Recent state-based energy plans and announcements of the acceleration of some coal plant closures has again raised questions of how best to manage the energy transition for communities and workers. This week reported analysis has pointed to potential impacts if careful planning and support for affected regions in New South Wales is not undertaken.
There is also an increasing number of case studies, both internationally and locally, that can help illustrate the options towards achieving a just transition. To take advantage of that work the Australian Energy Council commissioned consulting and advisory firm, Strategen, to undertake a wide-ranging review of overseas and Australian experience and distil relevant insights for Australia. Today we are releasing the resulting report, which will provide an invaluable resource.
The report Just Transition – Navigating Australia’s Energy Transformation – considers Australia’s current approach and possible future Just Transition outcomes. In doing so it considers the following questions:
Strategen’s work establishes some statements of aspiration, which includes that regional empowerment and national alignment on Just Transition could be achieved through layered, inclusive and collaborative governance, vision setting and resourcing models. Meanwhile, it notes the negative impact of plant closures can be mitigated and positive opportunities and benefits for regions, workers and industry can be realised through multi-year planning and preparation.
Case studies from around the world and here in Australia illustrate the difference in outcomes when there is a strong government focus on supporting those affected. The report finds government engagement and resourcing is an essential part in advancing Just Transition, particularly when it also empowers local communities and workers impacted and permits maximum autonomy for them to choose their own future.
Structured financial support directed to impacted regions and workers in a way that respects local differences, opportunities and empowerment. Impacted workers will need to be actively supported in the transition to provide security and avoid their skills being lost to the wider community.
Proactive and timely transition planning in the years prior to closure is absolutely necessary for success along with comprehensive and broad engagement with key stakeholders, while near and longer term solutions are needed and should work together.
The report can be found here. We believe it will provide a useful reference for what has gone before and what is coming.
The release of an expert study of last year’s autumn wind drought in Australia by consultancy Global Power Energy[i] this week raised some questions about the approach used by the Australian Energy Market Operator’s in its 2024 Integrated System Plan (ISP). The ISP has been subject to debate before. For example, there has previously been criticism that some of the ISP’s modelling assumes what amounts to “perfect foresight” of wind and solar output and demand[ii], rather than a series of inputs and assumptions. The ISP is produced every two years and with the draft of the next ISP (2026) due for release soon, it is useful to consider what it is and what it is not, along with what the ISP seeks to do.
As the Federal Government pursues its productivity agenda, environmental approval processes are under scrutiny. While faster approvals could help, they will remain subject to judicial review. Traditionally, judicial review battles focused on fossil fuel projects, but in recent years it has been used to challenge and delay clean energy developments. This plot twist is complicating efforts to meet 2030 emissions targets and does not look like going away any time soon. Here, we examine the politics of judicial review, its impact on the energy transition, and options for reform.
With energy prices increasing for households and businesses there is the question: why aren’t we seeing lower bills given the promise of cheaper energy with increasing amounts of renewables in the grid. A recent working paper published by Griffith University’s Centre for Applied Energy Economics & Policy Research has tested the proposition of whether a renewables grid is cheaper than a counterfactual grid that has only coal and gas as new entrants. It provides good insights into the dynamics that have been at play.
Send an email with your question or comment, and include your name and a short message and we'll get back to you shortly.