Moreland Energy Foundation

In a submission to the Department of Climate Change and Energy Efficiency’s Enhancing the Renewable Energy Target Discussion Paper, MEFL has welcomed the intention of the Government’s proposed changes to the RET and provided a number of suggestions on the implementation and operation of the changes.

MEFL applauds the separation of the incentive for small and large scale renewable energy technologies as an important step in ensuring that voluntary action by communities and individuals is additional to national targets and reviving the ailing large-scale renewable energy industry.

However there are a number of concerns with the proposal, outlined in MEFL’s submission along with a range of key recommendations outlined to ensure the proposed changes are as effective and efficient as possible.

MEFL has joined with a number of other community organisations - the Total Environment Centre, CHOICE, WWF Australia, the Australian Conservation Foundation, the Alternative Technology Association, and Environment Victoria - in a campaign to fix a serious flaw in the federal government's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme.

Specifically, MEFL has concerns with the failure of the proposed scheme to recognise the additional action undertaken by individuals to reduce the nation's emissions.

Under the proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) voluntary actions merely count towards the required targets, subsidising the big polluters' activities and limiting our national climate change efforts. The joint campaign calls for the voluntary actions that individuals, organisations, state and local governments choose to make to reduce carbon emissions be counted as additional to government-mandated caps.

A series of letters have been sent to the Prime minister, Climate Change Minister and a range of senior ministers with a relevant role in the CPRS legislation, highlighting the issue and bringing their attention to a Joint Statement and Briefing Paper put together by the coalition of organisations (see below). In addition, a concerted media campaign will be launched in the lead up to the legislation being debated in Federal Parliament.

For a full understanding of the issue and an outline of a proposed solution, download the Briefing Paper.

And to understand the position of the coalition of community groups, read the Joint Statement

In the wake of failed negotiations in Canberra, the Australian Government must not impede the efforts of individuals and communities who are actively working to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.

Download the press release from the Alternative Technology Association (ATA), the Moreland Energy Foundation (MEFL) and the Total Environment Centre (TEC).

Feed-in tariffs have been an incredibly successful incentive mechanism internationally for increasing the uptake of renewable energy. Whenever feed-in tariffs are explored in Australia, the discussion inevitably turns to whether the scheme is a net or gross feed-in tariff. What exactly is meant by these two terms? What is the difference between 'net' and 'gross' feed-in tariffs? And is this distinction a uniquely Australian thing?

In relation to feed-in tariffs, the terms 'net' and 'gross' refer to the way the renewable electricity system is wired up to the grid and how the electricity flow is metered. In the case of gross feed-in tariffs, all of the electricity generated by the renewable energy generator is independently measured and exported to the grid, whereas under a net system, only the excess after in-home consumption is exported to the grid. (More details are given below.)

In Australia, the majority of state-based feed-in tariffs in operation are based on net metering. South Australia, Queensland and Victoria have net feed-in tariff schemes in operation, with Western Australia set to follow. On the other hand, the ACT has adopted a gross feed-in tariff model which has been in operation since 2008 and NSW recently announced that they too would go for a gross scheme.

Gross feed-in tariffs:

• Measure total electricity generation and consumption independently
• Accumulate both values over time
• Customer paid for all generation
• Customer charged for all consumption
• Entire renewable generation valued
• Total consumption figures given
• Requires either two separate meters or a duel element electronic meter
• Typical metering used for feed-in tariffs internationally

Net feed-in tariffs:

• Renewable electricity generation on site is first used in the home
• Excess renewable electricity exported
• Measures either import or export at any instant, depending on balance between generation and consumption at any point in time
• Accumulates both values separately
• Export = generation minus instantaneous demand
• Import = Consumption minus instant generation
• Customer paid for all exports
• Customer charged for all imports

Problems with net metering

When compared with gross feed-in tariffs, net feed-in tariffs have some significant shortcomings. Net feed-in tariff schemes:

• Discriminate against people who are at home during the day, such as stay-at-home parents or senior citizens, as they will be consuming proportionally more of their generation.
• Don't provide financial certainty, as it is difficult to predict excess generation after in-home consumption without a detailed energy audit; even then, circumstances change. Without certainty, uptake rates will be low.
• Don't reward system owners for the full value of the clean electricity they generate, in terms of avoided emissions, network benefits and reduced demand.
• Lack transparency, as it is impossible to determine either the total generation or the total in-home consumption via this form of metering. This makes energy auditing very difficult.