Australian party proposes ban on electric hot water units in favour of solar
KINGSTON, Australia, August 29, 2007. A federal opposition party in Australia wants solar to replace electric hot water systems within five years.
Water heaters account for 28% of the GHG emissions from an average home in Australia, and electric systems release three times more pollution than solar, geothermal heat pumps or high-efficiency gas systems, claims Peter Garrett, the labour party’s shadow minister for climate change and environment. Switching to solar would save 7.5 Mt of GHG emissions each year, equivalent to taking 1.7 million cars off the road.
The party would work with states and territories in Australia to implement new ‘Greenhouse & Energy Minimum Standards’ for hot water heaters. By 2010, under the plan, electric hot water systems will no longer be installed in new homes or those with access to reticulated natural gas. By 2012, electric hot water systems will be phased out as replacements in both new and existing homes, although exemptions will be made based on tank size for smaller homes where gas is unavailable and where significant physical changes would be required, such as blocks of flats.
In replacing electric hot water systems, homeowners could choose the most cost-effective technology and receive rebates of A$1,000 for solar or geothermal heat pumps in existing eligible homes, continuing the current Solar Hot Water Rebate Programme.
The proposal would help families cut their GHG emissions and save $300 a year. The plan will form a key plank of Federal Labour’s strategy to tackle climate change, and the party says it will be implemented in consultation with industry to ensure low-income earners are not disadvantaged and to provide manufacturers with adequate timeframes for transition.
In addition, the party’s proposed Green Loans would provide low-interest loans of up to $10,000 to replace systems with GHG emissions.
Prime Minister John Howard described the Labour proposal as “heavy-handed,” adding that the mandatory switch would cost taxpayers $650 million per year. He accused Garrett of not considering the consequences of the plan, and that incentives are more successful than regulations.
Solar hot water systems would cost $2,800 more than a standard electric system but the Master Plumbers Association has also warned that the scheme will need to be backed by a rigorous assessment process to ensure that homeowners do not install the cheapest possible system, which may deliver no GHG or cost benefit.
Every year, there are 800,000 hot water system replacements in Australia, with 45,000 adopting solar.
Earlier, Garrett said the “stubborn refusal” of the Howard Government to increase the Mandatory Renewable Energy Target was responsible for the loss of 130 jobs following closure of a Vestas wind blade production facility in Portland, Victoria. “While the global renewable energy market is set to be worth US$750 billion a year by 2016 and the industry has an excellent track record in creating jobs in regional Australia, the government's failure to deliver a price for carbon and its continuing refusal to ratify the Kyoto protocol means Australian jobs and investment are heading overseas,” he explained.
Last August, Vestas Nacelle announced it would close its wind turbine assembly plant in northern Tasmania, dropping 100 jobs. In February of this year, Pacific Hydro said it would invest $500 million in Brazil because Australian renewable energy projects had been stalled by the government and, in March, Australia’s Global Renewables announced a $5 billion deal in the UK to cut GHG emissions.
The Labour party would ratify the Kyoto protocol, “significantly increase” the MRET and reduce Australia's GHG pollution 60% by 2050, he explained.
Renewable Energy Focus © Copyright 2008, Elsevier Ltd, All rights reserved.