Review of the Victorian Energy

1

Response Reference: A5883369

18 May 2015

Review of the Victorian Energy

Efficiency Target scheme

Energy Sector Development Division

GPO Box 4509

Melbourne VIC 3001

Dear Chair

Re: Setting future Victorian Energy Efficiency Targets

The Mornington Peninsula Shire (the Shire) would like to thank the Department of Economic Development, Jobs, Transport and Resources for the opportunity to make a submission regarding the Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) scheme review detailed in consultation paper – “Setting future Victorian Energy Efficiency Targets”. It should be noted that this submission from the Mornington Peninsula Shire represents the opinion of Shire Officers.

The Shire commends the Government’s decision to continue and strengthen the VEET scheme as we continue to support the community to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The Shire can best do this by setting an example for our residents. We have recently committed to a Carbon Neutral Policy and to achieve this; we must continue to reduce building associated carbon emissions by means of energy efficiency, reduce emissions from public lighting through a bulk LED upgrade and utilise local renewable energy generation.

The Shire would like to provide commentary on a number of questions asked in the consultation paper, as follows:

Question 1: What should the new VEET target be?

The VEET target should be strengthened to 6.8 tonnes CO2-e/year for five years. The core function of the VEET scheme is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and as the Government has expressed eagerness to strengthen the scheme; the best way to do this is to commit to a higher reduction target. The five year duration of the target is preferable for the reason stated in the consultation paper: “If the VEET scheme is to be extended outside of relatively simple, easily generalisable energy efficiency upgrades to include customised, ‘project-based’ upgrades, new, more flexible methods will need to be introduced into Regulations. This will enable more businesses to participate in the scheme, increase the availability of certificates, and therefore reduce certificate and scheme costs.” This will encourage and support local government and businesses to improve many aspects of energy efficiency in their buildings and strengthen the scheme to not just focus on residential activities, which has generated over 90 percent of VEECs to date.

Question 7: In addition to expanding the range of energy efficiency activities available in VEET, should any other action be taken to target participation by certain groups?

The Shire supports the comments made in the Municipal Association of Victoria’s submission to the VEET scheme review regarding energy efficient street lighting which specifically targets participation from local government:

“Enabling councils to generate certificates for lighting upgrades will provide a much-needed incentive to take on the next tranche of work and investment needed to upgrade lights on major roads. Based on conservative estimates, there is around 726,000 tonnes of emissions reductions to be achieved by changing to energy efficient hardware for major road lighting in Victoria. Councils will prioritise these upgrades if provided with an adequate incentive to do so. Victorian councils already have a strong track record of achieving significant savings and emissions reductions through adopting energy efficient street lighting in residential streets. With funding assistance from the now defunct Federal Government Community Energy Efficiency Program (CEEP), a little more than 232,000 residential street lights have been, or are in the process of being, changed to more efficient alternatives, reducing greenhouse gas emissions by an estimated 1.56 million tonnes over the life of the new lights.”

The Mornington Peninsula Shire however did not receive CEEP funding and have not committed to upgrading the 12,525 80W mercury vapour street lights in our municipality to a more energy efficient alternative due to funding restrictions. By upgrading these lights to the available LED alternative (Sylvania 18W StreetLED), with a much needed incentive; more than 4,000 MWh or 3,852 t CO2-e (using the current VEET coefficient) can be saved per annum. The benefits of subsidised street light replacements are self-evident in NSW where councils such as Richmond Valley and Clarence Valley Councils have undertaken bulk street light retrofits that would have not otherwise taken place in the absence of the NSW Energy Saving Scheme (ESS), which is similar to VEET but includes street lighting.The Shire strongly recommends the inclusion of all energy efficient street lighting; not just major road lighting.

Question 9: Please suggest up to three changes which should be made to improve the VEET scheme.

Promotion and delivery

The Mornington Peninsula Shire has recognised a knowledge gap amongst the community within our municipality. Multiple reports have been received by the Shire over the past 24 months suggesting private operators have been posing as local government agents to approach households and offer energy efficient lighting upgrades as well as various other activities. It is suspected that this has occurred due to the lack of success private operators have had due to lack of trust, lack of program knowledge and fear of allowing a stranger into one’s home while on the other hand council’s close relationship with its residents offers a higher chance of success. Not only does this result in councils dealing with dissatisfaction from consumers which they have no responsibility for but highlights a flawed approach in program engagement with Victorian residents.

The Mornington Peninsula Shire strongly suggests that an attempt is made to further educate residents on the VEET scheme. Sustainability Victoria, which has promotion and achievement of maximum energy efficiency as a core purpose, may have greater success in the promotion and delivery aspect of the VEET scheme.

Effective delivery partnerships

Delivery of the program to low income households can also be improved, not restricted to an amended scheme, but through the possibility of a more collaborative approach with the Victorian Department of Human Services and the Federal Department of Human Services who have the potential to promote the program to residents of public and community housing and Victorian residents who hold a Commonwealth Government-issued concession card.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide commentary on the review. Should any further information be required, please contact me on (03) 5950 1341.

Yours Sincerely

Chris Yorke

Sustainable Energy Officer