Policy Watch: O’Farrell govt renewables plan provides model for Napthine

camFriends of the Earth campaigns coordinator and prominent Australian environmentalist, Cam Walker, says it’s time for the Napthine government to follow the lead of their counterparts in NSW:

Tony Abbott has wasted no time in cutting into climate change programs, including reaffirming earlier commitments to kill off the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which supports the development of renewable energy projects.

This makes the Victorian government’s anti-wind energy stance even more worrying. The creation of arbitrary ‘no go’ zones across much of the state has effectively stopped new wind projects being brought forward. South Australia has been the main beneficiary of this policy, with wind investment moving west.

In contrast to the ‘closed for business’ approach of Victoria, the NSW government has just released its Renewable Energy Action Plan, which aims to guide NSW’s renewable energy development and support the national target of 20% renewable energy by 2020. The Plan positions NSW to increase energy from renewable sources at least cost to the energy customer and with maximum benefits to NSW.

Unlike Victoria, where the state government has walked away from any meaningful action to reduce greenhouse emissions, the NSW strategy aims to work closely with regional communities and the renewable energy industry to increase renewable energy generation in that state.

NSW shows what is possible under a Coalition government. Sadly, Victoria remains in thrall to an ideological opposition to wind energy that it inherited from Ted Baillieu.

5 thoughts on “Policy Watch: O’Farrell govt renewables plan provides model for Napthine

  1. We are very happy with the situation in Victoria as it means that 400 foot tall turbines must be 2km from the nearest home unless an agreement is reached with the owner. This is fair and balanced planning.

    1. Peter, I wonder if you have misinterpreted the information in this article? The arbitary no-go zones, stated here, are quite a different issue to the 2km setback rule. Arbitary no-go zones are NOT fair and balanced planning.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s