ACT Budget: Permanent boost to energy bill rebate

Penfold, you agreed below that you were unable to answer this:
“energy providers are investing in renewables as the lowest cost energy source. Prices would be higher without them.”
so I thought I would help out your latest attempt at diversion by inviting you to try again.

If Penfold has a point, why does he keep running away?

“They offered something about gas prices and coal generation as well, but not any details”

Penfold would prefer you not actually read that section, which says:
“these increases were due to high gas prices, demand on the NSW wholesale electricity market (where the ACT sources its electricity), supply constraints caused by coal generators and network outages”

For a more extensive takedown of Penfold’s vacuous waffle, read the comments under the article he links there, or don’t if you prefer to enjoy your day.

“……the lowest cost energy source”

Yes, indeed.

When the sun isn’t shining and the wind isn’t blowing the cost is actually zero.

LOL, Penfold tries dodging the issue just to rehash his discredited arguments elsewhere.

Thanks for linking to the thread providing evidence that Canberra has had the lowest electricity price rises in the country in recent years and that the current increases have been caused by increases in fossil fuel and network costs.

Even though by your logic we should be paying far higher than other areas because of our contracts to source 100% renewable energy offsets for our power consumption.

Well done.

“For those who can’t remember three weeks ago”

Also LOL at this, you cant remember yesterday, let alone 3 weeks ago.

The question was pretty simple Axon – if renewables are cheaper and their share is rising, why are power prices continuing to sky-rocket ?

Capital Retro’s knowledge of business and of energy retail seem not to exist.

Ever heard of capital cost amortisation, Capital Retro? Employee costs? Maintenance? Funding? Of course the energy providers have costs.

Meanwhile, the energy cost in the wholesale market shoots up owing to reliance on expensive gas infill, with unreliable coal plants exacerbating that problem.

This is why more wind farms are needed. They work at night, and it is always windy across most of the continent (Canberra valleys notwithstanding) even more so at sea. Solar energy is made available at night by storage in pumped hydro or batteries, with other technologies being tested. In fact it can be stored in your hot water tank, one of the big advantages of heat pump hot water, a “battery” in itself. After the massive rollout of solar to households, local batteries are following for increased resilience.

More investment in storage is needed, and under way.

More spin than a thousand wind turbines there, Axon.

When business and energy are corrupted by taxpayer subsidies there is no argument.

Maybe I should have said this much earlier but 20 years ago did some “commercial in confidence” work for a foreign wind farm promoter and I saw what a great job they did on our lily-livered, gullible politicians to get subsidies.

It’s the greatest scam since the South Sea Bubble 300 years ago.

Thanks Axon. Guess you’re unaware that you don’t amortise physical assets, you depreciate them. But thanks for the business lesson.

CR – I’m convinced that some of the renewable lovers here are really flat-earthers.

Twenty years ago is not today, and rent-seeking behaviour is not new in any business. You are welcome to open the can of worms which is fossil fuel subsidies if you wish, Capital Retro.

The fact remains that your comment was wrong and otherwise pointless.

Thanks for picking up my over-hasty term selection, Penfold, and thanks for completely failing to counter the point. Again.

Guess you are unaware that correlation is not causation. This has been covered in your own link about gold-plating, while you continue to fail to deal with real business investment.

Flat earthers are a small minority of the population, like deniers of human-forced climate change.

Correlation is not causation, much like an absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence. But if year after year, for 20 years, more renewables and higher power prices have gone hand in hand, well we’re really breaking the rules of probability to assume there’s no relationship.

In fact statistically the chances of no cause and effect are so insignificant they’re zero. But that’s another maths lesson not worth the effort.

Pengold showing his lack of knowledge in statistics as well now, whilst flailing around in the attempt to grasp a point.

“But that’s another maths lesson not worth the effort.”

Well obviously it wasn’t worth the effort for you to go to those lessons.

The evidence of your absence of knowledge on the subject is manifest.

It appears the socialist controlled demolition of australia is on track….

@davo1, is it your proposal that government should “give back” to everyone? I had not realised that you had communist leanings, happy with additional taxation, government control of energy generation and pricing.

Perhaps you would be content if they just subsidised you?

Ian Douglas, if a couple owns their own home with further assets exceeding $1M then they could try converting some of the latter to an income stream. If you lack non-residence assets of more than $1M then you can still earn up to about $100,000, most likely tax free. Asset rich and self-funded does not define poor.

In what respect are you suffering?

Not everyone is blessed enough to lack any resemblance of a soul, or a conscience, or the ability to feel empathy for those less well off. But at least we know there are some out there like you that do in fact have all those “qualities”.

