ActewAGL head Ivan Slavich is missing the point with his claim that their Greechoice option is more effective than the ACT's Feed-in Tariff (Canberra Times, "Ageny's warning on green wording", 6/8/09).
All green energy schemes that require payment of a premium are inherently flawed because they are requiring people who doing the right thing by the environment to pay more for the "privilege" of doing so. Seems about-face to me...
The Feed-in Tariff turns this right-way round by rewarding people who are investing significant amounts of their own money in equipment that will produce green energy. This reward is then defrayed among users who don't. So people who choose dirty energy pay a (very small) premium, which goes directly towards off-setting some of the environmental damage caused.
And with ActewAGL always banging on about the risk of only having one grid entry point for all of the ACT's energy supply, I would have thought that a distributed internal energy supply base would be something they would get behind, instead of trying to undermine?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please share, "Like", or comment on this post. Feedback is fuel for the blogger!