a low-cost abatement solution. Rather, it was aimed at encouraging the uptake of solar energy as part of a bigger strategy for reducing emissions. The scheme pays households about 50c per kW/hour of energy their solar panels generate, almost four times the standard rate, and the additional cost to electricity retailers is then passed on to non-participating customers, costing them about $27 extra a year, according to ActewAGL estimates.

Based on figures from the ACT Government on the scheme's operation since it started on March 1, 2009, to September 30, which showed $251,000 had been paid to solar generating households to save 556 tonnes of emissions, this worked out to about $500 a tonne. Liberals leader Zed Seselja previously supported the scheme, telling the Legislative Assembly in July, "[The feed-in tariff] seeks to encourage Canberra families to utilise this technology by installing renewable energy generators in their homes by offering a premium rate for any electricity they feed into the grid. Initiatives that encourage families to be more environmentally aware should be applauded."

But yesterday, Mr Seselja distanced Himself from his party's endorsement of the scheme, even though his party had estimated in 2008 the cost per tonne would be about $500. "What we are saying is that it's an inefficient scheme," Mr Seselja said yesterday. "We said there's some merit in solar; we're pro-solar. What we raised concerns about was efficiency and we raised those concerns right up front. What we're now getting is hard figures about what the benefit is and how mach it costs."

Acting ACT Environment Minister Joy Burch said the scheme was a success, with 905 households participating, and that the September figures Mr Seselja quoted were outdated. "The Liberals don't seem to be able to offer up a clear alternative policy to encourage solar use on a small or a large scale," Ms Burch said. "Over five years we expect there will be a reduction of 107,000 tonnes of greenhouse gases, and that's like taking 5000 cars off our roads. That's something we should be supporting."

Greens environment spokesman Shane Rattenbury also criticised Mr Seselja's position. "Zed is missing the point around the purpose of a feed-in tariff because it's not designed to be the lowest-cost abatement," Mr Rattenbury said. "It's an industry development policy - growth jobs among small business. I think those small business communities would be very concerned to hear that the Canberra Liberals are taking the position that they're taking." Mr Rattenbury did agree with Mr Seselja on one thing: the Government needed to hurry up with the implementation of stage two of the scheme, extending it to larger generators, which at the moment is the subject of a discussion paper. "I have some sympathy for the argument Zed's making. The feed-in tariff we have at the moment is a half-baked scheme."