Out of compassion let’s presume your inability to understand my post led to that silly comment. It was directed at our incompetent governments, not the recipients of this measure.

As someone who donates significant monthly sums to help struggling Aussies your comment seems to be blinkered in ideology.

It even sounds like you’re happy with sky-rocketing power prices.

Nope, I just don’t see the need for a****** driven comments because not everyone has everything go their way in life. Irrespective of government, it was a heartless comment, actually driveling in your obsession with ideology. Your mob of preference oversaw a large chunk of the development of the problems in the market, but you conveniently love to ignore that fact.

I think it was the “some people pay extra to subsidise poorer Canberrans” bit that JS9 picked up on.

That is what is known as progressive, as opposed to flat rates, which are regressive.

I believe some countries apply this principle to traffic fines as well.

It sounds like you think power prices are a tax ricketyclik. They’re not and this additional rebate is already on top of a $800 means-tested rebate which poorer Canberrans receive.

The real issue here is out-of-control power prices, another example of the destructive effect of renewables. Now we even read that wood fires are in the firing line. In some countries – especially in Europe – wood is considered a renewable. They call it something weird like biomass but our brilliant ACT government know otherwise.

At a certain point those who are the worst off are still working. Those that earn the middle amount are unemployed.

All the benefits add up to 10s of thousands a year.

It actually costs most a fair amount just to work.

Anyone interested in best prices rather than worst politics recognises that energy providers are investing in renewables as the lowest cost energy source. Prices would be higher without them.

History says otherwise Axon. Have a look at this chart which shows our power prices started exploding when Rudd was elected and renewables were subsidised. What a coincidence.

https://australiainstitute.org.au/report/electricity-costs/

How people keep bleating that renewables are cheaper flies in the face of any facts.

@Penfold
Did you actually read the report to which you provided the link, or did you think you could get away with just pointing to the chart.

If you had bothered to read the report, you would have seen one of the causes of the increase in power prices. Check Table 1, on page 8, entitled “The electricity workforce”. You will note that between 1996 and 2016, the total work force increased by 47%, but the cohort of “Managers” and “Sales workers” increased by 217% and 396% respectively, during that period.

Perhaps, you need to factor this disproportionate increase in office workers in the privatised industry, as opposed to people actually responsible for producing electricity, in the price rises.

JS – well done, consistency is your hallmark. Cherry pick a few details and claim a different conclusion from the very obvious. TAI tried to use this to prove that corporatisation failed, yet in their wisdom forgot to work out they were analysing the price explosion due to renewables.

Your “Managers” and “Sales Workers” represented less that 20% of the workforce, not very significant in the scheme of things.

What the graph does show as the renewables share in Australia went from a few % to 17% in 2016, prices went up three times that of CPI. It wasn’t due to a few managers or sales people, it was due to the exorbitant cost of the new energy being added.

Everyone with a brain knows as researched fact that renewables are the major cause of electricity price increases. The most aggregious price increases ever suffered by Australians in our history has been since the Albanese government was elected in 2022. Since that election electricity prices have doubled and the electricity market operator ( AEMO) has just allowed increases of nearly 10% in 2025. Further AEMO has forecast similar increases by the end of 2025. So, AEMO which is left infiltrated organisation itself cannot and will not follow the Bowen/ Albanese lie that electricity will be cheaper with renewables. FACTS MATTER, politics not at all.

But it’s the ACT and the whole place is “Socialism on steroids.”

@Penfold
Have a look at this graph, which compares the price wholesale spot power prices in several states, during the Rudd, Morrison and Albanese government years:
https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/1_TE-1.jpg
(The full article is here – in this article (https://reneweconomy.com.au/is-labor-to-blame-for-high-energy-prices-or-was-this-the-perfect-trap-set-by-the-fossil-fuel-industry/))

Also, check out this chart (https://reneweconomy.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Screenshot-2025-05-01-at-11.34.49%E2%80%AFam-624×500.png) in the article, which “clearly shows that as the share of wind and solar rises power prices decline across every single state.”

Why is electricity so expensive? Because Australia still gets approx. 65% of its electricity from fossil fuel sources (coal, gas, oil). There are a myriad of articles, like this one (https://www.climatecouncil.org.au/four-reasons-why-your-power-prices-are-sky-high-and-rising/) which show the issue is fossil fuels.

Perhaps you can actually provide evidence that clearly shows high power prices are directly related to renewables.

Penfold did not address my comment at all. This is no surprise. The report he cites addresses the issue and price impact of gold plating. To quote: “The report finds that companies have been ‘gold-plating’ financial assets and passing those costs onto consumers.”

