In recent times contingency FCAS has become a very lucrative revenue stream for participants in the NEM able to offer services into the various contingency markets.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5d73f/5d73fb6227bd08f532b3a0d815a3d33515428395" alt=""
The federal election is barrelling towards us, or perhaps not coming fast enough. Regardless, you may be wondering what the parties battling for our votes have planned for Australia’s energy system.
Unfortunately for the informed elector and mercifully for the author writing this piece on a short time frame, there is not much policy swirling around this federal election. Nevertheless we will pull apart the small policy differences that do exist.
The typical measurement for the viability of a policy is the so-called “pub test” — whether your average punter in the pub thinks something is a good idea. As we are slightly more sophisticated at Gridcognition, I am proposing a slightly more rigorous test: the bathtub test. Everyone’s favourite metaphor for energy vs power.
Let’s get the bath running, shall we?
Policy Name: Powering Australia Plan
Form Factor: Report
Link: https://www.alp.org.au/policies/powering-australia
Key policies:
The good: Removing FBT from EVs will make them significantly more competitive as an option for employers providing vehicles to employees. For example, a $50,000 Nissan Leaf would be $8700 cheaper under the scheme.
The bad: Lots of cash being splashed into Labor-favoured technologies (but thankfully not of the fossil-fuel variety like the other side of the political aisle). If our existing regulatory and market mechanisms aren’t driving the right investments, maybe the policies that inform these mechanisms need to be updated?
Bathtub score: Luke warm
Policy Name: Lower Power Prices, Our Plan for Resources
Form Factor: Web page
Links:
Key policies:
The good: Though not especially cost effective, Snowy 2.0 will provide dispatchable energy to smooth out peaks in renewable generation.
The bad: More investment in fossil-fuel projects, when we need less if we’re going to our 2050 climate targets.
Bathtub score: Stone cold
Policy Name: Powering Past Coal & Gas
Form Factor: Report
Link: https://greens.org.au/sites/default/files/2022-04/Greens-2022-Plan–Powering-Past-Coal-and-Gas.pdf
Key policies:
The good: Helping households eliminate gas connections and purchase EVs is a sensible and targeted approach to reducing emissions and air pollution.
The bad: A publicly owned retailer will likely do little to move the needle on the electricity prices paid by households. Retailing costs only account for 13% of electricity bills in the NEM (source: ACCC).
Bathtub score: Toasty
Policy Name: Various
Form Factor: Various
Links:
When discussing the ‘Teals’ it is important to note that they are independent candidates. The policies drawn together here are common threads between the candidates cited. They do not represent the views of all ‘Teal’ candidates.
Key policies:
The good: Though seemingly a small step, legislating emissions reductions policies gives citizens a legal recourse to ensure they are carried out.
The bad: A bit light on the details for some candidates.
Bathtub score: Tentatively snug
In recent times contingency FCAS has become a very lucrative revenue stream for participants in the NEM able to offer services into the various contingency markets.
The minimum viable product (MVP) is a concept deeply ingrained into startup culture.
This week Australia’s Energy Security Board released its Post-2025 Market Design Options Paper.