Australia’s energy transition: how’s it going?

Naturally I turned to ChatGPT for answers. Here in part was the response, verbatim.

• "Percent renewables" produces a simple, impressive headline
• 82% sounds like the system is nearly transformed
• it avoids committing to a future TWh requirement
• It does not reveal how much additional renewable generation is actually required if electricity demand grows
• It allows the target to look increasingly achievable as the denominator changes.
• Most importantly, it describes what proportion of the electricity system is renewable, rather than specifying how much renewable electricity Australia must actually produce.

Confirmation of my suspicions? You bet! Seems the performance parameters had been rigged at the outset to give a much better impression than the limp real growth rates would suggest. The puzzle is, who thought this up? It's by no means obvious that "percent renewables" would yield such a distorted view. It clearly had not been Bowen or his boss Albanese; they're not smart enough.

In hindsight, % renewables should have immediately rung alarm bells for any well-informed observer. It's a policy that calls for huge growth rates, but reliant on what are effectively tiny, widely spread-out generators compared with their predecessors.

Logic dictates that the main challenges to abundant future clean energy supplies ought to be of the kind "how do we make that much, that quickly?" Which prompts one to ask, where in the policy are the actual clean electricity generation numbers? Why are they apparently buried in a composite clean/dirty energy mix? How did a ratio of product components become a preferred performance indicator? It's still a mystery.

Somehow this reminds me of a common TV commercial where two well-known Australian Rugby League (NRL) personalities are relaxing poolside on a luxurious cruise liner. One says with a big smile, "It's 100% holiday!" What does that mean? Easy for a League fan to get the gist, not so much for a cricket fan. And best not take it too literally. It's marketing hyperbole, words aimed at evoking strong emotions in the viewers. The message in that 100%? "What a great holiday! Come join us on this fabulous cruise!".

And from a politician? "100%" simply says "Vote for me".