Tag: Alia Armistead

  • Sustainable Industrial Jobs in the Hunter

    Sustainable Industrial Jobs in the Hunter

    Aluminium Manufacturing and Australia’s Energy Advantage
    by Jim Stanford and Alia Armistead

    New research from the Centre for Future Work shows that the rapid transformation of Australia’s aluminium facilities to sustainable sources of electricity would spark substantial economic benefits: for the aluminium industry, its supply chain, and for the burgeoning renewable energy sector (which would achieve greater critical mass from major new power supply contracts).

    The report, by Jim Stanford (the Centre’s Director) and Alia Armistead, looks in detail at the Tomago aluminium smelter in the Hunter region of NSW. It is Australia’s largest smelter, and is currently powered through electricity mostly sourced from coal-fired generation. The facility has pledged to move to renewable power sources by 2030 – and the new report confirms that this would underpin long-term industrial and economic benefits felt in all parts of the country.

    The report reviews the worrisome deindustrailisation of Australia’s foothold in the global aluminium industry. Australia’s exports of raw bauxite have grown rapidly, but value-added aluminium manufacturing (including smelting) has declined. This undermines employment, exports, and spin-off jobs.

    The study also reports results of macroeconomic simulations of the overall impacts of the Tomago facility on the national economy (including employment, incomes, GDP, and government revenue). These effects, because of the economic linkages between the smelter, its supply chain, and the consumer goods and services industries which depend on its continued existence, are very large.  Our results indicate the Tomago facility ultimately supports:

    • Over $1.2 billion in national GDP per year, with production benefits experienced in all states (70% in NSW).
    • Household disposable incomes of almost $500 million.
    • Direct and indirect employment of over 6000 jobs: in the smelter, in its various suppliers, and in downstream consumer industries.
    • Incremental government revenues worth $465 million per year: two-thirds of which is captured by the Commonwealth, and $120 million by the NSW state government.

    The study makes several recommendations for supporting Tomago’s transition to renewable energy, and enhancing Australia’s value-added aluminium presence. These include:

    • A clear and sustained commitment to rapid roll-out of renewable energy sources: Government should assist and accelerate Tomago’s transition to renewable power with clear, powerful measures to support expanded renewable energy developments, appropriate capacities (including batteries and pumped hydro) for backing up variable renewable power supplies, and fiscal measures that acknowledge the contribution Tomago could make (through the scale of its renewable energy purchases, as well as its potential role in demand-response measures that stabilise the regional electricity grid) to support NSW’s transition to renewable energy.
    • Full-cycle financial support and public equity: Our simulations confirm a large fiscal payback to state and Commonwealth governments arising from the operation of the Tomago smelter, its supply chain, and the downstream consumer industries which depend on its continued operation. This gives both levels of government a major fiscal stake in Tomago’s continuing operation. For that reason, in addition to supporting the roll-out of renewable energy, both governments should negotiate other forms of fiscal support for future capital improvements (including those tied to developments of renewable energy supply for the smelter).
    • Leveraging public infrastructure and procurement: Considerable demand for aluminium products will be forthcoming in future years as a result of the unprecedented investments being made by governments at all levels in new physical infrastructure: ranging from transportation to utilities to public buildings. The business case for continued aluminium manufacturing in Australia can be incrementally strengthened with pro-active efforts on the part of government to ensure that these investments (which are ultimately paid for by Australian taxpayers) embody maximum Australian-made content in all building materials and inputs, including aluminium.
    • A value-added trade policy: Australia’s laissez faire approach to international trade has concentrated Australia’s exports in the extraction and export of unprocessed or barely processed non-renewable resources; this has been coincident with a severe decline in domestic manufacturing and value-added activity, and a precarious dependence on imports to meet most domestic manufacturing needs. A rethinking of Australian trade policy could help reverse this damaging deindustrialisation. This must include active interventions to limit the inflow (often at prices below cost of production) of aluminium products from other countries which are not making reciprocal purchases of value-added merchandise from us. Trade policy should actively discourage exports of unprocessed bauxite, and instead require at least preliminary processing (and better yet, smelting) of Australian bauxite in Australian facilities.



    Full report

    Share

  • Missing a Stitch in Time:

    Missing a Stitch in Time:

    The Consequences of Underinvestment in Proper Upkeep of Australia’s Electricity Transmission and Distribution System

    Australia’s electricity industry constitutes a large and critical component of our national economic infrastructure. The industry produces $25 billion per year in value- added. It employs around 50,000 Australians, paying out $6 billion per year in wages and salaries. It makes $45 billion in annual purchases from a diverse and far-reaching supply chain, that provides the sector with inputs ranging from resources to equipment to construction to services.

