Editorial: Govt's energy plan leaves a lot to be desired

Gerry Brownlee. Photo / Greg Bowker

This Government's strategy documents have a habit of being less than inspiring and light on illumination. The National Infrastructure Plan released in March contained little direction in its 141 pages, not even a strong endorsement of the advantages of public-private partnerships.

The discussion paper on the mining of conservation land was so devoid of hard facts on economic benefit that it made it easy for environmentalists to seize the initiative. Much the same attributes are apparent in the Government's first draft energy strategy. So sparse is the detail that the document struggles to make a convincing statement.

The Energy Minister has an explanation for this. The previous Government's 2007 energy strategy quickly became out of date because it focused on near-term action, says Gerry Brownlee.

His approach, in contrast, is to embrace "succinct and sharply focused statements" of policy. Succinct they certainly are but the scarcity of solid information in the draft strategy's 18 pages raises more questions than it answers.

Commendably, the Government has adhered to its predecessor's goal that 90 per cent of electricity will be from renewable energy by 2025 - providing security of supply is not affected.

This remains the most obvious path for achieving that security and, at the same time, meeting New Zealand's international obligations. The Government has always maintained that the main impediment to this goal were rules that discouraged power companies from investing in new water, wind and geothermal generation.

Early in its term, it reworked the Resource Management Act to streamline the consent process and remove frivolous objections.

There is a sense in this strategy that the Government may feel the job is largely done. It talks of continuing to "articulate the national benefits of renewable energy in its resource management reform and to remove any unnecessary regulatory barriers".

But it seems to be taken for granted that major projects will now develop, rather than continuing to be undermined too often by those unhappy to have a wind farm in their vicinity. Perhaps this will, indeed, happen, but it may be unwise to take this as a given.

The main difference between this Government and its predecessor was always its attitude towards thermal generation, even if only in degrees.

The Clark Administration banned the building of fossil-fuelled power stations for 10 years, although an oil- or coal-fired station would have been permitted if the Electricity Commission deemed it essential for security of supply.

The Key Government has lifted that ban, and makes clear its interest in New Zealand's extensive coal reserves. The potential of these, the strategy notes, "is more likely to be fully realised if an economic way to reduce high levels of greenhouse gas emissions is found".

Carbon capture and storage technology and other innovation would, indeed, open up new possibilities. But the timing and potential of these are not something that can be depended on.

Nor, indeed, is the Government's action plan that aims to promote oil and gas exploration as the Maui era ends. As much as this is to be encouraged, it does not guarantee the work will be successful.

This re-emphasises the importance of renewable energy. If power companies continue to be slow on the uptake, it would be comforting to know the Government had some sort of alternative approach in mind.

Should that be the case, it is keeping it close to its chest. It is also muddying the water somewhat with its enthusiasm for oil and coal. Indeed, this energy strategy sends out a mixed message. Not only is its content vague but its focus is less than sharp.