The word “renewable” does not appear in that report at all, nor do “solar”, “wind”, “hydro”. It is about capital cost padding. Penfold is hunting for a fog of credibility to wisp over his propaganda again.

My unaddressed comment was: “energy providers are investing in renewables as the lowest cost energy source. Prices would be higher without them.”
Penfold never does want to address the decisions of businesses, researchers, governments except to pretend the world is wrong. He is being bypassed in his rabbit-hole.

@Rob
“Everyone with a brain knows as researched fact that renewables are the major cause of electricity price increases. ”
Really Rob? Given Australia still relies on fossil fuels for over 50% of our power generation, can you provide your source for this “researched fact”?

Rob, your claim “energy prices have doubled” (i.e. up 100%) is easily checked so I did that, personally, by comparing my May 2022 bill with that for May 2025 from the same provider, observing the following changes (these are 3-year totals, not annualised):
Supply cost: up 46%
Peak rate: up 24%
Mid-rate: up 31%
Off-peak: up 42%
Rebate: down 38%

With regard to percentages you may be diagnosed with Penfold Disease. If your prices have actually doubled you must have worked hard to reach your most unfavourable outcome.

All of your comments are egregiously wrong. No surprise.

Pengoldfish once again repeating the same discredited points on energy.

Even down to the same linked report which doesn’t remotely say what he claims and was responded to in detail last time he posted it.

Only to rehash it again.

Strange that his correlation equals causation argument doesn’t apply to the ACT which has some of the cheapest energy prices in Australia despite paying for 100% renewable energy offsets. A program that has been explained repeatedly to him, yet he still doesn’t understand.

Really “lifting the bar” with the prodictive “exchange of ideas”.

Axon – not only was your comment not addressed, it was completely unsubstantiated too. It’s all very well to go around parroting Chris Bowen …. “renewables are cheaper …. squawk” but show us some evidence. In fact right now the renewables share is increasing, and prices are going up another 10%. If renewables are cheaper, then how can this be ? It’s not as if coal and gas are more expensive, so how can this happen ?

Now anyone who looks objectively at the last 20 years sees that as the renewable share rises, prices skyrocket. These are simple facts. Cause and effect.

At least JS had a crack at providing some evidence, albeit from the laughable Climate Council (“it’s all fossil fuels fault”) and a renewables protagonist and nuclear denier. Interestingly his main objective was to attack Dutton’s power plans so i think we can put them in the non-objective category.

Rob – yes it is socialism on steroids. Even renewable wood is in the firing line, go figure.

Pengolds argument:

“Now anyone looks at the objectively at the data can see that as ice cream sales rise, so do murder rates.

Ice cream clearly causes murder. This is a simple fact. Cause and effect.”

https://www.lifehack.org/624604/the-most-common-bias-people-have-that-leads-to-wrong-decisions

Maybe you should go back to incorrectly calculating percentage increases or not knowing what a capacity factor is?

Poor trolling as usual.

Particularly when you’ve once again been provided links to detailed analysis which you’ve not even attempted to refute or respond to.

Just proving that you disingenuously ignore any evidence that doesnt fit your narrow ideology because you aren’t interested in informed debate or a true exchange of evidence based opinions.

This Government easily presents to appease a majority of the population without an reasoning.
Look after those who aren’t as helpless as well like small business who strive.

Chris Bowen is so replaceable, Easy to sellout his countfy and then walk away from having to answer.

As far as all you’ve pointed and brought up Penfold, people want to hold the hand out for anything most of the time that’s guaranteed for free. So simple..

Andrew S – yes Bowen must surely be the most incompetent minister in generations.

But you’re right, once upon a time people were too proud to ask for handouts. These days many will do anything for a handout. How times have changed.

@Penfold
“It’s not as if coal and gas are more expensive …”
Is that so, Penfold? Perhaps you have “alternative data” to refute this unfortunate reality:
https://www.aer.gov.au/industry/registers/charts/gas-market-prices

“Now anyone who looks objectively at the last 20 years sees that as the renewable share rises, prices skyrocket.”
Perhaps LNG suppliers are having an impact on energy costs in Australia:
https://ieefa.org/articles/australian-gas-users-pay-price-lng-producers-prioritise-export-windfalls

As for your aside on my, and other posters’, destruction of the Dutton’s hair-brained nuclear argument … well I guess we can just point to his demise as proof it just didn’t pass the pub test. The electroate has moved on from Dutton – perhaps you should do so too.

Yes JS, I always delight in hearing how you’ve shredded the argument for nuclear. Have you mentioned this to France, the UK, USA, Microsoft and 25 other countries ? Perhaps you’re far smarter than them.

As for fossil fuel costs, there’s little evidence that outside government regulations that price increases were of any significance. Plenty of own goals there.

