Bill
Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015
passed, as at 2015-06-26. Environment portfolio.
- Sponsor
- Not recorded
- Portfolio
- Environment
Recorded stages
- introduced — 2015-05-27
- second reading — 2015-05-27
- second reading — 2015-06-02
- second reading — 2015-06-02
- committee — 2015-06-02
- third reading — 2015-06-02
- introduced — 2015-06-15
- second reading — 2015-06-15
- second reading — 2015-06-15
- second reading — 2015-06-17
- second reading — 2015-06-17
- committee — 2015-06-17
- committee — 2015-06-22
- committee — 2015-06-23
- third reading — 2015-06-23
- passed — 2015-06-23
- royal assent — 2015-06-26
Divisions
- Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Ask the question — 2015-06-02, House of Representatives: affirmative, ayes 79, noes 46
- Mark Butler by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4), as circulated in my name, together: (1) Title, page 1 (lines 2 and 3), omit "and the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Regulations 2001". (2) Clause 3, page 2 (line 11), omit "(1)". (3) Clause 3, page 2 (lines 15 to 17), omit subclause (2). (4) Schedule 1, Part 4, page 13 (line 1) to page 15 (line 2), omit the Part, substitute: Part 4—Wood waste _Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000_ 1 At the end of section 17 Add: _ _ _ _ _Wood waste_ (6) Despite anything in regulations made under subsection (3), wood waste does not include waste, or a product or bi-product, that is or is derived from biomass from a native forest. I will not detain the House. I spoke to them in my contribution to the debate on those amendments. Bruce Scott The question is that the amendments be agreed to. Eric Hutchinson I will be brief also. The amendments that have been moved by the opposition do deserve some consideration in detail. I presume they are in relation to biomass from native forests being excluded from the renewable energy target. That is not the opinion of the government. Honourable Members Honourable members interjecting— Bruce Scott Member for Lyons, just one moment. Could those members who are still carrying on a conversation please return to their places in this chamber or leave the chamber quietly and allow the member who is on his feet to be heard in silence. Eric Hutchinson I appreciate that; thank you indeed, Deputy Speaker. Biomass is, indeed, a very important part of the renewable energy target, particularly in my state of Tasmania. This was a federal Labor policy from 2007 until as recently as November 2011. The former member for Lyons, Mr Adams, at the time was the chair of a committee which, even as recently as October 2011, voted in support of the very measures which the Labor Party are now trying to remove from the renewable energy target. It is gross hypocrisy. The support comes from an astounding array of quarters. I — 2015-06-02, House of Representatives: negative, ayes 43, noes 79
- Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea — 2015-06-17, Senate: affirmative, ayes 40, noes 11
- Larissa Waters I thank the chamber for its indulgence; I believe now is the correct time to move under standing order 115(2) for a brief but necessary inquiry into this bill, the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015. It is highly unusual for us to not have inquiries into bills, particularly controversial bills like this one, which changes the face of our clean energy future. I am urging the chamber: whatever your position is on this bill—and we know that—unfortunately—both of the big parties are agreeing to cut the clean energy target—it is just abominable that you would do so without actually sending this bill to an inquiry. There is a litany of unanswered questions about the implications of this bill, not least about the native forest burning that has been included in the face of all evidence. The community deserves the right to have a say. That is the normal process. I am incredulous that we have already moved twice for an inquiry and have received no support. We are giving folk one last chance tonight. We are not trying to delay the passage of this bill. We understand that you guys want to slash the renewable energy target and we do not; we know we have lost that fight. But we do want to make sure that we actually scrutinise this bill, and so I move: That the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015, together with the circulated amendments to the bill, be referred to the Environment and Communications Legislation Committee for inquiry and report by 22 June 2015. Stephen Parry The question is that the bill be referred to a committee on the motion moved by Senator Waters. — 2015-06-17, Senate: negative, ayes 16, noes 38
- Gavin Marshall Order! The committee is considering the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015. The question before the chair is that amendments (1) to (4) on sheet 7712, moved by Senator Singh, be agreed to. — 2015-06-22, Senate: negative, ayes 30, noes 33
- Gavin Marshall The committee is considering the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015, and amendment (1) on sheet 7707 moved by Senator Waters. The question is that part 4 of schedule 1 stand as printed. Janet Rice In speaking to our amendment regarding the removal of the ability to burn wood from native forests to be eligible for renewable energy certificates, the issue of what is classified as waste is pertinent and is behind our amendment. Minister Hunt has claimed repeatedly the biomass that is going to be burnt in forest furnaces is just waste, so we are interested in knowing exactly what is the government's definition of 'waste' or 'residue' in relation to the burning of native forest biomass for electricity. As far as we can see, nothing about this proposal to be burning wood from native forests for energy is about waste. Rather, it is about maintaining, entrenching and expanding industrial scale clear-fell logging that would not otherwise have occurred. It is not about branches, bark and treetops, as we have been misled to believe over the last months. If it were it would be restricted to this and would not include whole logs. In contrast, this legislation is all about allowing the burning of whole logs from native forests for electricity—it is so far from being renewable it is not funny. The statistics on logging in native forests show that in Victoria and New South Wales 70 to 80 per cent of the logs that are coming out of our clear-felled native forests are ending up as pulp logs; they are not being used as sawn timber. In Tasmania, 80 to 90 per cent of the logs are being classed as residual or pulp logs, not as saw logs. Under this legislation all of these logs will be able to be classified as waste. The higher values test would not stop this occurring as you would only have to get a very small amount of revenue from the use of the sawn timber. You could have a massive amount of wood being produced for biomass and that would be acceptable. B — 2015-06-23, Senate: affirmative, ayes 33, noes 29