    Most important, of course, the industry literally keeps the lights on: it provides an essential input, electric energy, without which no other industry could function and the safety and comfort of Australians would be immediatel jeopardised. In this regard, electricity is clearly an essential service: a utility vital to virtually everything else that occurs in the economy and society.

    Given that critical importance, we would assume that investing in the proper capitalisation, modernisation, upgrading and maintenance of this system would be a top priority of economic policy and corporate decision-making. Unfortunately, however, irrational and unintended consequences arising from the business-friendly, market-driven regulatory regime presently governing Australia’s electricity sector have produced exactly the opposite result. A structural pattern of sustained underinvestment in the upkeep and quality of the transmission and distribution grid is jeopardising the safety and reliability of the network – and harming both the people who work in this industry and the customers they serve.

    The present system was established on the assumption that profit-seeking behaviour of private businesses, with appropriate regulatory supervision, will best ensure an efficient allocation of resources, top quality service, and lowest possible prices for consumers. On every one of these grounds, however, the system has failed. Alongside chronic underinvestment in the system’s equipment and reliability, there is abundant evidence of an enormous waste of resources by self-dealing, rent-seeking corporate entities – diverting billions of dollars of expenditure away from necessary upkeep, redirected to ultimately unproductive activities (including overlapping corporate bureaucracies, frenetic selling and re-selling within the industry, and intense financialisation) that have nothing to do with the production and delivery of reliable, affordable energy. The national grid is unable to meet several challenges to its safety and reliability: including its ability to safely withstand extreme heat and severe weather events, and its capacity to adjust to the accelerating roll-out of variable and distributed renewable generation investments. The workforce in the industry has lost jobs and real incomes. And consumers (both residential and industrial) have faced an unprecedented and unjustified inflation of electricity prices.

    To be sure, this privatised, fragmented, and badly regulated industry has been consistently and increasingly profitable for its owners. Given the monopoly power these energy businesses have been granted over a critical piece of public infrastructure, these profits are hardly a surprise. What is surprising (and disappointing), however, is how Australia’s regulatory regime has failed to recognise and respond to these perverse outcomes. Despite growing evidence of deteriorating efficiency and reliability, and the inflation of both prices and profits, regulators continue with a business-as-usual approach to managing the industry. This approach routinely turns back legitimate requests for needed upgrades, modernisation, and maintenance on the system’s real capital base – while turning a blind eye to the rampant waste of resources on unproductive and self-serving corporate functions. Given the increasing pressures associated with climate change, more severe and frequent bushfires, population growth, and the shift to renewable generation, this business-as-usual approach cannot continue.

    A timeless adage reminds us that ‘a stitch in time saves nine.’ Prudent attention to maintaining productive assets in top quality condition, and upgrading capital in line with new technology and evolving best practices, is a hallmark of efficient and successful management. Australia’s electricity industry is controlled by self-seeking private businesses, and a few state-owned corporations directed to act just like them. They are governed by a regulatory system which places far too much faith in the inherent efficiency of private sector actors. Hence the industry is failing to make that stitch in time. Australians will pay the price for the chronic neglect of proper maintenance and upkeep of our electricity system in many ways: through a system that is inefficient, unreliable, cannot meet the challenges of the coming energy revolution, is unduly expensive to consumers, and which in many cases is unsafe for both workers and the public at large.

    This report provides evidence of a pattern of systematic underinvestment in the upkeep and capability of Australia’s electricity grid, drawing on three major sources of data:

    • A project to gather original qualitative data from dozens of power industry workers employed on the front lines of maintaining Australia’s transmission and distribution network. Their personal and professional experience attests to a widespread and sustained pattern of underinvestment and neglect, and provides worrisome details regarding the consequences of that underinvestment for the well-being of workers, communities, and the environment.
    • A review of other research and findings in the public domain (including several government commissions and inquries) regarding the importance of a top-quality, well-maintained electricity grid for our economy and society. These previous studies have also warned that the current system is falling behind in safe and efficient upkeep of its capital assets.
    • A review of available quantitative data – from the Australian Energy Regulator, from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, and from individual companies. This review confirms the steady decline in allocations of real resources to the capitalisation and good operating condition of the transmission and distribution grid. And it documents the erosion of real maintenance and upkeep according to several indicators, alongside evidence of unprecedented inflation in both electricity prices and industry profits.

