Andrei.Hicks wrote on May 4
th, 2012 at 10:07am:
The Greens -
1) Want to reduce coal exports for Australia - despite it being very profitable
Is that true. Because, as you are well aware I'm sure, a lot of green initiatives in NSW alone could be acheived by reducing the tax payer subsidies to coal power generation (leaving export alone).
For example, coal gets (or was getting a year back) around $120 / tonne export. Our NSW government however is subsidising coal to our power generators by as much as $80 / tonne. Meaning they only pay $30/ tonne. This has the impact that the NSW government (who owns the mine providing the coal to these power stations) is losing $80/tonne it produces, or $4b over an extended period. $4b that could build roads, hospitals, 2nd airport, etc, etc.
It also means coal powered power stations are subsidised more any any renewable or nuclear. These alternate power supplies will never get a chance to be cost competitive, no matter how high the carbon tax is.
I'm happy for NSW to subsides power costs, but not to pick which form of generation to subsidise. That flies in the face of all market-driven economic models. Remove subsidies for coal, sell at the market rate, and subsidize people at the electrical consumer end of the chain. Then let the way that electicity is generated be driven by the market.