Probably should have been titled “an attempted defense of the indefensible” or “a bazillion excuses and nonsense as to why everyone should pay far too much for my favored research projects or I’ll never get rich”. I’ve yet to see a valid excuse for “renewables” but Neil Perry gives it his best shot.
Power prices are a hot political topic at the moment. While politicians argue about who is to blame for higher prices, the renewable energy target (RET) is also being reviewed.
The RET has been the focus of considerable debate since the introduction of the carbon pricing scheme. Critics of the target argue that it is redundant or that it interferes with the working of the carbon pricing scheme leading to a distortion of market processes. Australian industry groups, such as the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, highlight the costs to consumers and other energy users and are calling for it to be abolished.
There are undoubtedly aspects of the RET that need fine tuning. But it is not redundant, it corrects market distortions rather than distorts the market, and the cost of the target pales in comparison to network costs and the costs of exorbitant profit margins in the electricity supply industry.