- Glenn Lazarus ) ( ): I move amendments (1) and (2) on sheet 7721: (1) Schedule 1, item 2, page 3 (lines 7 to 9), to be opposed. (2) Schedule 1, page 3 (after line 9), after item 2, insert: 2A After subsection 40(1) Insert: (1AA) For the purposes of subsection (1), the required GWh specified in the table for the year 2020 and each later year must include at least 8000 GWh of renewable source electricity generated using a solar energy source by an accredited power station. I stand today to oppose item 2 of schedule 1. I am putting forward a few amendments today. I make no apologies for being one of the few senators in this place to stand up for the future of this country. The rest of the world is moving towards renewable energy and so should we. You are quite welcome to leave, Senator Macdonald. I have, on number of occasions, stood up in this chamber and talked about the types of renewable energy targets which have been put in place by countries across the world. In fact, only last week I also spoke about the G7's recent commitment to eliminate the use of fossil fuel by the year 2100. Australia currently has a renewable energy target of 41,000 kilowatts by 2020. This target is in sync with the types of targets which are in place across the world. Our target of 41,000 gigawatts is not a stretched target. It is actually a very feasible target which our country could have easily reached had our government rolled up its sleeves and put in place support and the necessary mechanisms to reach it. Anything is possible in this world if you put your mind to it. But, as we all know, the Abbott government decided to ignore the realities of climate change and instead opted to demonise the renewable energy sector. This, combined with the Abbott government's decision not to publicly support the RET, resulted in a sharp decline in investment in the renewable energy sector. So here we are today facing the likelihood of our country becoming the first country in the world to reduce a r — 2015-06-23, Senate: affirmative, ayes 35, noes 11
- Gavin Marshall Senator Lazarus, given that the schedule stands as printed, there is not a requirement for you to move your next amendment. It is redundant. Thank you. Larissa Waters I move Australian Greens amendment (1) on sheet 7705: (1) Schedule 1, Part 1, page 3 (line 2) to page 4 (line 3), to be opposed. This is similar to the last amendment but drafted slightly differently and more broadly. But it achieves the same outcome of stopping this gutting of our renewable energy target from a very sound 41,000 gigawatt hour target down to a paltry 33,000 gigawatt hour target. As we have just seen from the vote on the last similar amendment, it looks as though we have very few friends. We can clearly see that both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party have ganged up to slash the renewable energy target, right at this point in human history when the vast majority of climate scientists are begging us to make the transition to a low-carbon economy. Right at this point in history in 2015, both of the big parties in this chamber have just voted to slash the RET from 41 to 33. Here is another chance. I am moving a similar amendment that would achieve the same outcome and I would love it if you could reconsider your positions. I severely doubt that that will be the case, but I would urge you to listen to the clear community sentiment on this one. Last week, we saw the Lowy poll, which canvasses community sentiment across a whole range of issues which found that 63 per cent of Australians want serious action taken on climate change and want us to be global leaders. If that is not a clear statement and if that is not certainly a clear turnaround from recent years then I do not know what is. It is perfectly clear that people can see the danger that climate change is posing to our very way of life, to our economies and to our environment. We have seen more and more extreme weather events buffet our coast, slam our good quality, food-producing land and damage people's homes. The s — 2015-06-23, Senate: affirmative, ayes 32, noes 11
- Glenn Lazarus I move amendment (1) on sheet 7726: (1) Schedule 1, Division 1, page 13 (line 2) to page 14 (line 29), omit the Division, substitute: Division 1—Amendments _Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000_ 47 Subsection 5(1) Insert: _ biomass_ means organic matter other than fossilised biomass. Note: Examples of fossilised biomass include coal and lignite. _ wood waste_ has the meaning given by section 5A. 48 After section 5 Insert: 5A Wood waste (1) For the purposes of this Act, _wood waste_ means: (a) biomass: (i) produced from non-native environmental weed species; and (ii) harvested for the control or eradication of the species, from a harvesting operation that is approved under relevant Commonwealth, State or Territory planning and approval processes; and (b) a manufactured wood by-product from a manufacturing process; and (c) waste products from the construction of buildings or furniture, including timber off-cuts and timber from demolished buildings; and (d) sawmill residue; and (e) biomass from a native forest that meets all the requirements in subsection (2). (2) Biomass from a native forest must be: (a) harvested primarily for a purpose other than biomass for energy production; and (b) harvested from a forest that has been certified, or becomes certified before 30 June 2016, by the Forest Stewardship Council to a forest management standard; and (c) either: (i) a by-product or waste product of a harvesting operation, approved under relevant Commonwealth, State or Territory planning and approval processes, for which a high-value process is the primary purpose of the harvesting; or (ii) a by-product (including thinnings and coppicing) of a harvesting operation that is carried out in accordance with ecologically sustainable forest management principles; and (d) either: (i) if it is from an area where a regional forest agreement is in force—produced in accordance with any ecologically sustainable forest management principles required by the agreement; or — 2015-06-23, Senate: negative, ayes 30, noes 34
