KEY POINTS:
If an energy strategy is to gain widespread support, it must combine principle with a strong dose of pragmatism. There is no point setting off on high-minded tangents that place the country on a potentially fraught course. On that score, the Government's draft energy policy rates highly.
For all the willingness to embrace environmental responsibility in the shape of renewable energy sources, there is a proviso that security of electricity supply remains the paramount concern. Equally, it is recognised that New Zealand's response to climate change should not outpace progress in other parts of the world. In sum, there is an overriding direction that, applied correctly and without undue delay, comprises a sensible means of catering for New Zealand's energy needs and global concerns as the era of Maui gas comes to an end.
The draft policy and accompanying discussion documents state a preference for wind, geothermal and hydro power as sources of electricity at the expense of coal, liquefied natural gas and nuclear energy, which are considered too costly. The use of these renewables would see the redressing of a situation that has seen fossil fuels supplying an increasing proportion of electricity over the past 25 years.
There are varied views on the costs and potential of wind power, in particular, and how much might be added to electricity bills. But, as Maui gas becomes rarer, the proposed direction is immeasurably preferable to using liquefied natural gas to fuel power stations. Its price is tied to the international oil market. Dependence on that market for electricity generation would leave this country hostage to pricing and exchange rate vicissitudes.
The Government is also eyeing the potential for tidal power. This interest in a new technology does not involve a huge cost, but nor should it when it amounts to an attempt to "pick a winner". Hopefully, on that score, the Government will not ignore the possibility of modern clean technology clearing the way for the exploitation of abundant South Island brown coal resources.
Predictably, the Greens have accused the Government of lacking boldness. There is not, says co-leader Jeanette Fitzsimons, a lot to make the strategy happen. On one level, she is correct.
With several plans for oil or gas-fired power stations in the pipeline, the Government's preference must be implanted quickly. If this does not happen, it could be, as the Greens suggest, that there will be no room for renewables.
Above all, however, the draft policy must be viewed as a starting point. It precedes other parts of the Government's climate change policy to be released before Christmas, including an energy efficiency and conservation strategy. This should include more concrete proposals for an area that seems to receive serious consideration only when the hydro lakes are running low. A more consistent approach, and greater incentives, would be a significant contributor to a stable energy future, as would cross-party agreement on strategy.
The Government, having indicated it now favours a carbon emission trading system to encourage clean energy, is charting much the same course as the National Party's "bluegreen" policy. Such broad agreement suggests the adoption of a long-term view in the national interest is within reach. National leader John Key has described the draft policy as a "wish list of vague ideas". But, at the very least, that list points in the right direction. All political parties should work now to bring the best of its ideas to fruition.
