AEMO slams Murdoch media campaign that claims renewables are not low cost

The Australian Energy Market Operator has ventured into the mainstream media discourse concerning the shift towards green energy, emphasizing that assertions suggesting its evaluation of renewable energy costs excludes transmission and storage are erroneous.

The conservative media, headed by the Murdoch press and including other sources, has been attempting to imply that AEMO's long-term strategy, known as the Integrated System Plan, and the GenCost report created by AEMO and the CSIRO, fail to consider the expenses associated with the system.

Multiple articles released in the past few weeks have criticized the GenCost and ISP reports. This appears to be a coordinated effort to oppose renewable energy, new transmission connections, and to promote small modular reactors, which are not widely used in the Western countries on a commercial level.

The initiative has already received feedback from Paul Graham, a CSIRO economist. However, when a columnist from Murdoch media attempted to exploit this response as evidence that renewable energy sources are not affordable, it seemed to have overwhelmed AEMO (Australian Energy Market Operator).

In a media statement released on Monday, the organization contradicted recent media claims that AEMO's Integrated System Plan (ISP) neglects the expenses linked to transmission, storage, and generation required to deliver electricity to Australian consumers.

"The Internet Service Provider (ISP) is an all-encompassing system strategy developed through extensive economic calculations and engineering examination. It undergoes simulations to:

The strategy considers the composition of energy sources in the coming years and incorporates the necessary infrastructure for transmitting and storing energy to ensure continuous electricity supply.

AEMO reveals that the most recent ISP, published in 2022, included 32 discussion boards and online seminars, 198 written contributions, engagement with over 1,500 interested parties, and "ongoing discussions on every element" of the report.

The internet service provider (ISP) states that using newly developed renewable energy sources, supported by hydro, batteries, and gas, is the most affordable method to provide electricity to households and commercial establishments in Australia, especially as coal-powered generation plants are phased out.

Additionally, it mentions that although the Internet Service Provider (ISP) does not simulate technologies that are not permitted by current regulations, such as nuclear power, the GenCost report encompasses all feasible sources of energy generation, including nuclear power.

This demonstrates that the cost of nuclear power generation is more expensive and takes a longer time to develop compared to renewable energy sources supported by storage and transmission systems.

Every significant energy company in Australia, along with two previous chief scientists, Alan Finkel and Robin Batterham, who are known to be advocates of nuclear technology, have provided support for this evaluation. They assert that nuclear energy does not have a part to play in Australia's transition to green energy, at least for the next twenty years.

However, the federal Coalition is pinning its hopes on nuclear power and intensifying its resistance to - and crusade against - renewable energy sources.

This is being accomplished through the legislative body by means of Opposition leader Peter Dutton, and through vigorous efforts led by former National leaders Barnaby Joyce, utilizing channels like the Bush Summit which receives backing from the Murdoch media and Gina Rinehart.

The resistance against renewable energy sources is intensifying on social networking platforms as well. Numerous TikTok and YouTube videos are circulating, spreading falsehoods about wind power. These videos, for example, deceitfully claim that turbines are unable to operate unless they are fueled by coal-fired generators.

According to green energy developers, their interactions with property owners have been negatively impacted by this campaign of false information. This is impeding efforts to engage in meaningful discussions regarding the potential benefits of green energy.

RenewEconomy is also witnessing a substantial increase in comments, emails, and social media engagement criticizing renewable energy.

A portion of it is truly bonkers, like those proposing we explore online platforms (with up to one million followers) that endorse the idea of interstellar reptiles governing the world, alongside the notion that the promotion of wind and solar energy is actually a scheming plot to manipulate people's thoughts. I kid you not.

Some people are easily fooled, believing all kinds of ridiculous things about wind farms and solar panels. This particular video on You-Tube, which asserts that wind turbine blades cannot be rotated by wind energy alone, is quite popular.

A particular Facebook page, which has garnered attention from Murdoch media, resides at the heart of the protest against a significant wind farm project in northern Queensland. This platform clarifies that it does not hold an opposing stance towards renewable energy sources.

However, it offers a noticeable connection to a Facebook page that releases articles like "The Deceptive Nature of Electric Vehicles" and "Solar Energy: A Pointless and High-Risk Investment." Moreover, it promotes the misguided views of One Nation's Malcolm Roberts and the LNP's Gerard Rennick, who deny the scientific consensus on climate change.

The entirety of this absurdity can and must be disregarded, but it frequently emerges in everyday discussions, frequently exaggerated by allegedly "respectable" journalists in the right-leaning media. This is creating difficulties for the renewable energy sector.

Paul Graham, the experienced energy economist at CSIRO, penned a message to The Australian last week in order to elucidate the methodologies employed in generating the GenCost calculations. This correspondence has been officially published on CSIRO's website.

This came after a previous article that argued against it. Graham highlighted that its cost evaluations center on determining the expenses of transition from the projected 50% fluctuating renewable energy portion by 2030 to alternative options of 60%, 70%, 80%, or 90% reliance on renewable sources.

"All the current resources, facilities, and technology for generating, storing, and transmitting energy until 2030 are considered as already spent expenses as they do not affect the costs of constructing new infrastructure in that particular year," Graham states.

However, he mentions that AEMO's ISP does indeed consider all additional expenses. Moreover, the ISP explicitly states that wind, solar, and storage are the most cost-effective alternative.

The Australian repeated themselves by publishing another piece written by the same commentator. They argued that Graham provided evidence suggesting that CSIRO's cost estimates did not consider transmission and storage. However, Graham vehemently denies these claims, labeling them as absurd.

"If you are constructing a fresh wind and solar installation at this moment, you will be able to utilize the existing infrastructure, according to Graham's statement to RenewEconomy. This is also applicable to newly established coal and gas facilities. There is no need to construct or calculate the expenses all over again. The infrastructure is already in place."

In his communication to The Australian, Graham emphasized the importance of being vigilant when deciphering alternate research that suggests increased expenses associated with incorporating renewable energy.

Typically, these are founded on renewable energy sources functioning in manners that don't align with the most cost-effective system approach, which necessitates utilizing all the accessible technologies and implementing renewables only in situations where they bring down overall system expenses.

Giles Parkinson established and manages Renew Economy. He is also the creator of One Step Off The Grid and the editor of The Driven, a publication focused on electric vehicles. Giles has a 40-year tenure as a journalist and previously held roles as a business and deputy editor at the Australian Financial Review.