❓ A Member of Parliament questions the Minister for Energy regarding the Renewable Energy Access Regime, specifically about industry feedback and its perceived workability. The Minister provides detailed responses based on advice received, clarifying the timeline and stakeholder concerns.
AnsweredQoN 537Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to answers given to question without notice Nos. 742 and 756 dated February 19 and 20 2002 respectively, and ask -
(1) Has the Minister seen the actual documents provided by the industry members of the Renewable Energy Access Working Group in the process of establishing a Renewable Energy Access Regime?
(2) Is the Minister absolutely certain that the organisation currently working satisfactorily referred to in his answer to question without notice No. 756 has not also raised concerns about the new energy access regime?
(3) Is the Minister prepared to stand by his advice that only one organisation has described the regime as unworkable?
(1) Has the Minister seen the actual documents provided by the industry members of the Renewable Energy Access Working Group in the process of establishing a Renewable Energy Access Regime?
(2) Is the Minister absolutely certain that the organisation currently working satisfactorily referred to in his answer to question without notice No. 756 has not also raised concerns about the new energy access regime?
(3) Is the Minister prepared to stand by his advice that only one organisation has described the regime as unworkable?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 May 2002
Responded by
Minister for Housing and Works representing the Minister for Energy
Response time
48 days
2. I am advised that at the time the response to the question was prepared, the organisation referred to was using the access regime for fossil fuel based generation to enable it to supply part of its generation output to customer(s) other than Western Power. At that stage the renewable energy access regime had not been put in place. The Western Power Board did not approve the renewable energy access regime until 20 February 2002. I am also advised that the organisation referred to is considering an alternative of selling all its generation output to parties other than Western Power. I understand that in considering renewable energy access for this purpose, the organisation has recently expressed concern that some aspects of the new regime do not suit its particular situation. I also understand that concerns raised by stakeholders in relation to the Renewable Energy Access Regime were discussed at a meeting of the Renewable Energy Access Working Group on 7 March 2002 and that ways of refining the regime to address these concerns are being considered by Western Power. 3. The previous advice on this matter to the Minister for Energy has been checked and I am advised as follows. Of the four potential developers of renewable energy projects that were canvassed, none of them used the word unworkable in their response. The responses were: Written response: Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
3. The previous advice on this matter to the Minister for Energy has been checked and I am advised as follows. Of the four potential developers of renewable energy projects that were canvassed, none of them used the word unworkable in their response. The responses were: Written response: Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Written response: Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
3. The previous advice on this matter to the Minister for Energy has been checked and I am advised as follows. Of the four potential developers of renewable energy projects that were canvassed, none of them used the word unworkable in their response. The responses were: Written response: Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Written response: Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 1 advised that it was heartened by the workability of the regime, and although its financial modelling indicated that its proposed project would not be viable under the part supply option, it would be marginally viable under the energy balancing option. Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Written response: Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 2 implied that the framework for promoting renewable energy in Western Australian did not compare favourably with that in other countries such as Denmark, Spain, Germany and India and should be revisited. Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Verbal response: Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 3 advised that in its view, the regime was workable in certain circumstances. Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Subsequent verbal response: Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Respondent 4, a developer of renewable energy projects both in Australia and overseas, advised that while there were aspects it did not find ideal, the regime was considered to be workable overall.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.