COP28 More of a Fizz Rather than a Bang

Logo for COP 28 UAE event featuring a circular design with intricate yellow patterns on a green background, symbolizing sustainability and environmental themes, displayed over a dark brick wall texture.

With just 2 days of negotiations left at the COP28 summit, it is clear that world leaders are not entering into the summit with the same sweeping mandated as seen in Paris in 2015. In fact, it is becoming increasingly clearer that the Paris 1.5-degree target is unlikely, never mind strengthening the resolve on these targets.

Despite this year, 2023, already being declared the warmest on record by November, and having six record breaking months and two record breaking seasons, world leaders as squabbling over texts which will have little to no impact on emissions or targets.

With the head of this year’s COP, Sultan Al Jaber, the head of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company (ADNOC) in the position many thought would create a conflict of interest, he is indeed between a rock and a hard place. With over 80 countries, many at the forefront of climate change pushing for an end to the use of fossil fuels, a topic every previous COP has been careful to avoid, the Sultan is now being lobbied from both sides, with OPEC now pressuring members and the chair to reject any deal which targets fossil fuels directly.

Reuters, who broke the news shared a letter from December 6th sent by OPEC Secretary-General Haitham al-Ghais “It seems that the undue and disproportionate pressure against fossil fuels may reach a tipping point with irreversible consequences, as the draft decision still contains options on fossil fuels phase out … I avail of this opportunity to respectfully urge all esteemed OPEC Member Countries and Non-OPEC Countries participating in the CoC and their distinguished delegations in the COP 28 negotiations to proactively reject any text or formula that targets energy i.e. fossil fuels rather than emissions”.

The Sultan is therefore walking a very fine line, as evident by his calling of the majlis, elders conference, on Sunday. In there, the main focus was two pronged, one the aforementioned fossil fuels phase out or abatement, and the second on financing.

Climate adaptation funds is not a new concept, it was raised pre-the-Paris agreement, and every year since. However, despite UN reports released in November, Adaptation Gap Report 2023, showing 2021 funding fell 15% year on year to a cumulative $24.6bn, but more than $200 – 350bn is needed, and 2023 is likely to only be around the $100bn mark. The idea of now increasing the burden on fossil fuels emissions to be phased out and not abated will leave many countries, especially in the African continent behind. As emerging and expensive technologies, which will allow other countries to continue producing, will not be available to them.

I once again argue, with politicians and special interests lobbying, the value of the COP is diminishing. Energy policy should not be in the hands of those who are worrying about re-election in 1, 2 or 4 years but those who understand the science, industries and financing of the projects required to make the change. We cannot just turn off coal, the Eraring “closure” has shown us that in bright bold lights (or blackouts), so there has to be balance. But that cannot be done by those who are not in that world or influenced by only one side of an argument.

However, with Azerbaijan the COP29 hosts, a country with at least 7bn barrels of commercial oil, and 1.3 trillion cubic meters of natural gas and one of the world’s largest gas fields I am sure will fly the flag for phase out of fossil fuels and strong targets for all nations attending.

With Statements due in the next 48 hours, I may be proven incorrect, and the Sultan is absolutely making the right noises, “I want everyone to come prepared with solutions … I want everyone to come ready to be flexible and to accept compromise. I told everyone not to come with any prepared statements, and no prescribed positions. I really want everyone to rise above self-interests and to start thinking of the common good.” But as always, the proof is in the packages which come out of the talks and with only two days to go and no consensus the clock is absolutely counting down.

Transmission Requires Community Engagement Realisation

Back view of two children and an adult walking towards wind turbines, the adult holding a colourful pinwheel up in the air

With the government ploughing ahead with the re-wiring the nation rhetoric and discussions about $10,000/km costs for land the attention of the AEMC and others have naturally been drawn to the requirement for community engagement.

Many panels and speakers at this years’ All Energy conference in Victoria honed in on the requirements for the local communities to be brought into the fold regarding Renewable Energy Zones, Transmission and the benefit this could bring to those communities.