In response to me pointing out that Penfold had not addressed my comment about business investment, he rather hilariously wrote: “Axon – not only was your comment not addressed”

Well, glad we got that sorted. Penfold does not address comments, because he cannot, even if he were to try.

The rest of his line, that it was “unsubstantiated” was followed immediately by a diversion from the comment which was: “energy providers are investing in renewables as the lowest cost energy source. Prices would be higher without them.”

In what respect would you claim that the pattern of business investment is “unsubstantiated” Penfold?
Seen any new coal-fired power stations being built in Australia lately?
Seen any lobbying for nuclear from energy providers in Australia lately?
Or have you seen wind farms, solar farms, pumped hydro being built like crazy with proposals being put for more?

Australian householders alone have installed over 25 GW of solar, over 10% of the grid, because they can see the payoff in their bills despite FITs now being negligible, and heat pumps are cheaper than gas.

QED

@Penfold
Oh, Penfold, yet again you show your inability to understand actual outcomes versus what occurs in your fantasy world.

We are in Australia … not “France, the UK, USA, Microsoft and 25 other countries”. So, tell me – how many nuclear power plants are on the agenda for Australia?
Answer: I’ll give you a hint, it begins with “z” and ends with “o”.
Obviously, you are smarter than, the majority of the Australian voters, who have not only “shredded the argument for nuclear” at the ballot box, but also Dutton’s political career. But, hey, keep blowing that nuclear trumpet and kidding yourself it’s going to happen – although, perhaps if you want access to nuclear power, you may want to consider moving to one of those countries you mentioned, or get a job with Microsoft.

“As for fossil fuel costs, there’s little evidence …”
You should have stopped there, because, as usual with you, little (well actually, no) evidence is your MO. (Oh let me save you having to look that up – it’s “modus operandi” , which is Latin for mode of operating.)

Incorrect JS. As we’ve discussed previously Australians supported nuclear until the big successful Labor cost scare during the campaign. Plenty of polling confirmed this.

But of course to understand this, you need to be across a few issues, not just dronely anti-nuclear.

@Penfold
“Plenty of polling confirmed this”
LOL … hanging on to that idiotic pipe dream like, a limpet to a ship’s hull, aren’t you?

As previously discussed, there’s only one poll that counts. As a result of that poll, nuclear is off the agenda, for your democratically elected government. Perhaps you need to get across that issue, so you can understand it.

Thanks for the MO lesson, presume you picked that up from CSI !

It appears he is spot on.

Um…no. Prices would be lower if the zealots who have systematically removed all cheap coal power stopped doing it. Socialism hates the middle class, so by slowly crippling small business with massive power costs sends many businesses to the wall….job done.
Ive never understood the unhinged aspect of socialism that just seems to hate humanity and seeks to destroy it.

Encouragingly, the normally rusted on Left almost lost power in the last state election. Next time it may get booted into years of political cold. That would allow the libs to turn the ACT around and stop wasting money on the climate boondoggle.

Good that the same information that Pengold references showed Australians were significantly more “pro renewable” which hasn’t waned, because you need to be across the actual evidence to understand that renewables are significantly cheaper than the alternatives.

Well JS there’s only one poll that counts in deciding elections, but there’s plenty of other polls which inform us on Australian’s opinions on nuclear energy. In 2024, before Labor’s scare campaign, close to two-thirds of Australian supported nuclear.

https://poll.lowyinstitute.org/charts/australia-using-nuclear-power-to-generate-energy/

Now this might come as news to you, but elections are decided on multiple issues, not just one, so your suggestion that “nuclear is off the agenda” is somewhat narrow-minded.

Nuclear submarines, anyone ?

@Penfold
Your welcome, Penfold – happy to adssist in the slow road to expanding your knowledge. Mind you, I suppose when you have nothing cogent to contribute, sarcasm is a safe haven for you.

It’s hard to see how your very tunnel-visioned approach is mind-expanding JS, particularly with what’s going on around the world.

Btw do you know the difference between humour and sarcasm ?

@Penfold
“ there’s plenty of other polls which inform us on Australian’s opinions on nuclear energy”
Who is “us”, Penfold? Given that there is currently a legislative bar on nuclear energy (yes you are right, I neglected to include ‘energy’ in a thread which was discussing nuclear energy), then what “us” thinks about nuclear energy is somewhat moot. Prior to the election, your democratically elected government clearly rejected Dutton’s nuclear energy policy, and has every right to not proceed with the policy of an overwhelmingly defeated opponent. Spin it how you like to salve your bruised electoral ego, but I am confident in saying again nuclear (power) is off the agenda.