- Larissa Waters I move Australian Greens amendment (3) on sheet 7705: (3) Schedule 1, page 15 (after line 2), at the end of the Schedule, add: Part 5—Concurrent operation of State or Territory laws _Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000_ 53 Section 7C Repeal the section, substitute: 7C Concurrent operation intended (1) This Act is not intended to exclude or limit the concurrent operation of any law of a State or Territory. (2) This section does not apply to a law of a State or Territory if there is direct inconsistency between that law and this Act. This is the amendment that would delete section 7C from the renewable energy target act, which would allow state governments to have their own renewable energy targets within their own state borders. We know that the Prime Minister has absolutely no ambition for clean energy. We know he wishes there was never a renewable energy target in the first place. And we know this chamber has just voted to slash the RET from 41,000 gigawatt hours down to 33,000. Yet there are state governments that want higher clean energy ambition. In Queensland, the incoming state government has said that it wants its own renewable energy target. In Victoria, Premier Andrews has written to Victorian Senators begging them to support this amendment and to repeal 7C. At the moment the dead hand of Prime Minister Abbott is stopping the states from investing in clean energy over and above the pathetically weak RET that this parliament just slashed it down to. I just want to quote from that letter: 'The Victorian government is calling on all Victorian senators to support the repeal of section 7C when the RET legislation comes before the Senate. If it is repealed, we have committed to reinstating the Victorian renewable energy target, VRET, to top up the national RET.' So, here we have a Labor premier urging his colleagues in this place to support this amendment and allow states to have clean energy ambition and to try to undo the dirty work of Prime — 2015-06-23, Senate: negative, ayes 11, noes 40
- Dio Wang I move Palmer United Party amendment (1) on sheet 7719 revised: (1) Schedule 1, page 15 (after line 2), at the end of the Schedule, add: Part 5—Self -generation _Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000_ 53 Subparagraph 31(2)(b)(ii) Omit "used solely", substitute "used predominantly". 54 After subsection 31(2) Insert: (2A) For the purposes of subparagraph (2)(b)(ii), electricity that is transmitted or distributed is used predominantly for the transmission or distribution of electricity if: (a) the primary purpose of generating the electricity is for the use of the end user who generated the electricity; and (b) an amount of that electricity, no greater than the threshold amount determined under subsection (2B), is made available for use in relation to one or more services in the public interest. (2B) For the purposes of paragraph (2A)(b), the Minister must, by legislative instrument, determine a threshold amount of electricity which can be made available for use in relation to one or more services in the public interest. (2C) The Minister must: (a) make a determination under subsection (2B) within 3 months of the commencement of this subsection; and (b) as far as is practicable, ensure that a determination under that subsection is in force at all times after that determination comes into force. I am concerned that the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 does not include provisions to overcome a potentially serious flaw in the RET legislation. The problem arises due to the consequences of incidental uses of electricity under the existing legislation, and has potentially serious impacts in my home state of Western Australia. And I note that comments made by shadow minister Gray in the House debate also asked the government to address this matter. The issue arises because the concessions available to self-generators of electricity from RET liability only apply where such self-generated electricity is used solely by that person. That said, the law — 2015-06-23, Senate: negative, ayes 15, noes 39
- Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 - Third Reading - Pass the bill — 2015-06-23, Senate: affirmative, ayes 41, noes 14
Plain-language summary
Written by a model from the explanatory memorandum; not the record, as at 2015-05-27.
This bill would change the large-scale renewable energy target yearly through to 2030.
It would let regulations provide full exemptions from the renewable energy target for electricity used in certain energy-intensive trade-exposed activities.
Native forest wood waste would be made eligible again as a renewable energy source, matching the rules before it was disallowed in 2011.
- Amends the annual renewable electricity targets under the large-scale Renewable Energy Target scheme each year until 2030.
- Gives regulations power to grant full exemptions from the renewable energy target for electricity used in energy-intensive trade-exposed activities.
- Removes the requirement for periodic reviews of the Act.
- Reinstates native forest wood waste as an eligible renewable energy source under the same conditions as before its 2011 removal.
Electricity generators, businesses in energy-intensive trade-exposed industries, and operators using native forest wood waste for renewable energy.
Sources
em
billhome
frl act