The AEMC have taken this a step further and on Thursday released the final requirements which are required for any transmission projects to get through the regulatory investment test (RIT-T). They are expecting for this engagement to be across all affected parties from councils to local landowners and will ensure they not only have clear information about the proposals but they are aware of the rights they hold.

Taking directly from the AEMC announcement the main changes being made include:

  • Stakeholders are to receive information that is clear, accessible, accurate, relevant and timely and explains the rationale for the proposed project.
  • Engagement consultation materials, methods of communication and participatory processes must be tailored to the needs of different stakeholders.
  • The stakeholders’ role in the engagement process must be clearly explained to them, including how their input will be taken into account.
  • Stakeholders are provided with a range of opportunities to be regularly involved throughout the planning of ‘actionable’ or ‘future’ Integrated System Plan (ISP) projects and Renewable Energy Zones (REZs).

This is timely given the announcement from Chris Bowen who was speaking at the Future Energy conference in Adelaide this week who amongst his optimistic speech stated that “a properly constructed renewable grid is a reliable grid… is one that we can count on in difficult times,” and that access to transmission or delays in building new infrastructure would be the main contributor to Australia not meeting its targets.

These targets are now set to 82% of Australia’s energy coming from renewable sources by the end of the decade, and GHG emissions cut by 45% (in comparison to 2005 levels) by the same time.

However, with the focus of the government squaring in on transmission as the key messaging to Australia missing its targets and not the lack of cohesive renewable energy strategy for the past 10 years or the governments approvals of new gas fields, you do wonder if that is part of the reason our Minister for Climate Change and Energy is ducking the hard questions at this years COP28 in Dubai which starts at the end of the month.

The announcement that he is dispatching his Assistant Minister, Jenny McAllister has not gone unnoticed, especially by the pacific islands our Prime Minister is trying to woo this week. With those nations key to Australia being announced as the COP31 hosts, Turkey is stating they would also be interested, they intend to firmly hold Australia to its climate promises and pointing the finger will not wash with their nations at the forefront of recent climate disasters.

 

And the Best Horror Story of 2023 Goes to…

No need for Stephen King, the ESOO (Electricity Statement of Opportunities) is this year’s horror bestseller, and it comes out this week.

In WA this week we have seen the power of the AEMO reports. With the WA WEM ESOO showing the government’s ambition to phase out coal by 2030 would result in shortfalls. This week the WA government scrambled to cover the shortfall and quickly announced the Muja 6 plant was given an extension until at least April 2025 under ‘reserve outage mode’ conditions. With WA planning to remove 1,366MW from the system by 2030, the transition was showing shortfalls of just below 1GW by FY26 and a terrifying 4GW by FY33. The noises coming from the state are therefore all about how to “manage the transition” and no longer how to meet the targets.

Over in the NEM (National Electricity Market), even before the release of the ESOO this week, this was the week in which we saw announcements in Victoria and an expected announcement from NSW looming. The question is no longer will Australia meet its Net-Zero target, but by how far we will miss it and what impact will closures have before renewable uptake comes onto the grid?

The Victoria government has pre-empted its requirements and moved forward to strike the “structural transition deal” with AGL to continue the operations at Loy Yang until 2035. Despite the pressure from certain board members, even they have to concede that the uptake in renewables is not at pace to orderly transition the market away from coal.

Energy Australia followed this announcement with the news that through its “Climate Transition Action Plan” the Yallourn power station will close in 2028, with the Point Piper remaining available until 2040.

This has been flanked by the NSW government strategically leaking, no doubt to soften the announcement, that the Eraring plant will remain online. The question now is in what form and at what cost.

With Australian renewable uptake at one of its lowest levels in years, hindered by the huge subsidies in the US and massive European demand. Increasingly vocal opposition to transmission upgrades, especially from rural communities, and no certainty on policy post the RET expiry in 2030, there is no doubt this week’s ESOO will make scary reading.

With the COP28 looming at the end of November, I think the hot potato in Canberra is going to be who goes, as there is no doubt when the ESOO is published we will be back in the naughty chair.

The question, therefore, is not will we miss our energy transition and therefore climate targets, but rather by how much?”