    The main findings of this comprehensive qualitative and quantitative analysis include the following:

    • First-hand accounts from dozens of electricity sector workers in various roles and all parts of the country confirm the ongoing failure of the current system to allocate adequate resources to pro-active maintenance, upgrades, and safety, with serious consequences for workers, community safety, and the environment.
    • Real spending by the transmission and distribution sectors on operations and maintenance of the grid has been reduced by at least $1 billion per year since 2012.
    • Adjusted for inflation and the expanded base of customers in the network, real operating expenditures per customer have declined by 28-33 per cent since 2006.
    • Even within that contracting overall envelope of spending on maintenance and operations, several indicators confirm a reallocation of resources away from concrete system operation and maintenance, in favour of corporate overhead functions, re-selling, and financial activities.
    • The transmission and distribution system now employs 40 per cent more managers and office-based professionals than electricians.
    • Capital investment, spending on materials and equipment, capitalised own-use activity, and employment of electricians, linespersons, and related specialists have all declined markedly in the past several years.
    • Fundamental measures of efficiency in the industry (including total factor and average labour productivity) have also deteriorated, dragged down by misallocation of resources to corporate and overhead functions.
    • The squeeze on maintenance and upgrading expenses resulting from a combination of AER pressure and corporate profit-seeking has not produced savings for consumers. To the contrary, prices for both residential and industrial users have soared dramatically (almost doubling in real terms) since 2000.
    • High electricity prices have boosted revenues and profits in the industry – which have doubled in nominal terms since 2006, and grown substantially as a share of the industry’s total value-added. The AER’s superficial and ineffective oversight processes have not prevented private energy businesses from profiting through underinvestment in the industry’s asset base, and exploitation of consumers andworkers alike.

    After reviewing this worrisome evidence of systematic underinvestment in the quality and capability of Australia’s electricity grid, the report concludes with seven concrete recommendations to begin repairing and reversing these irrational and destructive outcomes. These include:

    1. AER determinations of allowable capital, upgrading and maintenance investments by regulated businesses should be ascertained on the basis of concrete bottom-up auditing of system capability, reliability and performance, undertaken by independent arms-length technical experts. Regulation of capital and maintenance expenditures needs to be ‘grounded’ in analysis of real-world challenges and constraints facing the system – including assessments of additional requirements arising from climate change and severe weather, risk mitigation (including bushfire prevention and vegetation management), and challenges related to the growth of distributed renewable generation. A broader economic benefit test should be applied to ensure the interests of workers and the community are factored into decision-making around capital investments and upkeep.
    2. Once appropriate levels of system capital and maintenance expenditures have been identified, explicit mechanisms must be established to reflect and recover those costs in regulated electricity prices.
    3. When adverse events (such as severe weather, bushfires, or other occurrences) necessitate capital or repair expenditures above and beyond previously approved regulated levels, provisions for additional cost recovery must also be accessible.
    4. Costing of capital installation, upgrading, and maintenance expenditure must take explicit account of the need for high-quality skilled, certified labour to perform that work – including appropriate wages, entitlements and working conditions in line with industry best practices.
    5. The accelerating transition to renewable energy sources, through both utility- scale projects and distributed sources, poses a unique and historic challenge to the capabilities of the national transmission and distribution grid. The AER, in conjunction with the AEMO and other industry bodies, should undertake a thorough assessment of the investments and system changes that will be required to meet the new requirements of an increasingly renewables-focused power system. This assessment must incorporate a broader economic and social cost-benefit lens, rather than the current narrowly-defined conception of economic costs. The findings of this assessment must then inform the AER’s subsequent determinations regarding allowable capital and maintenance expenditures by regulated businesses.
    6. Businesses which underspend allowed capital and maintenance budgets should be issued financial penalties which offset the impact of this underspending on their operating margins. This would eliminate the current perverse incentive for private transmitters and distributors to artificially suppress needed maintenance and upgrades in the interests of a short-term bonus over and above their already-substantial profit margins.
    7. The AER must undertake more detailed reviews of the submitted overhead, marketing, and financial activities of regulated energy businesses. Instead of providing blanket approval for whatever operating expenses companies deem to be in their interests, within an overall ceiling that is not differentiated with respect to specific cost activities, the regulator should focus on reducing the deadweight costs of duplicated, self-serving corporate bureaucracies.

    It is past time for those in charge of Australia’s electricity system – both private owners and government regulators – to acknowledge the widening tears in the fabric of this vital public service. And it is well past time for them to begin making the necessary repairs.



    Full report

    Share